Why is the Justice Department now calling "Obamacare" a "tax"?

Question

This article in the New York Times from Friday 16 July 2010:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/health/policy/18health.html?_r=2&ref=politics

Quote from the article:
[In a brief defending the law, the Justice Department says the requirement for people to carry insurance or pay the penalty is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes. 
Congress can use its taxing power “even for purposes that would exceed its powers under other provisions” of the Constitution, the department said. For more than a century, it added, the Supreme Court has held that Congress can tax activities that it could not reach by using its power to regulate commerce. 
*****
Under the Constitution, Congress can exercise its taxing power to provide for the “general welfare.” It is for Congress, not courts, to decide which taxes are “conducive to the general welfare,” the Supreme Court said 73 years ago in upholding the Social Security Act.] 

So...Congress can exceed or go beyond is Constitutionally-listed powers by levying a tax to "promote the general welfare" or "regulate commerce"?

Second quote from the article:
[Jack M. Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School who supports the new law, said, “The tax argument is the strongest argument for upholding” the individual-coverage requirement. 

Mr. Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill,” Mr. Balkin said last month at a meeting of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal organization. “This bill is a tax. Because it’s a tax, it’s completely constitutional.”]

So...since this tax is completely constitutional, according to Mr. Balkin, then *any* tax designed to "promote the general welfare" or to "regulate commerce" is completely constitutional.  

This administration is giving itself rationalization to levy any kind of tax they see fit.

WTF?!

Click the article and read it for yourself; it isn't that long.

justgetitright · Accepted Answer

Obama is trying to defend the violation of the 10th amendment. By calling this a tax and the constitutional ability of the federal government to lay and collect taxes they are grasping at straws.

The problem that he still faces is that the tax (fine) has no provisions for which an individual can file a grievance thus you are being denied your constitutional right of "Due Process" under the 5 and 14th amendment.

I have identified a number of areas that I see as constitutional violations, though these will have to be decided by the courts and not me,

Before listing the constitutional violations, let me say that once they start publishing your medical records they will be in violation of our current HIPAA Laws

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/

OK, the HIPAA laws are part of our right to privacy that is protected by the 3rd amendment. The administration wants to collect your medical records and digitize them for faster access but those working in that department and all prospective employers will have access to your medical records.

Collection of your medical records will also include collection of your financial records as well as hospital and doctor records. They will do this by using the laws contained in the health care bill.
Clearly this is a violation of the search and seizure rules, they will be collecting your private records with out a warrant.

This is the 3 constitutional violations that I have seen, violations of the 3rd, 4th, 5th and 14th amendments plus the 10th amendment.

I really fail to see how the federal government can compel the citizens to purchase an item from the public sector.

Madhukar · Answer

Obama is inclined towards socialism which an average American hates. His theory is "rich should pay for the poor" is justified. Afterall, it is an incorrect assumption that all rich are by their hard work. It is a matter of chance too that some not so deserving people in the society end up becoming rich and many deserving persons rot and struggle for their needs. Health is not a luxury to be allowed only to those who can afford it. It is the duty of the State to ensure health to all and if that demands taxing the rich, it MUST be done.

Anonymous · Answer

Because that's what it is.

That was decided over 12 months ago, when it was decided the fine would be added to your income tax. That made it a tax.

If the fine is a tax, then by implication so is any mandated spending to avoid the fine.

One way or the other, the government will confiscate some part of your money. That is a tax.

? · Answer

Well, from reading the NYT article, it sure sounds like the administration is using what some people refer to as "Obama-speak" to dig deep into the pockets of average Americans ~ all just to pay for the new health care plan. Even people who might support Obama are just now beginning to blast his administration's policies for what they call "lop-sided language" and even blatant socialism.

WJ · Answer

When they were selling it, it was going to be free and improve health care for every American.  Now reality is setting in that it's an expensive socialist boondoggle.

Anonymous · Answer

Its called bait & switch. Obama went on national TV and INSISTED it wasnt a tax.

But when they get to the court room it suddenly is one.

Just one of the many many lies we were told about this health care reform bill.

zzone · Answer

He and his Justice Dept is corrupt as hell.  They are doing this to try and keep it from being repealed, yet he claimed......NO one would be taxed a DIME.  He is lying criminal, that is why he put criminals and con artist in his cabinet and appoint Czars.

? · Answer

Ok, here it come's.............Surprise!!!!!!!!!

A democrat never seen a tax they didn't like and hike..to give to the....well to help..the,,Ok, so some people  have stay poor to give them a reason to be in office..its a small price to pay..right?

Chewy Ivan 2 · Answer

To prove it's constitutionality.

Trending News

Why is the Justice Department now calling "Obamacare" a "tax"?

9 Answers