General Discussion

zoechen

(93 posts)

89. So I don't understand what you point is

Sun Jul 1, 2012, 11:07 PM

Jul 2012

<snip>
When the Affordable Care Act reached the Supreme Court, Verrilli insisted that the government's briefs should present two alternative grounds for upholding the law's insurance mandate. The first argument was that the law was valid under Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce. His fallback argument rested on Congress’s power to impose taxes.
<snip>

So if we assume that the commerce clause was his only arguement he would have lost and the mandate would have struck down, that would have prestaged the complete colapse of ACA.

So what he did was set up a buffet of options, Roberts found one of the administrations arguements fell within constitutional grounds.

The Congresses right to levy taxes.

Read more
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-scorned-after-oral-arguments-on-healthcare-verrilli-emerges-a-winner-20120628,0,7731384.story

Edit: To correct a poor choice of words.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

134 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can the President still say that the mandate is not a "tax"?? [View all] kentuck Jul 2012 OP

How can it be Pyrrhic when the ACA stays in effect? treestar Jul 2012 #1

The Chief Justice ruled that it was constitutional only because... kentuck Jul 2012 #6

Except when this gets out BumRushDaShow Jul 2012 #7

I'm going to find that link and save it to my phone... Volaris Jul 2012 #64

A Pyrrhic victory is one in name only treestar Jul 2012 #18

I think that calling it a "Pyrrhic" victory means that it may have a negative effect razorman Jul 2012 #25

There are many issues to campaign on treestar Jul 2012 #41

You have a point. Of course, both sides will try to "spin" to their best advantage. razorman Jul 2012 #134

"Its positive attributes can be touted." - in today's "liberally-biased media"??? zbdent Jul 2012 #34

No argument from me on the media carrying water for Rs treestar Jul 2012 #42

Well Dems really need to start touting loudly and often. n/t Beartracks Jul 2012 #76

If I don't get health insurance and pay the tax what do I get? You just stated: kelly1mm Jul 2012 #39

A health insurance policy? treestar Jul 2012 #72

No, I don't get a health insurance policy by paying the tax. By definition you only pay the tax if kelly1mm Jul 2012 #74

Then get the insurance policy treestar Jul 2012 #109

This is the first I've heard of the catastrophic loss coverage. drm604 Jul 2012 #106

that is what insurance policies are for! treestar Jul 2012 #110

I understand what insurance policies are for. I'm not stupid. drm604 Jul 2012 #111

The only people who will pay the penalty are treestar Jul 2012 #114

I understand that. drm604 Jul 2012 #116

No, paying the penalty would mean no coverage treestar Jul 2012 #124

It's a tax on a behavior? girl gone mad Jul 2012 #62

Well, that's what the Court said treestar Jul 2012 #71

If you can't afford it, government subsidies are available. drm604 Jul 2012 #104

One Justice says it is a tax Motown_Johnny Jul 2012 #2

Explain tax break for 99 percent Broderick Jul 2012 #3

Actually, it's projected to be 98% Wounded Bear Jul 2012 #9

That seems like an unrealistic projection. girl gone mad Jul 2012 #63

The tax/penalty will only be on 1 or 2 percent of the population. Motown_Johnny Jul 2012 #16

Well that might go higher as people drop coverages. Broderick Jul 2012 #30

Have you tried the Wa Po calculator? Motown_Johnny Jul 2012 #40

thanks for the link Broderick Jul 2012 #125

How can they possibly project those percentages? B2G Jul 2012 #46

That is the rate in MA where they have a similar system. Motown_Johnny Jul 2012 #55

Good points. kentuck Jul 2012 #8

I don't think he can, and along those lines hughee99 Jul 2012 #4

The decision says it is not a penalty treestar Jul 2012 #45

The President won the battle for legislation he tacked his presidency on, but Roberts gave... Poll_Blind Jul 2012 #5

"There's a certain type of diabolic brilliance..." kentuck Jul 2012 #12

Some legal scholars suggest Roberts produced an essentially conservative opinion with a... Poll_Blind Jul 2012 #17

Thanks PB! kentuck Jul 2012 #28

It is a penalty affecting a small number of people who could afford to buy health insurance but Skidmore Jul 2012 #10

The IRS does not administer DMV fines. David__77 Jul 2012 #105

This tax is going to impact the middle class the most B2G Jul 2012 #11

Bullshit. Warren Stupidity Jul 2012 #58

Bull. The middle class can afford insurance Arkana Jul 2012 #117

The Mandate isn't a tax. The Penalty is. If you follow the law, you incur no tax. MjolnirTime Jul 2012 #13

Good description n/t ChazII Jul 2012 #68

Because one out of the nine Justices says it's a tax, Nye Bevan Jul 2012 #14

Because he wrote the majority opinion... kentuck Jul 2012 #15

That was still only his opinion. Nye Bevan Jul 2012 #19

So the President can say that it is only CJ Roberts' decision? kentuck Jul 2012 #22

Yep. Five Justices said ACA was fine, Nye Bevan Jul 2012 #33

But it ProSense Jul 2012 #21

Interesting that Roberts may be too clever by half... kentuck Jul 2012 #24

Democrats ProSense Jul 2012 #27

I would agree but still... kentuck Jul 2012 #29

To add... rufus dog Jul 2012 #32

The Chief Justice based his decision on the White House's own arguments. girl gone mad Jul 2012 #65

The Solicitor General argued before the SCOTUS that it was a tax zoechen Jul 2012 #20

Thanks for the clarification... kentuck Jul 2012 #26

The spin will be interesting 4th law of robotics Jul 2012 #23

Again, while five Justices said it was constitutional, only one said it was a tax. Nye Bevan Jul 2012 #37

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." A tax by any other name would smell as... Tierra_y_Libertad Jul 2012 #31

I think Dems best response is - "Huge tax increase"? Fearmongering hyperbole. Check the facts... pinto Jul 2012 #35

It is a tax and your health insurance premiums are now taxes. dkf Jul 2012 #36

Insurance premiums are NOT taxes B2G Jul 2012 #44

We didn't choose. The government forced us to buy it. dkf Jul 2012 #53

Got it...and I agree B2G Jul 2012 #54

+1 Poll_Blind Jul 2012 #59

You aren't forced to buy anything. Warren Stupidity Jul 2012 #60

He can, he is and he will. lonestarnot Jul 2012 #38

Whatever they call it, 40 millon uninsured will now be covered still_one Jul 2012 #43

It's all about informing people about how they will save $ flamingdem Jul 2012 #50

17 million were supposed to be covered under expansion of Medicaid. dkf Jul 2012 #56

Ask Romney. nt BootinUp Jul 2012 #47

I stand by Justice Ginsburg ashling Jul 2012 #48

To your final question .... The people who now get coverage won. JoePhilly Jul 2012 #49

Why are you looking gift horse in the mouth. pennylane100 Jul 2012 #51

Simply stated. kentuck Jul 2012 #52

I support fair taxation. Warren Stupidity Jul 2012 #57

No. I think taxes are necessary for the society that we want. kentuck Jul 2012 #61

You are a brave person; your op is spot on (if it looks like a tax, quacks like a tax, and walks sad sally Jul 2012 #70

This is a very regressive tax. girl gone mad Jul 2012 #67

why is it regressive? Warren Stupidity Jul 2012 #69

It's regressive in that a .001% upper income will pay the same as a 10% upper income.. Fumesucker Jul 2012 #77

They say that anyway, truth be damned. PotatoChip Jul 2012 #66

It's like a cigarette tax Life Long Dem Jul 2012 #73

And the Repubs are now saying... kentuck Jul 2012 #75

why are you ignoring the interpretations of the other affirming Justices bigtree Jul 2012 #80

Yes it's a tax. So what? bluestateguy Jul 2012 #78

Absolutely right. kentuck Jul 2012 #85

A sovereign currency government does not need to increase taxes to spend. girl gone mad Jul 2012 #100

why can't he refer to more than just the one Justice who claims it's a tax? bigtree Jul 2012 #79

But then, it would have failed and you would have something else to complain about. kentuck Jul 2012 #81

I don't understand why is this such a problem to understand. zoechen Jul 2012 #83

It was not just "one Justice". former9thward Jul 2012 #82

Must have been a very persuasive argument? kentuck Jul 2012 #84

It is about one word zoechen Jul 2012 #87

he says that IF they view it as a tax, they have an obligation to leave the law alone bigtree Jul 2012 #88

So I don't understand what you point is zoechen Jul 2012 #89

so the Justices that didn't recognize the tax argument were just swiss cheese? bigtree Jul 2012 #90

The fact of the matter is zoechen Jul 2012 #92

I think you are right. kentuck Jul 2012 #94

that doesn't make the tax element some overriding part of the mandate bigtree Jul 2012 #98

It says it (taxation) was the "heart" of his argument. former9thward Jul 2012 #118

it affects about2% of the population, mostly affluent folks opting out bigtree Jul 2012 #121

So Obama's lawyer lied to the court. former9thward Jul 2012 #122

no, that's just a distortion of what was said and the facts of the law bigtree Jul 2012 #128

social security and medicare are mandated taxes madrchsod Jul 2012 #86

There's a difference between a tax, and a penalty imposed under the authority to tax markpkessinger Jul 2012 #91

The administrations own Council General argued zoechen Jul 2012 #93

If they had not made that argument... kentuck Jul 2012 #95

That's what I'm saying zoechen Jul 2012 #96

What is at issue now is not what the Solicitor argued, but what the Court actually held n/t markpkessinger Jul 2012 #97

Ok zoechen Jul 2012 #99

In other words, would it have been better to have the entire bill declared unconstitutional? kentuck Jul 2012 #101

I agree zoechen Jul 2012 #102

The Solicitor made two parallel arguments . . . markpkessinger Jul 2012 #107

Right, I have already commented on this before zoechen Jul 2012 #108

Well, it is a "tax" by all reasonable measures... David__77 Jul 2012 #103

It's a penalty paid as a tax.... soccer1 Jul 2012 #115

No, it's not a tax, it's a .... soccer1 Jul 2012 #130

the supreme court confirmed that he can call it whatever he wants. unblock Jul 2012 #112

Nnnnnnope cherokeeprogressive Jul 2012 #113

No. n/t lumberjack_jeff Jul 2012 #119

Romney agrees with the President... kentuck Jul 2012 #120

yes. it is a penalty. spanone Jul 2012 #123

Pyrrhic? Not in the slightest. It ENERGIZED Obama, if anything. MADem Jul 2012 #126

It is not a tax; it is a penalty to be paid only by free-riders. NYC_SKP Jul 2012 #127

tell em bigtree Jul 2012 #129

I don't understand by people want to echo the current RW talk radio rant about "new taxes"... NYC_SKP Jul 2012 #133

"penalty to be paid only by free-riders" girl gone mad Jul 2012 #131

Hey, why don't you just take it up with Nancy Pelosi, who used the term last week? NYC_SKP Jul 2012 #132