By Tim Phillips
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care plan at the end of March, one of the president’s closest advisers has added to the weight of evidence that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is losing viability among lawmakers and the public.
Last week, while testifying before Congress, the president’s acting budget director Jeffrey Zients undercut one of the central legal defenses of the law, admitting that the penalty imposed on those who do not purchase health insurance does not constitute a tax.
This acknowledgement contradicts one of the most important arguments the administration is making before the court. The administration will argue that the mandate is constitutional because it is a tax, and the government has been granted the power to tax.
As the Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of President Obama’s health care plan at the end of March, one of the president’s closest advisers has added to the weight of evidence that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is losing viability among lawmakers and the public.
Last week, while testifying before Congress, the president’s acting budget director Jeffrey Zients undercut one of the central legal defenses of the law, admitting that the penalty imposed on those who do not purchase health insurance does not constitute a tax.
This acknowledgement contradicts one of the most important arguments the administration is making before the court. The administration will argue that the mandate is constitutional because it is a tax, and the government has been granted the power to tax.
No comments:
Post a Comment