Article 1, section 8

bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
Where have you read they plan on taxing the middle class for healthcare? The only 'tax' Obama has proposed is to reduce the bloated tax exemptions for people who make over $280,000/year.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3092880
Where have you read they plan on taxing the middle class for healthcare? The only 'tax' Obama has proposed is to reduce the bloated tax exemptions for people who make over $280,000/year.
WRONG!!! Try reading the bill. Business with a payroll of 400,000 dollars a year will be taxed if they do not provide insurance and cover 72% of the cost. Most of these are small businesses. Most Small Business owners do not fall into the top 10%. Most small business owners are middle class.
I see a little bit dribbling out of your mouth, next time swallow it all.
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3092892
Except for where it says "general welfare" which could be interpreted to refer to the general welfare of the citizenry, including their health.
The general welfare is spelled out in the next sentences.
 
bionicarm

bionicarm

Active Member
WRONG! Which version of the bill are your reading now, the fifth, the sixth? If the intention is to put the cost of this reform on businesses, which it's not, then why wasn't this brought up ion his speech last night? He allowed multiple people to ask him questions. Why didn't ANY ONE OF THEM bring this up? If this were true, why isn't it being reported in every post speech and news article out there? Did you bother listening to Obama last night when he stated exactly how he planned on paying for this? Open your ears and LISTEN before spewing babble out of your mouth...
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/3092896
The general welfare is spelled out in the next sentences.
There are a number of items spelled out, but it is not clear (to me, at least) that they are definitions of "general welfare". Also, take a look at the XIV amendment, which permits income taxes, without any specification of how the money is to be used.
It would be very surprising if an 18th century document specified anything about health care, since at that time there wasn't really anything of the sort, barring a few leaches and the bloodletting at the local barbershop. The Founding Fathers were pretty bright guys, but they weren't prescient. That's why we have a Supreme Court, despite the occasional assertion of original intent in applying the constitution.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3092899
WRONG! Which version of the bill are your reading now, the fifth, the sixth? If the intention is to put the cost of this reform on businesses, which it's not, then why wasn't this brought up ion his speech last night? He allowed multiple people to ask him questions. Why didn't ANY ONE OF THEM bring this up? If this were true, why isn't it being reported in every post speech and news article out there? Did you bother listening to Obama last night when he stated exactly how he planned on paying for this? Open your ears and LISTEN before spewing babble out of your mouth...
I don't care what the man says....when it is in the bill he is going to sign into law. He said get it on his desk before august. wwhich means he will not read it in it's entirety. When questioned on some things in the bill previously (before last nights weak attempt to placate the sheep) he openly admitted he was not familiar with portions of the bill. So why do I care what he says when the bill is all that matters?
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/3092899
WRONG! Which version of the bill are your reading now, the fifth, the sixth? If the intention is to put the cost of this reform on businesses, which it's not, then why wasn't this brought up ion his speech last night? He allowed multiple people to ask him questions. Why didn't ANY ONE OF THEM bring this up? If this were true, why isn't it being reported in every post speech and news article out there? Did you bother listening to Obama last night when he stated exactly how he planned on paying for this? Open your ears and LISTEN before spewing babble out of your mouth...
I am sorry I thought I did. Here is an excerpt from the transcript last night;
"The House suggested a surcharge on wealthy Americans, and my understanding, although I haven't seen the final versions, is -- is that there's been talk about making that basically only apply to families whose joint income is a million dollars.
To me, that meets my principle that it's not being shouldered by families who are already having a tough time."
So is this a way to say take from the haves and give it to the have nots? Spreading the wealth? A surcharge by any other name is perhaps a tax when the government is imposing it?
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
http:///forum/post/3092908
There are a number of items spelled out, but it is not clear (to me, at least) that they are definitions of "general welfare". Also, take a look at the XIV amendment, which permits income taxes, without any specification of how the money is to be used.
It would be very surprising if an 18th century document specified anything about health care, since at that time there wasn't really anything of the sort, barring a few leaches and the bloodletting at the local barbershop. The Founding Fathers were pretty bright guys, but they weren't prescient. That's why we have a Supreme Court, despite the occasional assertion of original intent in applying the constitution.
I am sorry Geridoc. I looked up the amendment you noted above and do not see any reference to taxes in it. It talks about naturalized citizens, senators and representatives.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut...ndmentxiv.html
As for the supreme court it was created by the constitution, not the other way around. The supreme court is there to ensure the constitution is upheld, not write it. That is why we have the congress, senate and executive branch.
 
geridoc

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/3092916
I am sorry Geridoc. I looked up the amendment you noted above and do not see any reference to taxes in it. It talks about naturalized citizens, senators and representatives.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut...ndmentxiv.html
As for the supreme court it was created by the constitution, not the other way around. The supreme court is there to ensure the constitution is upheld, not write it. That is why we have the congress, senate and executive branch.
The Supreme Court used the XIV amendment to permit income taxes. Upholding the law is a function of the constabulary - the role of the judiciary is to interpret and apply the law to each situation that arises. Many such situations cannot be enumerated in advance, so the role of the court is to be reactive in novel circumstances (IMHO, but I'm not a lawyer). Most of the things the government does are not listed in the Constitution specifically, because they did not exist at the time of the Framers - biomedical research, for example. Slavish adherence to the exact words of a 200 year old document simply guarantees that your society will be 200 years out of date. Ask anyone living under the Taliban (or any extreme religious doctrine) how that works out in the long term.
 
spanko

spanko

Active Member
Then the congress should change the wording in the correct way, through an amendment to the contstitution. It is not the courts right nor duty to change the constitution only apply the law as it relates to the constitution.
The role of the court is not to be reactive in novel circumstnace but to apply the basic precepts of the constitution.
The federal government does not have any right by the constitution to be involved it biomedical research.
 
crimzy

crimzy

Active Member
Google "Taxing and Spending power of the US Congress" and "Necessary and Proper Clause".
This seems to be more of a commentary than a request for the legal authority. But if you want to find the authority, check the above.
Sincerely,
The guy taking the bar exam next week.
 
veni vidi vici

veni vidi vici

Active Member
We are sure to have a Welfare and Health Czar working with the Redistribution of Wealth Czar that apparently answer not to Congress but only to the President ironing all this out for us in the near future.
Fear Not! The Government has it all under control.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top