Irony: Obama said health care mandate not a "tax." Supreme Court says it is.

As a political strategy, the Obama administration and Democrats had argued that forcing Americans to buy health insurance was not a "tax." Admitting that it was a tax would have made it more difficult for Democrats to vote for it. But it turns out that the Supreme Court's rationale for declaring that the mandate provision is constitutional is that it is in fact a "tax" that Congress that is empowered to pass.

For further clarification, check out DonB's comment elsewhere on my blog, the Barbershop.

Here is Obama saying that it's definitely not a tax.


Filed under: Health care reform


Leave a comment
  • I'll lift my clickcount boycott of you for this one instance. [Oh, joy unalloyed--Dennis]

    (1) I was 100% correct about the outcome of the Arizona immigration law case, including that the injunction against Section 2 wouldn't stand.

    (2) I was 50% correct with regard to the rationale of the health care case, at least according to preliminary news reports. However, I said it could be upheld as a tax and it was. Thus, it is sort of like Blago only being convicted on 18 of 21 counts--he's still doing 14 years.

    I'm sure this will be debated in law school constitutional law classes, but apparently you lack the capacity to join that debate. Especially when you posted a headline "Obama care IS unconstitutional" about a year ago. No, it isn't according to GWB appointee C.J. Roberts. So, you were wrong.

    But here is the more interesting point: The Tribune says it is going to put the columnists behind a pay wall. Hence there will be a free market capitalism test whether anyone is willing to pay to read Zorn's and your opinions that lack any basis, at least in primary sources.

    BTW, I see that you posted before SCOTUS posted the official slip opinion on its site. Not that that really matters with regard to this post.

    So, back to the boycott.

  • Oh I get it- Jack's a moron. It's funny how the Left thinks that somehow they have been vindicated with this ruling, when in fact, the only logic for it to be made unconstitutional was for justices to "interpret" the individual mandate as a tax.
    I know this is over your head here Jack, but note that the federal government lacks police powers that the states retain (that's what destroys the whole, "but..but..Romney did the same thing in Massachusetts")- that was reaffirmed by the majority opinion. The only way that Roberts could make the argument that the mandate was constitutional was to re-interpret the "fine" (as the President and Congress always contended- the mandate is a "fine" and not a "tax") as a "tax". Congress is delegated authority under the Constitution to levy taxes, but levying a fine against an individual for not engaging in commerce would require police powers that the federal government lacks and states retain.
    It's funny, though, as we have seen in the past three cases (life imprisonment of minors, Arizona immigration law, and the healthcare law) that the "conservative" wing of the court rarely votes as a block, but no one on the "liberal" wing ever steps out of line. This is particularly interesting considering that the "liberal" wing espouses the notion of the "living constitution", which has no underlying premis (strict constructivism from the conservative wing, at least, has the underlying premisis of accepting the consitution with the original intention of the founders) other than interpret as you see fit from your post-modernist construct. So ultimately, the "liberal" wing is full of intellectual light weights (few can argue that anyone on the "liberal" wing of the court can go toe-to-toe with Scalia) and partisan hacks.

  • Nice answers in replace of the question with real point of view and explaining about raspberry ketone

Leave a comment

  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Advertisement:
  • Visit my new website

    I'm a freelance writer, editor and author. I can help you with a wide variety of projects. Check out my new website at

  • Meet The Blogger

    Dennis Byrne

    Chicago Tribune contributing op-ed columnist and author of forthcoming historical novel, "Madness: The War of 1812." Reporter, editor and columnist for Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Daily News. Freelance writer and editor.

  • Subscribe to The Barbershop

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Dennis Byrne’s Facebook Fan Page

  • Categories

  • Like me on Facebook

  • Our National Debt

  • Twitter

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

  • /Users/dennisby/Desktop/trailer.mp4
  • Latest on ChicagoNow

  • Advertisement: