Obamacare: Taxes Just For Existing

From World Net daily and The Patriot Update:

Obamacare condemned for taxing just 'existing'


Brief argues Congress, president thumbed noses at Constitution



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: September 04, 2010

12:00 am Eastern





By Bob Unruh

© 2010 WorldNetDaily







Democrats in Congress and President Obama thumbed their noses at the U.S. Constitution in approving Obamacare, the president's plan that essentially nationalizes the health-care decision-making process, according to a legal brief filed in support of a lawsuit challenging the March law.



"Congress is trying to use the Commerce Clause to justify compelling citizens into involuntarily engaging in commerce," said the brief filed today by Liberty Counsel, which is representing Liberty University and employees.



"Congress is mandating that people who are not engaged in the economic activity of purchasing health insurance must now engage in that activity or be assessed a civil penalty," the brief states.



"Congress here is regulating people who [are] not engaged in any activity. … Here, people are regulated for simply existing," the brief said.



Sign the petition opposing Obamacare.



The arguments were filed in a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia by Liberty Counsel. The suit challenges the constitutionality of the 2,409 pages of law signed by Obama March 23. Under the law, the university faces the potential of penalties in the millions of dollars.



It was the first private party lawsuit in the nation against the health-care bill, filed only hours after Obama's signature was affixed. It asks the court to declare the law unconstitutional.



(Story continues below)









Asking for the case to be dismissed, Obama's Department of Justice had argued Congress can force everyone to buy insurance to make it affordable to all.



"This socialist mentality would allow Congress to nationalize anything on the assumption that all must pay in order to make the object of regulation affordable to all," arguments from Liberty Counsel said.



"If that is true, then there is no limit on what Congress can regulate. This health-care law is an unprecedented expansion of federal power and regulation. It is unconstitutional. It represents everything that is wrong with the failed political philosophy of socialism. The power of the federal government to regulate has limits. This healthcare law is far beyond those limits," the legal team said.



The brief said, "The fact that Congress enacted a laundry list of provisions regarding how health-care expenses affect the economy does not establish that decisions not to purchase health insurance can somehow be regulated under the Commerce Clause.



"Simply because Congress may conclude that a particular activity substantially affects interstate commerce does not necessarily make it so."



Mathew Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel, argued the "power of the federal government to regulate has limits." "



This health-care law is far beyond those limits," he said.



Obamacare, the complaint explains, "is analogous to Congress compelling every person in America to purchase a Chevrolet because Congress has the authority to regulate the automotive industry and purchasing or not purchasing a Chevrolet will have an eventual effect on the industry. As the Supreme Court said … the Commerce Clause has never been extended that far."



It warned that the very structure of the nation is at risk.



"The threat of civil penalties under the act will induce the surrender of rights and compliance with federal regulation as the price of simply living in the United States."



A total of 170 members of the U.S. House already have signed a discharge petition sponsored by U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, that calls for Obamacare's repeal.



The effort in the House is quickly gaining momentum even though it has received little media coverage. Under House rules, King's discharge petition needs 218 signatures to advance. But with that number – a majority in the 435-member body – once it moves it virtually is assured of passing, even though House Speaker Nancy Pelosi vigorously opposes it.



All of the GOP representatives and 34 Democrats opposed Obamacare when it was passed by a narrow 219-212 vote earlier this year. King said 212 representatives, at least, should be in favor of overturning it, since they previously opposed it.



Then it will be up to the four Democrat votes that would be needed to turn from endorsement to rejection for it to advance.



The proposal states: "Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XV, I, Steve King of Iowa, move to discharge the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Ways and Means, Education and Labor, the Judiciary, Natural Resources, Rules, House Administration and Appropriations from the consideration of the bill (H.R. 4972) to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which was referred to said committees on March 25, 2010, in support of which motion the undersigned Members of the House of Representatives affix their signatures."



Its target is the $940 billion, or greater, bill adopted by the Democrat-controlled Congress.



Advocates say constituents need to call their representatives to tell them to get on board right away so that the petition is positioned to move forward whether or not the GOP becomes the majority in the House after the 2010 fall elections.