In what is likely to go down in history as one of the most convoluted decisions by any court, the Supreme Court of the United States voted to uphold President Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act. In their unprecedented ruling, the 5 justices who ruled for the majority said that Obamacare was in fact constitutional because it is not a mandate, it is a tax. But wait, there's more...
What the judges voting to uphold Obamacare didn't explain though, is how you can define something as a tax only when it is a penalty, but not a tax when you buy health insurance of your own volition. What in effect the majority is saying, and what is so monstrously perplexing, in this decision is that you are not really being forced to buy insurance, but we will tax you if you don't buy it.
I'm not quite sure their definition of a tax then, is even legal. How can you levy a tax on a product and then say, but we will only charge you a tax on this product if you don't buy this product. Can you imagine going into your local Best Buy electronics store and not buying an iPod and then being hit with a tax before you are allowed to leave the store, because you did not buy an iPod?
What makes this ruling so confusing and twisted is how they actually came to their decision to uphold Obama's law. Here's how the SCOTUSblog explains it:
What the Courtâ€™s ruling does do, though, is important far beyond health care.Â Â Five Justices of the Supreme Court â€” the Chief Justice, for his reasons, and Thursdayâ€™s four dissenters, for their reasons â€” agreed that Congress cannot command individual Americans to buy a commercial product against their will.Â Â Here is the way the Chief Justice put it: â€œThe Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance.â€Â Thus, he said, the mandate provision (Section 5000A of the Act) â€œwould be unconstitutional if read as a command.â€Â Â The four dissenters thought the mandate was invalid in any case, so they surely shared at least that sentiment.
The way the tax provision will work, if it does, in fact, go into effect about two years from now, is that individuals who do not obtain health insurance will be assessed a tax (based on family income) that they must pay along with their regular federal tax return.Â The enforcement of the tax will depend, ultimately, on whether an individual who refuses to buy health insurance chose â€” as a specifically intended response â€” not to pay the tax, for whatever reason.Â Â The Chief Justiceâ€™s opinion did note that willful failure to pay a tax that is due can lead to criminal prosecution.Â There would have to be proof of something more than a simple failure to include the penalty payment along with the return.
So what the justices (I'm beginning to dislike that term as it's hard to find real justice any longer) upholding the law did was say the mandate is unconstitutional, but because there is a penalty or you can choose to pay a tax, the mandate is not unconstitutional. No wonder Roberts and the other majority Justices decided to wait till the last minute to released their decision. They must have had to wrestle and contemplate for a long time with their inner mojo to come up with such twisted logic.
The bottom line is that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled the individual mandate portion of Obamacare is really a tax. That is in spite of the fact that Obama said it wasn't a tax a long time ago. He swore up and down it wasn't a tax. You know, he made one of those Presidential promises when he rebuked George Stephanopoulos for looking up the word "tax" in the dictionary. I don't know how you get around that. Listen to what the man said below:
How much more of a broken promise do you need? Obama, with every fiber of his being, is trying to convince George Stephanopoulos that Obamacare is not a tax, but when his crooked lawyers went before the Supreme Court, they used every fiber of their being to convince the court that it was a tax. And now The Supremes agreed with them, and the Liar in Chief.
I'm not sure what is more incredulous, Obama's outright lie about what his signature healthcare law really was or John Robert's ridiculous comment in his majority decision when he said, â€œCongressâ€™s ability to use its taxing power to influence conduct is not without limits.â€ Oh really Justice Roberts, what exactly are those limits on Congress now in light of your most wise decision? It seems like you just opened a dumpster sized Pandora's Box of evil ways for an out of control Congress and a Hugo Chavez Socialist liar like Obama to get their corrupt hands on even more of our money. Thanks.