Bait And Switch on Obamacare
By Cal Thomas
June 29, 2012
When is a tax not a tax? When President Obama says it isn’t, or when the Supreme Court says it is?
Obamacare was sold on several fraudulent lines. The president knows the country doesn’t want to pay higher taxes, given the deplorable way their government spends the money. And so the administration packaged it as something different.
That’s called bait and switch, which is defined as “an illegal tactic in which a seller advertises a product with the intention of persuading customers to purchase a more expensive product.” And Obamacare, if it is not repealed, is guaranteed to be more expensive, not to mention more bureaucratic, delivering lower-quality care and eventually rationing to save money.
Does it matter what this president promises since so many have turned up empty?
This ruling will impose a massive tax increase during a lingering recession. Twenty-one new taxes are associated with Obamacare, according to the House Ways and Means Committee. That doesn’t include the scheduled year-end expiration of the Bush tax cuts. President Obama has said taxes shouldn’t be raised during a recession.
Simply put, if government is going to take more money from the people who earn it — mostly small businesses — it will result in those businesses hiring fewer people, or laying off more employees, or both, thus increasing already high unemployment. People who have never run a business, or made a payroll, like most in this administration, have no sense of that.
The list of lies and deceptions by this administration is long and growing. When campaigning for president in 2008, candidate Obama made “a firm pledge” not to raise taxes: “Not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” In 2009, he vigorously denied to George Stephanopoulos of ABC that the individual mandate is a tax. Now Chief Justice John Roberts says it is. If money leaves your pocket and goes to government, it’s a tax, no matter the label.
Some congressional Democrats, especially those running for re-election in traditionally Republican districts, might not have voted for this law had it been presented as a tax increase. They will now have to either defend the tax hike or vow to repeal the law. One way, they appear not to have known what they were doing. The other way, they will be portrayed as having lied.
In the short term, the president may have won the argument, but the Supreme Court has given Mitt Romney and the Republicans three issues: higher taxes, a loss of individual freedom and the wrong solution to reforming health insurance.
The Founders sought to “secure the blessings of liberty.” This president wants to secure the power of government. And so government, which has done a poor job of running Medicare and Medicaid, will now be responsible for an even bigger program. This is like renewing the license of a serial drunk driver.
**Emphasis added to the above**
Obama and his White House is STILL trying to sell this as a “penalty” NOT a TAX. FACTS say otherwise…..
Okay then……IF this is a Penalty and NOT a tax……WHY has the IRS increased its staffing in order to get ready to collect the “Penalties” ……
The only time it becomes a PENALTY is IF you DON’T pay your TAXES to the IRS, then YOU are hit with PENALTIES and INTEREST……
**WRITTEN in March 2010**
Collecting taxes under the Democrats’ newly passed health-care plan will cost the federal government more than $1 billion a year in salaries alone, Republicans in Congress estimate.
The legislation will require the IRS to hire as many as 16,500 additional auditors, agents and other employees to investigate and collect billions in new taxes imposed on Americans,according to a House Committee on Ways and Means Committee Republican report prepared March 18 for ranking members Reps. Dave Camp, R-Mich., and Charles Boustany R-La.
Averaging the three pay grade averages yields an estimated $65,696 per IRS worker hired, assuming an equal number of tax examiners, internal revenue agents and tax specialists.
Together, the 16,500 new IRS personnel needed to collect taxes under the new legislation will cost the federal government somewhere in the realm of $1.1 billion.
The IRS media office objected that the Joint Committee on Taxation publication JCX-18-10 issued March 21, “Technical Explanation of the Revenue Provisions of the Reconciliation Act,” does not specify any number of IRS personnel that must be hired to implement the tax provisions of the bill.
Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, disagrees.
“The Internal Revenue Service will see its largest expansion since withholding taxes were enacted during World War II to enforce the glut of new tax mandates and penalties included in the Democrats’ latest health care plan,” reads a statement on Brady’s congressional website.