Democrats Claim Obamacare Isn't Mandatory

[Patranus]

We actually have not required in this law that you carry health insurance.

http://soundpolitics.com/archives/013920.html

I guess we have more Democrats who didn't read the bill.

5000A

An applicable individual shall for each month beginning after 2013 ensure that the individual, and any dependent of the individual who is an applicable individual, is covered under minimum essential coverage for such month.

 

[Jhhnn]

True enough- pay for healthcare insurance or pay a fine at taxtime, take your pick...

 

[cubeless]

but she won't even use language that is that clear... "... it's simply a different way to file your taxes.." now that's a gem..

 

[xj0hnx]

True enough- pay for healthcare insurance or pay a fine at taxtime, take your pick...

Um yea, that kind of makes it mandatory, if it wasn't there would be no fine, of course, you know that.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Maybe dumb people vote people like her into office?
where is my free healthcare

 

[xj0hnx]

Maybe dumb people vote people like her into office?
where is my free healthcare

He's going to whip out the Obamabucks from his stash and put gas in their cars, and pay their mortgages, as well as all their medical care needs ...didn't you hear?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Um yea, that kind of makes it mandatory, if it wasn't there would be no fine, of course, you know that.

Legally that isn't true, and that's what will be argued before a judge. A person is free to refuse. All they need do is pay the "no insurance tax".

I agree that this leaves little effective choice, but politicians use any trick they can.

 

[Ronstang]

Harry Reid claims that the income tax is voluntary so this fits right in. I guess they figure the rest of us are as dumb as the people who actually vote for these idiots.

 

[CycloWizard]

Creative marketing... Anything to avoid the simple, direct question which was asked by a constituent.

 

[nakedfrog]

Creative marketing... Anything to avoid the simple, direct question which was asked by a constituent.

My goodness, that sounds like pretty much any politician answering any question.

 

[TruePaige]

Fines don't start for a long while yet and when they do it is $95 a year. Big whoop.

 

[Tab]

Sigh.

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2009/11/will-i-go-to-jail-if-i-dont-buy-health.html

So if you don't buy health insurance, you are increasing costs for other people. The federal government is taxing you to recoup some of those costs. An analogy would be taxes on alcohol or tobacco, although these taxes are usually worked into the retail price of the goods so that people don't even have the opportunity to refuse to pay them. Another example would be taxes on an enterprise that is creating additional costs to the environment through pollution; the government taxes you if you don't purchase and install anti-pollution equipment. If people don't purchase the pollution-control equipment and won't pay the tax, the government will fine them too.

Again, you may object: isn't the argument that you are imposing costs on others really an argument that young and healthy people are subsidizing other people? Why should I be forced to pay taxes that benefit others more than they benefit me? The answer is that tax policy does this all the time. Progressive income taxes, for example. tax subsidize middle class and poor people at the expense of rich people. You can't get out of paying taxes just because your tax dollars subsidize people you'd rather not subsidize. This is as true of rich people who object to subsidizing the poor and middle class as it is of people who have ideological objections to government health care programs.

 

[Genx87]

Remember when Harry Reid said paying income taxes was voluntary? Yeah, these people live in a different dimension.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Fines don't start for a long while yet and when they do it is $95 a year. Big whoop.

Fines are $95 a year? Are you serious?

Assuming you're correct, why would anyone who doesn't currently have health insurance choose to pay for something that would cost many times that amount out of pocket? They can still go to the ER if they get sick/injured, right? What am I missing?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Fines don't start for a long while yet and when they do it is $95 a year. Big whoop.

Yep, that's when they start.

Two years later is is $695 or 2.5% of your income, whichever is higher.

Big whoop indeed.

 

[Darwin333]

Fines are $95 a year? Are you serious?

Assuming you're correct, why would anyone who doesn't currently have health insurance choose to pay for something that would cost many times that amount out of pocket? They can still go to the ER if they get sick/injured, right? What am I missing?

Not only that but with the pre-existing condition thing removed, can I just pay the fine and wait until my wife is pregnant and then purchase insurance and have the pregnancy be covered?

Do you have any idea how much money I can save a year?

 

[ShawnD1]

Fines are $95 a year? Are you serious?

It doesn't sound like a lot to you but to poor people this is a lot of money. Those same poor people have no hope in hell of ever affording health insurance, so basically this new scam is an attack on poor people.

 

[GoPackGo]

He's going to whip out the Obamabucks from his stash and put gas in their cars, and pay their mortgages, as well as all their medical care needs ...didn't you hear?

I remember hearing all sorts of stuff like that on election night.

 

[cubby1223]

Harry Reid claims that the income tax is voluntary so this fits right in. I guess they figure the rest of us are as dumb as the people who actually vote for these idiots.

Well, Democrats believe all of federal income tax is voluntary, none of them ever seem to pay their fair share. How many so far have been found to have tax problems?

 

[Fear No Evil]

Well, Democrats believe all of federal income tax is voluntary, none of them ever seem to pay their fair share. How many so far have been found to have tax problems?

Might be easier to say which ones HAVEN'T had tax problems. I'm just wondering how long it is before they go back to stealing stamps...

 

[ElFenix]

Fines are $95 a year? Are you serious?

Assuming you're correct, why would anyone who doesn't currently have health insurance choose to pay for something that would cost many times that amount out of pocket? They can still go to the ER if they get sick/injured, right? What am I missing?

or they could just do it massachusetts style

This week Blue Cross Blue Shield reported a big uptick in short-term customers who ran up costs more than four times the average, only to drop the coverage within three months.

Last July, Charlie Baker detailed similar gaming at Harvard Pilgrim, the health plan he used to run. Between April 2008 and March 2009, about 40% of its new enrollees stayed with it for fewer than five months and on average incurred costs about 600% higher than the company would have otherwise expected.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...82805022028.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Popular

 

[Pulsar]

Yep, that's when they start.

Two years later is is $695 or 2.5% of your income, whichever is higher.

Big whoop indeed.

Stop letting facts invade the discussion. He's playing the same crap game with that $95 comment that the politicians are.

"It's not mandatory".

"It's only $95 dollars".

Nickel and dimed to death, and in two years a two income median range family making a combined $100,000k a year has to pay $2500 on top of their normal health care to not be forced into a government mandated system.

But hey, income tax is voluntary. If you like prison time.

 

[nonlnear]

Of course it's not mandatory. If it were mandatory, then it might be unconstitutional...

 

[ElFenix]

Stop letting facts invade the discussion. He's playing the same crap game with that $95 comment that the politicians are.

"It's not mandatory".

"It's only $95 dollars".

Nickel and dimed to death, and in two years a two income median range family making a combined $100,000k a year has to pay $2500 on top of their normal health care to not be forced into a government mandated system.

But hey, income tax is voluntary. If you like prison time.

i'm not entirely sure from your post but you do understand that if you do purchase insurance you don't pay the no-insurance tax, right?

Of course it's not mandatory. If it were mandatory, then it might be unconstitutional...

here's the thing... i don't think there's any argument that whether tax credits for purchasing products are legal, correct? what if the structure is actually (normal income tax) + greater of ($695 or 2.5% of AGI) with a credit for ($695 or 2.5% AGI) if insurance coverage = true?

 

[woolfe9999]

Legally that isn't true, and that's what will be argued before a judge. A person is free to refuse. All they need do is pay the "no insurance tax".

I agree that this leaves little effective choice, but politicians use any trick they can.

I think Wasserman's comment is a total spin job and I wouldn't defend it.

However, the tax is less than the cost of the insurance, so you do have a meaningful choice: to have insurance and pay more, or forgo insurance and pay less. You don't, however, have an option to pay nothing, so it's obviously disengenuous to say it isn't "mandatory."

- wolf