Saturday, June 30, 2012

The Liar's Tax

By Alan Caruba

The most singular aspect of Obamacare is the way Democrats, from the President on down, consistently lied about the fact that it was a tax. Interviewed by George Stephanopolos on ABC News, September 2009, Obama was asked if he rejected the criticism that it was a tax increase. “I absolutely reject that notion,” was his reply.

No need to quote the others. They all lied. It took the Supreme Court and, in particular, Chief Justice Roberts, to call Obamacare a tax in the process of eliminating the Commerce Clause of the Constitution as a justification for imposing this burden on Americans.

As CNBC’s Larry Kudlow was quick to note, “Twenty new or higher taxes across the board are bad for economic growth, bad for job hiring, bad for investors, and bad for families,” adding that when “you tax something more, you get less of it.”

Most Americans have been repeatedly told that Obamacare would ensure more care for more people, but the fact is, with or without health insurance, Americans receive health care, even if the hospital emergency room is their last resort, even if they are homeless, and even if they have no way to pay for it.

The multi-millionaire former Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who told Americans that we would have to wait to know what was in Obamacare until after it was passed, reacted to the Supreme Court decision saying, “Call it what you will.” That is the equivalent of “Let them eat cake”, Marie Antoinette’s famed statement before the enraged citizens of France separated her head from her body.

Obamacare just became the single most important element of the November 6th national elections, followed by the economy. Both stink! Both are the direct result of Obama’s declared intention to “fundamentally transform America.” If he had even a schoolchild’s grasp of American history, he would know that Americans hate taxes. They declared their independence from England over the issue of taxation without representation.

What will emerge in the months between now and the elections is the fact that the Congressional Budget Office has projected that the implementation of Obamacare will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, an increase of $820 billion over the initial estimate when it was first signed into law. A nation already $17 trillion in debt can hardly welcome such news, nor absorb such costs.

For most Americans, though, the realization that Obamacare contains twenty-one new taxes will likely tip the scales in November to the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, who has promised to begin the repeal of the law the first day he takes office. Yes, it is an irony that he introduced Romneycare in Massachusetts when he was Governor there, but that is not going to affect the outcome of the election.

Among the many new taxes buried in the 2000-plus pages of Obamacare, there’s a 2.3% excise tax on U.S. sales of medical devices that observers believe would prove to be a $20 billion blow to an industry that employs an estimated 400,000.

There’s a 3.6% surtax on investment income from capital gains and dividends on those earning more than $250,000.

Obamacare imposes a $50,000 excise tax on charitable hospitals that fail to meet new “community health assessment needs”, whatever they are.

There’s a $2.6 billion-a-year tax on drug companies. A 10% excise tax on indoor tanning salons. An $87 billion hike in Medicare payroll taxes for employees, as well as the self-employed.

Between now and November voters are going to be reminded that Obama promised to fix the economy and then spent the first two years getting Obamacare through Congress. No Republican voted for it and, in 2010, voters replaced some sixty representatives and senators with Republicans.

Obama promised to create jobs. Instead he gave us a multi-billion “stimulus” that utterly failed. He promised to cut the deficit in half. And he promised that Americans could keep their current health insurance plans. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that as many as twenty million will lose theirs.

Lies! Lies! Lies!

In a thoughtful analysis of Obamacare, two senior fellows at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution were joined by the dean of the Columbia Business School who concluded that “In upholding the Affordable Care Act, the Supreme Court has allowed the President and Congress to put the country’s health policy on a path that will restrict individual choices, stifle innovation and sharply increase health-care costs.”

As that sinks in, the November elections will end the tyranny of Barack Obama and his minions in Congress. If you wonder what will replace it, just ask Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WIS) who has a plan in place to reform Medicare and Medicaid. If you haven’t heard much about it, you can thank the mainstream media and its slavish adoration of the President.

It is a liar’s tax. It is a liar’s penalty. It is a liar’s plan to further bankrupt the nation.

© Alan Caruba, 2012


Ronbo said...

...for some reason, I smell revolution in the air...something to do with excessive and illegal taxation in a country during the late 18th century.

Intolerable Acts...

A blockhead of a king...

A corrupt and degenerate ruling class...

The well armed citizen...

Harry Dale Huffman said...

I was going to comment, that the Obamacare "mandate" is obviously a penalty, not a tax, but there is a more forceful and immediately effective point to make. I found the following comment (by someone who comments as "eon") on an article at Pajamas Media, where it was noted by someone that the Supreme Court ruling was a big win for Obama:

"...Except of course for the small detail that the entire argument while the measure was being passed that it was not a tax, in any way, shape, or form. And of course, it originated in the Senate and White House, not the House of Representatives.

"This makes it an illegally-passed 'revenue bill', which legally cannot be collected. That is, until it goes back to the House to be rewritten and passed correctly.

"What Roberts did here was say to the Administration and its cronies in the legislature, 'Go back to Square One and start over. Or else.'

"The 'or else' being that while they have a Draconian law on the books (which is one of their big dreams and no doubt gives them a near 'O' just thinking about it), they cannot enforce it as it is. Because doing so would violate other Constitutional provisions, and the U.S. Code.

"The hilarious thing is that neither celebrating liberals, or conservatives who want to tar and feather Roberts, realize just what a colossal defeat this is for Obama & Co."

I second this motion, and pass it on to you and your many readers, for immediate distribution.

Lime Lite said...

Buying today's voters with tomorrow's money. Never a good idea....

LarryOldtimer said...

It always helps to do the calcs.

This is no more and no less than socialized medicine, pure and simple.

So . . . count the number of MD/GPs. Estimate the huge numbers of people now eligible for "free" medical care. Oh my, not all that number of licensed medical doctors to provide medical care in the first place. Guess what, blow their trumpets as they will, there will be no doctor around when one is really needed.

As to the "tax" part enforced by the IRS. Hmmmm. This would be an annual tax, and the only way would be to audit. After the first audit, there are 4 higher levels that can be appealed to, followed by Tax Court.

As it is, only a very few audits are conducted each year. IRS does not have the personnel to audit more tax forms.

When I was a child, we would get a deck of cards, and see just high a structure we could make by placing one card at a time . . . until the whole thing came down.

All this socialized medicine is . . . is a house of cards.

Any widespread law which cannot be enforced can be safely ignored.