Skip to main content

View Diary: Constitutional Misdirection Will Not Derail the Health Care Law (56 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It came up (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gary Norton

    in the Virginia Case, that Judge argued that ACA mandates was "Fraudulently called a tax" simply because moving the authority to collect the fine to the IRS was a late change before final passage of the bill.

    I diaried that here.

    Vyan

    •  Not so. (0+ / 0-)

      He found it wasn't a tax in substance.  The DOJ countered with the slightly ridiculous argument, "aha!  But the IRS collects it, so it must be a tax!"  And his counter to that was that legislative history didn't support that reading.

      That late change was one argument among many made by the judge, rather than the sole one.

      •  The judge argued (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Gary Norton, cdkipp

        that the penalty "lacks a bona fide intention to raise revenue for the general welfare" even though the Secretary pointed out the it would raise approximately $3 Billion in revenues which would be applied to the general fund, and therefor offset the cost of tax credits and subsidies which the bill provides for purchasing care through the Exchange.  He then argued that it was a "unconstitutional regulator tax" which abridged the tenth amendment rights of the states.

        "The use of the word 'tax' appears to be a tactic to achieve enlarged regulatory license".

        The Secretary countered that "it is beyond serious question that a tax ceases to be valid, merely because it regulates..." and I tend to agree with that. Gas Taxes regulate. Tobacco Taxes Regulate. It's quote common for Congress to use it's tax power is selective and targeted ways to impact both commerce and regulation.

        The judge just choose to disagree.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site