Pelosi’s Healthcare Vision: Government Mandate or Jail
by Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL)Failing to purchase “acceptable health insurance coverage” could result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” Those are direct quotes from a letter of analysis done by the Joint Committee on Taxation, a non-partisan analysis committee in Congress. While that policy may not be one of Nancy Pelosi’s main talking points about her healthcare takeover legislation, it is an undoubtedly destructive portion of her healthcare bill, part of the reason it passed with only two votes to spare.
For months now, we’ve heard about the merits of Nancy Pelosi’s healthcare overhaul. To hear it from Democrats, the healthcare overhaul would be all things to all people, forever solving America’s healthcare woes. So if the Speaker’s plan is so fantastic, why do Democrats need to criminalize Americans to coax them into this plan?
Americans struggle enough already with a historically weak economy, high taxes and the looming burden of having to pay off an enormous federal debt. In Illinois, unemployment is already 10.5%, and Chicago-area residents just endured property tax increases to the tune of 20% in some areas. With this sort of abuse to their bank accounts, the last thing folks need is more taxes – but Pelosi’s plan shovels them on.
The Pelosi healthcare overhaul is a mandate lockdown.
First, it will raise the cost of purchasing “acceptable” health insurance. If you do not purchase health insurance Pelosi deems “acceptable,” you get slammed with an income tax increase. And what happens if you can’t afford or choose not to purchase that “acceptable” insurance? You can eventually be punished by a fine of “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.”
While most Americans agree that we need healthcare reform that lowers costs and increases access, this is a textbook example of the bureaucratic horrors Americans will face from these kinds of mandates and requirements. The Pelosi overhaul is littered with 3,425 “shalls,” and the threat of jailtime accurately shows that Pelosi means the “shalls” to be a “must.” Of course, she thinks this is “fair.”
While Republicans would work to lower costs and increase access by opening markets, increasing real competition, and dealing with pre-existing conditions, Pelosi’s overhaul relies on requirements, mandates, taxes and even imprisonment. When it all comes down to it, if the Pelosi overhaul is such a good plan, then people will join it – willingly. But Democrats know better. Remember, they defeated an amendment which would require Members of Congress to use the “public option.” So they’ll send you to prison for not using the health insurance that they wouldn’t use themselves.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
256 Comments
I wonder, will this law apply to Nancy Pelosi, and the undocumented illegals working at Pelosi Vineyards?
The democrats are rattling their sabers now but they'll be hiding under their desks after the 2010 elections.
"Why do Democrats need to criminalize Americans to coax them into this plan?"
Since when has any representative had to live under the laws they create? Rangel comes to mind.
It’s cool when you are the government, think of the marketing possibilities, you can force people to buy all sorts of stuff from the government. Buy this suicide clown car from government motors or go to jail. Buy this cardboard box house from the government, or go to jail. The possibilities are endless, not just crap healthcare.
And if you don’t have the money, the government will take some from the other guy and give it to you so you can buy it.
"So they’ll send you to prison for not using the health insurance that they wouldn’t use themselves."
Get ready for the tortured progessive arguments to defend that one, if they dare.
Illegal aliens are exempt from the mandatory insurance requirement.
this entire post is a broad faced lie
http://mediamatters.org/research/200911090054
here is where you readers of biggovernment.com must make a decision.
will you continue to sit there and passively accept the lies, the paranoia, the misleading and unbalanced information they are feeding you… or will you stand up and think for yourself?
the OBJECTIVE TRUTH: the punishment for not having health insurance is an added tax of approx 2.5% of your income- so for the avg American household, roughly $1,000.
if you choose not to pay your taxes, you get fined and go to jail. the 250k or 5 years jail that Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) talks of is if you REFUSE to pay your taxes.
SHOCK! ITS ILLEGAL TO NOT PAY TAXES!!!
SHAME ON YOU Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) .
SHAME ON biggovernment.com
Got this in my email today:
" News From the Office of
US Senator Kirsten Gillibrand
New York families and businesses are struggling in this economy and Senator Gillibrand is working in a bipartisan way to provide emergency relief to people who need it most, create jobs and rebuild New York’s economy. "
Oh really?
All this crap they have been pushing about stimulus and economic policies and all and NOW she wants to start creating jobs? In a bipartisan way also!
It goes on:
"Improving Childhood Nutrition
Senator Gillibrand teamed up with famous chef Rachael Ray last month at P.S. 89/I.S. 289 in New York City to unveil a new, healthy lunch menu for New York City schoolchildren."
Good grief.
"Providing Emergency Economic Relief for New York Seniors
More than 3.4 million seniors, veterans and people with disabilities … Watch Senator Kirsten Gillibrand discuss her effort to provide these New Yorkers with $250…"
You see the statist is so generous, they are the ones providing to us. Of course it's our dammned money to begin with. Thanks Senator.
"Ensuring America’s Competitiveness, Creating High-Tech Jobs
Last month, Senator Gillibrand launched her Innovation Agenda. Watch Senator Gillibrand discuss her plan to harness all of New York’s unique potential to lead in the high-tech economy of the future by sparking new industries, attracting new businesses, creating thousands of new jobs for New York and restoring America’s competitiveness in the high-tech global economy."
Blah blah blah. Where are the effing jobs Senator? You can go on discussing attracting, sparking and restoring all you want. I don't see any damned jobs. There aren't going to be any jobs from the crap Senator.
Then:
"Helping Small Businesses Get New Loans
To help small businesses recover and create new jobs, Senator Gillibrand is pushing the Obama Administration to set aside approximately $40 billion of unused TARP funds"
$40 billion! Unused! Wow, that'll solve everything.
Are you people scared yet?
Obama, Nancy and Harry should just get the Constitution printed on toilet paper for all the government offices, pretty much all of them dump all over it every day anyway, might as well make it official.
LET ME SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME.
the penalty for not having health insurance under the plan is a tax equating to NO MORE THAN 2.5% of your annual salary,
the penalty for REFUSING to pay taxes is a fine of “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.”
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, THE TRUTH MATTERS HERE.
"why do republicans need to outright lie to scare common hard working Americans away from affordable health insurance?"
if you have health insurance that you like, you can keep it.
"SHOCK! ITS ILLEGAL TO NOT PAY TAXES!!! "
So you admit that the thesis of this post is in fact true.
Then, I don't see the lie you speak of.
Do you believe everything you read on the internet?
Or just everything that you read that you happen to agree with, and lines up to your particular political ideology?
If ever anyone belonged in jail, it's Pelosi.
NO.
the "thesis" of this post is blatantly and obviously false.
failing to purchase “acceptable health insurance coverage” DOES NOT result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.”.
it results in a fine of no more than 2.5% of your income.
THAT IS A LIE! YOUR REPUBLICAN CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE JUST LIED TO YOU!!!
the real question is: what are you gonna do next. Are you going to learn more about the bill from OBJECTIVE sources, or will you continue to believe whatever you are told by the good folks at biggovernment.com and the republican party of "no"?
scotty,
Have you no shame?
What right does CONgress have to enact a law, criminalizing not having health insurance. Of all the goddamned unmitigated gall! Those pompous arrogant bastards need run out of town.
Scott address this then you state the post is a lie. The post says "Failing to purchase “acceptable health insurance coverage” could result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.”
You admit that not paying taxes will result in prison.
This is not a lie.
Enough is enough yourself.
Address this or admit you are wrong and shut up.
Scott, your reply is disingenuous or simply misinformed.
Here's how it works.
If you don't have "acceptable health coverage" as required by Section 501, then you are assessed a penalty (in this case coming in the form of a tax, b/c its easier to nail people for tax fraud, the penalties are stiff, and the IRS is relentless – besides let the IRS do the Democrats dirtywork, they don't care about getting elected).
So, if you don't get health insurance, you get slapped with a penalty tax. If you don't pay your tax, then you face either:
1) $25,000 fine and up to 1 year in jail – for negligently failing to pay taxes, OR
2) $250,000 fine and up to 5 years in jail – for purposefully failing to pay taxes.
Therefore, the statement that "if you don't buy health insurance(or pay the penalty for not doing so), you will go to jail" is correct. If not for the provision created by the Democratic health bill, there wouldn't be a penalty, and if there wasn't a penalty, there wouldn't be jail time.
I realize that reasoning things out takes a bit more effort than blindly citing to mediamatters, but you'll find that the truth is worth it.
failing to pay enough parking tickets will get your car impounded.
that doesn't mean that letting the meter run out once will cost you $25,000.
that is the line Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) is trying to feed you.
and unfortunately, the line you bought hook, line, and stinker.
scotty,
Isn't that special?!
That is sooo nice of the government, to allow me to keep something that I have already purchased.
Not accepted.
Post: Don't pay you go to jail.
Scott_z: Don't pay you go to jail.
You are wrong.
Hey Scott…
Here's where the rubber meets the road! Personally I REFUSE to sign up for ANY mandatory health care PERIOD! I REFUSE to pay ANY fines (or taxes or whatever else you want to call it) and I REFUSE to do jail time for it!
Now, if Uncle Samantha wants to deal with me over the issue they better be prepared to bring in the catering trucks and the army because they are going to have a fight on their hands.
You stupid morons who elected these a-holes are about to get a lesson in civil disobedience that will make your afro/hippy/socialist rebellions of the late 60's & early 70's look like a sunday school picnic!
It would be best if you just left for Europe now because by the time we are done putting this country back on it's founding path, you morons and the politicians you've elected may very well be the ones doing time for your treacherous actions.
YET AGAIN.
not having health insurance IS NOT CRIMINALIZED under the democratic plan. It merely hits you with an additional tax penalty.
there, you just lied right there by claiming it was criminalized! Lies built in lies does not a good foundation make!
So Rep. Peter Roskam what are you going to do about it. Stop whining like a RINO and lead. Not one of you have come onto this site to lead, just whine. What happened to Congressional Leadership? What hormones are they putting in congresses water? Backbone Rep. Peter Roskam, Backbone.
Have you ever heard the phrase "Stop bringing problems to the table bring solutions" Well your solutions may not be perfect but please at least bring them to the table. If you ever come up with a plan, SELL IT, just don't print it out and run away. Leadership is what we need.
That has nothing to do with the assertion you are trying to make and it does nothing to refute my point.
I am done arguing with you, you are a drone.
"if you don't buy health insurance(or pay the penalty for not doing so), you will go to jail"
that was NOT what Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) was saying. HIS WORDS:
"Failing to purchase “acceptable health insurance coverage” could result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years."
he does not mention the "(or pay the penalty for not doing so)" part.
YOU are being CLEARLY disingenuous here.
Scott,
Show us where in the Constitution Congress has the right to make us buy health insurance.
As for me, hi ho, hi ho, its off to jail I go.
scotty,
Don't ever call me a liar.
do you have health care right now?
if you do, none of this affects you. you wont have to sign anything.
Why should there be a penalty at all?
thank you peaches. that was the most intellectual and well reasoned arguement I have read on the blog in weeks.
He won't address it because he can't. The only answer he can give is that 2.5% of your income isn't really that much or that $1,000 isn't really all that much to ensure that we all have coverage.
It all boils down to the fundamental difference between people like Scott and a true conservative.
Scott supports more taxes, more government intervention, and the continued abuse of the commerce clause.
True conservatives support fewer taxes and less big government intervention.
Sorry Jack we are all paying for this crap. Now you have really shown the world your brilliance.
The "leadership" and "plan" is to block this piece of shite from being passed in to law. THAT IS THE PLAN. Oh, and then this; "While Republicans would work to lower costs and increase access by opening markets, increasing real competition, and dealing with pre-existing conditions"
Scott, you're playing with words.
THE RESULT IS THE SAME.
If you don't purchase "acceptable health insurance" then it COULD (not will) result in a fine punishable (it is) by "up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years."
Yes, the truth matters.
1) Failure to pay taxes is NOT a criminal offense. Failure to file IS. Filing a false return is criminal. Not paying is a civil crime…NOT punishable by imprisonment.
2) Up until Pelosi-care, all taxes have been voluntary. Don't wanna pay income tax? Don't earn an income. Don't wanna pay sales tax? Don't spend money. You see Scotty, when one CHOOSES to do certain things, one chooses to pay the taxes that go along with that behavior. However, with Pelosi-care, the tax is MANDATORY, unless, of course, you choose not to live. Wait…don't I have the RIGHT TO LIFE? Where in the constitution does Piglosi and Obamadinehad get the permission to tax a RIGHT??????? Show me Scotty.
because "liberal activist", today, the people do not have health insurance and get in to car accidents or develop costly and tragic diseases, well, I end up paying for them in higher deductibles- because you cannot be turned away at the emergency room no matter what. and that is not fair.
i pay for my health insurance. i don't want my rates skyrocketing because someone else felt they could save a quick buck and not carry their policy.
right now, i am paying higher rates because i subsidize the people who do not hold insurance but get seriously ill or sick.
it's about personal responsibility, and picking up your own tab when the bill is due.
LMAO, coming from the guy that thinks Wiki is the pentultimate source of knowledge I will take that as a compliment.
This article is about the House bill, not the Senate bill which came out today.
using your logic:
the gov't can impound your car if you get too many parking tickets.
so too many parking tickets will cost you $25,000.
THE RESULT IS NOT THE SAME. and Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) was caught in a BOLD FACED LIE.
I'm sorry, but you're an idiot.
"Do you believe everything you read on the internet?"
Of course not. For example, anything you state can be discarded out of hand.
as i say again and again and again. if you can name a more authoritative, reliable, and free internet source i will cite that instead.
but here's something for you to consider:
http://news.cnet.com/Study-Wikipedia-as-accurate-...
It's all about governement controling what we do. Once again, you have drunk too much socialistic koolaid and are blathering nonsense.
Post: Don't buy health insurance, get fined $250k and go to prison for 5 years
Reality: Don't buy health insurance, get taxed up to 2.5% of your annual income
Reality: Don't pay your taxes, the IRS will come after you.
Yea and they did real good job blocking it in the House. Could not even read it in time before the vote, let alone understand it.
"While Republicans would work to lower costs and increase access by opening markets, increasing real competition, and dealing with pre-existing conditions"
If this is enough information for you to get behind this, great. For me it is cheap theater.
you know what that means right?
NOTHING CHANGES FOR YOU UNDER THIS BILL.
The problem here, clearly, is that scott_z is illiterate.
He is equating the discussion of possible outcomes ("up to" in the original post) with definite outcomes ("will" in his comment).
I blame Bush… yet another child left behind.
Are you going to stand by your assertion that not owning health care under the democratic plan is criminalized?
if you do, you are a liar no two ways about it.
Nicely done, it gets kind of tiring though doesnt it, I mean in regards to explaining things to Scott?
Words have meanings but Scott like most progressives have no use for actually looking too closely at them, that comes in especially handy when they are Divining the real meaning of the constitution or trying to manufacture points.
First he says "the entire post is a lie" then he walks back to "the thesis" of the post is lie. Then he gets nailed on a point, then another and has to walk back again, the end result is always the same, he backs right off the cliff declaring victory as he plummets into his delusional abyss.
"LET ME SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME. "
Yes, the truth matters here. And the truth here is that you're wrong.
"because you cannot be turned away at the emergency room no matter what"
Who do you have to thank for that genius?
And your plan is to give them more power.
Feh.
And you're still going to be paying for all that, plus more.
it refutes your point completely and succinctly. consider:
if you do not buy health insurance, you are hit with a tax (several times less than health care actually costs, i might add). if you do not pay that tax, the irs comes after you and gets you for tax evasion- penalties of 5 yrs and $250k.
if you park illegally, you are hit with a fine. if you choose not to pay that fine, the gov't may impound your car. do you believe that the penalty for not paying parking tickets is the price of the car?
the only real difference is that parking illegally is… illegal. where as not buying health insurance, under the nre plan simply exposes you to greater tax liability.
Hey Scott is actually telling people they don't have to pay taxes, it's not a criminal offense.
Scott please, your embarassing your self again, don't you ever tire of it?
right now, my insurance premiums are higher because they subsidize *everyone* who does not have insurance, but shows up at the emergency room. because they cannot be turned away for service there.
i believe in every man picking up his tab when the bill is due. there is nothing more financially conservative than that, Sausa.
Quote from post: "could result in a fine punishable “up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” "
Quote from scott_z "Don't buy health insurance, get fined $250k and go to prison for 5 years "
You are a liar.
It's frustrating but also deeply entertaining watching Scott getting walked back towards the cliff, can't you just see his tiny little arms flailing as he teeters on the edge.
I wonder if there are any drugs that would permiate that haze of Obama Zombie Admiration?
That wasn't a serious question.
Look! A Floater!
CL, pull the chain again, quick!
1) Failure to pay taxes is NOT a criminal offense.
so if someone files taxes every year but never pays their entire life, what is their punishment? a slap on the wrist? COME ON!!!!
2) all taxes have been voluntary
That is an interesting theoretical observation, but NOT a distinction that the US Constitution makes, citing the 16th amendment:
"The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises [ . . . ] but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"
Except if you're a potential member of the OBAMA Administration…
God, liberals are SO stupid…
they will need a whole lot more prisons in California since we are already letting baby rapers and killers out do to overcrowding.
I wonder if Pelosi will name these new "housing facilities" GULAGS?
Government issue prozac. That's what they want.
citing the 16th amendment:
"The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises [ . . . ] but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"
as long as it is uniform in manner as it applies (which it undeniably does), it follows strict adherence to the Constitution of the United States of America.
Hey!
You have a cellmate picked out yet, One More Patriot?
If I have to be a "political prisoner", I would prefer to have someone with a brain to talk to, instead of someone like ScottyZee the rotten TP spouting out stupidity all the time…like how all this is now violating HIS "rights"…
What do political prisoners do, anyway? Write books and make all sorts of bucks after they're released?
LET ME SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME.
Good. NOW will you go away?
Oh I can google to! http://www.livescience.com/technology/091106-ttr-...
Of course, as usual, this has nothing to do with my post, what a complete surprise!
the punishment for [A] is a*
the punishment for [B] is b*
committing [B] and getting punished for b* is not saying that the punishment for committing [A] is b*
that is pure logic, in it's most basic form. do with it as you may, harry turtle.
the punishment for [A] is a*
the punishment for [B] is b*
committing [B] and getting punished with b* is not the same as saying that the punishment for committing [A] is b*
that is pure logic, in it's most basic form. do with it as you may, malclave.
Who is going to ask pelosi if her new healthcare bill will cover "botox injections" and "facelifts" ??? Of course not, because she sits on over 25 million dollars and she doesn't care. This bill is only for the little people and she will be the queen that rules who gets a mammogram or an MRI.
Can you say hate ? As a female, I hate that reptilian who thinks she is above everyone. Karma is a bitch and I hope karma is following this hermaphroidite "thing' . Maybe God is karma?
I have health insurance right now, yet this threat of jail time directly threatens me. If the federal government tells me I must buy something, I will refuse. If they tell me to buy something I already buy, I will stop buying it. If the federal government tells me to pay a tax because they don't like my unwillingness to buy what they want, I will refuse to pay that tax (and only that tax, as I have absolutely no problem paying for my government). My reasoning for all of this is that I like freedom. I am willing to risk absolutely everything to still feel free, and I will also fight for your freedom even if you are unwilling.
Please don't bring up the car insurance analogy since I have no problem with a state government exercising their police powers, and requiring car insurance isn't even as strict as police powers can get.
So what? What the hell are you talking about anyway? What does that have to do with what you are responding to? I'll give you a clue, it has nothing to do with it. The fact is that you are misrepresenting facts and making broad un-substantiated statements. You can't argue against this.
Now I am truly done discussing this.
Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL):
I will not be coerced, threatened, or bullied into this…tell Pelosi I will go to jail, I will make it a "cause celebre", I will accuse the Administration and the Congress of defining an entire group of citizens trying their best to get through these needlessly more difficult economic times, as "criminals". I will declare that we are being made into "political prisoners" of the Democrats for our resistance to governmental abuses of power: and I will involve Amnesty International and anyone else I can to embarrass and humiliate the Democratic party and its members at every turn I am able to do so. I will show up to any arresting authority with miles and miles of reporters and journalists in tow, I will demonstrate, I will hunger strike, I will sit-in, I will chant, and I will be a nuisance that will NEVER GO AWAY…
Tell her that…and all the rest of us will do the same as well….
"telling people they don't have to pay taxes, it's not a criminal offense"
i do not follow. please explain your logic.
i am saying that if you do not buy heatlh insurance under the proposed plan, it will increase your tax liability.
i never claimed anything less than full payment of taxes due were not mandatory.
it's called the 16th amendment. and it governs what congress can tax, and how.
you might want to look it up.
care to refute anything?
or just lob those ever-so-clever one liners over the fence and see what sticks?
Sentiment understood but I don't support that.
care to refute anything in particular?
or just lob those ever-so-clever one liners over the fence and see what sticks?
erm. no. because universal health care would be…
universal.
where do you think this bill is at odds with the Constitution, specifically?
i think i just went a little over year head with all that logic.
it's okay, harry turtle. have a good evening.
Yes, it isn't criminalized. It's worse. You get told by the IRS that you have to pay a penalty because you didn't buy something. You don't get a jury of your peers to determine whether or not you're guilty, you just are guilty because they said so.
In order to contest that you did nothing wrong by not buying insurance, you have to wait to get a criminal charge from the IRS for tax evasion. That is even worse than if they just said it was a crime to lack health insurance. We don't even get proper due process, just due process after the fact.
yeah but the tax is a fine for not buying insurance, which means the resulting penalties are a result of not having health insurance. Therefore you are being thrown in prison for not having insurance.
All I have to say is get my cell ready.
YET AGAIN.
if you have health insurance, none of this concerns you. have a good evening, good bye.
if you don't have health insurance, no one is forcing you to buy it at the threat of jail time. they are imposing a max of 2.5% tax against your income. which is fully in their power under the 16th amendment to the Constitution.
so this really is much ado about nothing.
and yes. they get reconciled.
how would you pay for "this crap" if you already have health insurance, AND you are no longer required to subsidize every visit of uninsured at the emergency room?
curious.
"he entire post is a lie" is a fact.
"harry turtle" made a claim that, well… "the thesis" was true. what ever that means. so i said, no, the thesis is NOT true.
i did not back down, i maintain my initial claim. i was just responding to someone in that one post who tried to make it about Rep. Peter Roskam's (R-IL) "thesis" and not his exact wording.
thoughts on that, "Thinking Man"?
I've looked at the 16th amendment. Where does it state the government has the right to tax behavior? What income is derived from lack of "acceptable health insurance coverage"?
If you are convicted of a federal offense, then you lose the right to vote and the right to bear arms.
Pelican 5
the tax is fully consistant with congress's powers under the 16th amendment to the US Constitution.
I have no idea what you are trying to say about a jury of peers. that simply does not enter the picture, Constitutionally.
You have read the US Constitution, have you not?????
Loss of freedom for any group in America concerns me. That is like saying 9/11 didn't concern anyone that didn't live in Washington, D.C. or New York City.
I also disagree that the 16th amendment permits behavioral taxes. There is no income derived from not purchasing insurance.
as i say again and again and again. if you can name a more authoritative, reliable, and free internet source i will cite that instead.
i welcome your input.
A couple of days ago I reviewed Scott_z's ratings. At that time he had 43 pages of comments. Over 1200 thumbs down and about 28 thumbs up. (And those were mostly the single point he gets for posting)
That amounts to a 0.02 percent favorability rating for his arguments here. In other words, the quality of his arguments are statistically meaningless to the followers of this site. His arguments are rejected wholesale as having added any merit to any discussion.
In essence, scott_z has been statistically proven to be a troll.
THIS IS NOT A LOSS OF FREEDOM.
congress has been exercising this very style of taxation by authorization of the 16th amendment since… the 16th amendment.
AND, it will specifically eliminate the need for us health insurance carriers to subsidize the uninsured at the emergency rooms. which will cost LESS MONEY!
YAY!
You're painfully stupid, no wonder you need govt to wipe your ass. Tell me moron, where do you think the money for nationalized healthcare will come from, a money tree? You're still subsidizing their healthcare you blithering idiot, and as malclave pointed out it will cost far more than it does now. Explaining why to you would be the same as trying to teach a chimpanzee to play the piano.
The 16th Amendment to the United States Constitution (which you obviously have NOT read) says so right here:
"The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises [ . . . ] but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"
as long as it is uniform in manner as it applies (which it undeniably does), it follows strict adherence to the Constitution of the United States of America.
Do you understand what "shall be uniform" means? I'm pretty sure dividing the population into the uninsured and the insured, and taxing them differently, does not qualify as uniform treatment. Just think if there were a tax for short people. Would that be consitutional? Congress cannot constitutionally tax states of being, only incomes.
"I'm pretty sure dividing the population into the uninsured and the insured, and taxing them differently, does not qualify as uniform treatment."
you'd be wrong.
EVERYONE: BUY HEALTH INSURANCE OR GET THIS TAX
and now i am ready for your next baseless arguement?
You must be logged in to post a comment.