Sponsored Content

Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

« Issa Puts Wiretaps Detailing Official Knowledge of Gunwalking Tactics Into Congressional Record | Main | $51 for 51 Senate Seats »
June 29, 2012

Old and Busted: Commerce Clause Abuse. The New Hotness: The Tax Catch-All.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” ~ Lewis Carroll

There's been a lot of analysis in the wake of yesterday's disastrous (IMO) decision by John Roberts to join the court's liberals and find a constitutional justification for Obamacare, and I thought I'd address a couple of related points that are swirling around (before Ace gets to them in this rare fit of in-before-the-crack-of-noon posting).

First, there's some chatter about the "mandate as a tax" position violating the constitutional requirement that tax bills originate in the House. I hate to burst people's bubbles (not really), but this is just silly.

Don't forget that the law contains some actual tax increases on payrolls, medical devices, etc. If PPACA was an unconstitutional tax on top of all the other issues it has, don't you think we'd have included that fact in our arguments against it before now?

There's a decent post at Hot Air on the legislative history that explains why even though the Senate's version of health care reform was passed it meets constitutional muster.

The bill that passed the Senate wasn’t technically a Senate bill. Reid took a bill that had already passed the House, stripped out the provisions to turn it into a “shell bill,” and then inserted the text of ObamaCare to get around this requirement. The bill that passed the Senate was H.R.3590, which initially had to do with tax breaks for military homeowners. And yes, they’ve used the “shell bill” strategy before. In fact, the conservative opinion today specifically mentioned Article I, section 7 at one point while raising no objection to Reid’s sleight of hand.

The process was admittedly ugly, but the Supreme Court apparently couldn't care less about this type of chicanery.

Now to the more important issue. This idea that Roberts was playing n-dimensional chess and this is some kind of great victory that puts an end to Commerce Clause abuse is ridiculous. Oh, sure, there will never again be a health care mandate offered under the Commerce Clause, but that's about the end of it.

And, worse, any gain that may have come here opened the door to an awful new legislative fallback position where all sorts of laws of dubious constitutionality can be passed and then magically transformed into a tax when they reach the Supreme Court because they could have been passed as a tax.

The Court's ruling ignores the entire reason that taxes were supposed to originate in the House. The idea, in a nation whose founding narrative centers around a tax revolt, was that this was the branch of government most responsive to the people, and the red wave of November 2010 shows that this notion is far from antiquated.

Roberts, in joining the Court's liberal wing, effectively moved the taxation power to the least accountable branch of government. If congress and the president had wanted to pass Obamacare as a tax, I don't disagree that they had the constitutional power to tinker with the tax code in an attempt to arrive at a similar result (the convoluted tax code we have now is largely the product of such social engineering efforts). The question is whether they would have had the political will.

The RNC's new ad that Ace linked this morning (included below the fold here, in case you missed it) gives a pretty good indication of the answer.

Is it even reasonable to believe that the law the Court ruled on would have been identical if the penalty associated with the mandate had been referred to as a tax during deliberations? As someone (RD, I think) said yesterday, if the Supreme Court truly believes the penalty would be constitutional if it was a tax, then it should have sent the law back to Congress and told them, "nice try, but pass it as a tax". Instead, the Court took it upon itself to rewrite the law.

I'm so old I remember when judicial restraint included the notion of considering legislative intent. Now, Congressional Record be damned, the mandate is a tax because John Roberts says it is (sometimes). It's hard to see how this "victory" is anything but Pyrrhic.

digg this
posted by Andy at 03:50 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
Village Idiot's Apprentice: ""Angry arrogant black woman. Noticing a trend?" ..."

Sponge - F*ck Joe Biden: "[i] I just can not imagine a universe where Old Ba ..."

Way, Way Downriver [/i][/b]: "Back when would-be engineers became "managing engi ..."

Khiri: "A final solution, or THE final solution? ..."

Sponge - F*ck Joe Biden: "[i] Angry arrogant black woman. Noticing a trend? ..."

jewells45 fuck cancer: "[i]Consumer Cellular is down here in Greenville, S ..."

It had to be said: ""What's a 'palestinian?'" $20. Same as in town. ..."

Village Idiot's Apprentice: "I just can not imagine a universe where Old Bay se ..."

Cat Ass Trophy : "Joe Biden received a $1 million diamond from A Chi ..."

"Perfessor" Squirrel: "What comes next....Reavers? Posted by: Village Id ..."

The American Insect Ranchers Association : "Cricket. It's what's for dinner. ..."

Village Idiot's Apprentice: ""We've come to determine You'll eat the vermin ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64