OBAMACARE AS TAXATIONDoes this provide another avenue to defeat it?
June 29, 2012 TPATH - First and foremost, TPATH and our contributors and researchers are not going to jump on the bandwagon of several so called Conservative Pundits and suggest that Justice Roberts is a hero and his ruling, activist as it was, had any long term or well planned tactical advantages for this country.
As far as TPATH is concerned there are just three possible reasons why he ruled as he did. Without going too deeply into them now, they are health, threats or disguised liberalism.
Mr. Nicholas Purpura, a TPATH contributor, along with others, have suggested that this ruling, and the way in which it was worded, that the mandate portion is a TAX, has given a green light and another avenue to put a halt to the entire bill, as being unconstitutional.
This new front is based upon Article I of the Constitution that says only the House of Representatives may propose bills that raise revenue.
For those of us who have followed this mess from the beginning, we remember that the original bill, HR3500, was authored by many of our more liberal Congressmen including the utlra progressive Frank Pallone.
However, that bill was scrapped and the one which was signed into law by the Usurper was presented and "reconciled" in the Senate. It went to Charlie ( I pay no taxes on rental income) Wrangle in the House of Representatives.
This would appear to run contrary to the Constitution in that this bill, now declared as a tax bill by the Supreme Court, originated in the Senate.
The Supreme Court ruling and any ruling can be challenged within 30 days of the release of its decision. There are 26 states and their Attorneys General that were party to the Obamacare lawsuit, that can do this.