13 attorneys general sue over health care overhaul

[PoliCon]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100323/...NhdHRvcm5leXNn

Only 13? I would have though it would be all 57!

[swirling_vortex]

Woo-hoo, go PA! Tom Corbett is running for governor too this election cycle, so it should get interesting.

Hopefully more states will get on board.

[Wei Wu Wei]

It's just a show. Everyone knows it's not unconstitutional for the governmeny to levy taxes or issue tax credits which is all that's happening here.

It's just to get people riled up about it, I can garuntee fox news is going to report this all day like it's actually a Real Thing (which it's not)

[PoliCon]

Woo-hoo, go PA! Tom Corbett is running for governor too this election cycle, so it should get interesting.

Hopefully more states will get on board.

Agreed.

[PoliCon]

It's just a show. Everyone knows it's not unconstitutional for the governmeny to levy taxes or issue tax credits which is all that's happening here.

It's just to get people riled up about it, I can garuntee fox news is going to report this all day like it's actually a Real Thing (which it's not)

For a second I was going to post a serious response to this post - and then I reread it and realized that I should respond in the same spirit the post was made. THEREFORE:

[Wei Wu Wei]

For a second I was going to post a serious response to this post - and then I reread it and realized that I should respond in the same spirit the post was made. THEREFORE:

So you have a serious reasons for believing what you believe but you just choose to not explain them? Ok sure bud. And I really know the secret to immorality (but I'm not gonnna tell you teehee)

[Lager]

Wu, I'd like to hear what your argument before the Supreme Court would be, explaining how mandating citizens to purchase health insurance is the same as levying taxes. It's okay, I've got a few moments.

[Wei Wu Wei]

Wu, I'd like to hear what your argument before the Supreme Court would be, explaining how mandating citizens to purchase health insurance is the same as levying taxes. It's okay, I've got a few moments.

They are calling it a mandate and certain sources are describing it as a new law with a punishment attached. That is not what it is.

Here is what everyone is calling the Mandate:

A new tax is issued on everyone, if you have or purchase insurance you receive a credit on that tax.

That's it. No law is going in the books that says "all citizens must purchase health insurance" they are just issuing a tax and credits.

Taxing is perfectly constitutional.


"Supreme Court, this so-called mandate (as you obviously know) is not a federal law, but a tax with credits. That is all."

[Lager]

You are implying that everyone is going to pay the fine upfront, and those that prove they have insurance are going to get a credit back? You know that's a stretch.

[Lager]

Here is the actual text of the bill as near as I could find:

All individuals will generally be required to get coverage, either through their employer or the exchange, or pay a penalty of 2.5 percent of income, subject to a hardship exemption

Although many people may feel that the burden of taxation is a "penalty", there is no legal basis for equating the two terms. A tax has more in common with a "fee" than a fine.