From the moment the Supreme Court rewrote
Obamacare's individual insurance mandate as a "tax," the Obama White
House began pushing back, even though the "tax" label is all that saved
the law from destruction. But on Thursday, the White House took its
denial to a degree of "verbal wizardry" and "sophistry" not seen since
Chief Justice John Roberts' baffling decision.
In defending the law, White House press secretary Jay Carney has moved from merely misrepresenting the law's effect to mischaracterizing the very Supreme Court decision that upheld it. "[I]t is simply a fallacy to say that this is a broad-based tax. That's not what the opinion stated that was authored by the chief justice. The [Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act] is constitutional under Congress's taxing authority, but this is clearly a penalty that affects less than 1 percent of the American population."
In fact, Roberts repeatedly called the mandate a tax in his decision to uphold it. "[T]he shared responsibility mandate may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax, not a penalty," Roberts wrote, before concluding, "It is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance."
Read more: http://washingtonexaminer.com/not-content-with-winning-obama-aides-rewrite-courts-ruling/article/2501427
In defending the law, White House press secretary Jay Carney has moved from merely misrepresenting the law's effect to mischaracterizing the very Supreme Court decision that upheld it. "[I]t is simply a fallacy to say that this is a broad-based tax. That's not what the opinion stated that was authored by the chief justice. The [Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act] is constitutional under Congress's taxing authority, but this is clearly a penalty that affects less than 1 percent of the American population."
In fact, Roberts repeatedly called the mandate a tax in his decision to uphold it. "[T]he shared responsibility mandate may for constitutional purposes be considered a tax, not a penalty," Roberts wrote, before concluding, "It is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance."
Read more: http://washingtonexaminer.com/not-content-with-winning-obama-aides-rewrite-courts-ruling/article/2501427
No comments:
Post a Comment