New crime in HopeandChange Era? Failure to insure
posted at 6:30 pm on September 25, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Senator John Ensign (R-NV) wanted to get an answer on the implications of the individual mandate in the ObamaCare bill floated by Max Baucus (D-MT) during the markup session. Ensign asked Thomas Barthold, chief of staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation, what would happen if a taxpayer refused to buy health insurance and then refused to pay the subsequent fine, which could run to $1900 for an individual. Barthold replied that one shouldn’t do the crime if one doesn’t want to do the time:
Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it “Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold.”
See the note for yourself here. This should come as no surprise. Thanks to Baucus, the IRS would enforce the individual mandate, and a failure to comply would impose the fine, which in Baucus’ own words is called an “excise tax.” Those who refuse to pay their taxes will eventually go to prison for it, unless the person is someone like Tim Geithner, who then gets to run the agency that puts people in prison for failing to pay their taxes.
Great system they’re building in Washington, isn’t it?
Update: Somehow, I wrote “Sessions” when I meant “Ensign”. Weird. My apologies!
Update II: Second big question — will ACORN start providing advice on how to evade these taxes, too?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
yeah but will I still get my FREE health care in the Jail? What about my Meds?
poppieseeds on September 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM
My primary question–the next question Senator Ensign should have asked–what part of the constitution gives federal government the authority to declare not buying health insurance a crime?
Chaz706 on September 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM
What’s up with the ads on the threads?
TimeTraveler on September 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM
From my cold,dead jail cell.
Lincoln Cadillac on September 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM
See you in FEMA camp, er, Obamacare work camps…
ted c on September 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM
Here’s some feedback from the folks. You can tell some of these are younger people who are SHOCKED that their savior would do this to them. So long iphone data plan. You need to pay for insurance! LMFAO
http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Ensign_receives_handwritten_confirmation_.html#comments
marklmail on September 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM
But won’t I be getting free healthcare in jail?
myrenovations on September 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM
The irony of being put in debtor’s prison for failure to buy medical coverage–when you get free medical care in prison–fails on the libtards.
Enoxo on September 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM
Ed and AP are attempting to pauperize the Left.
Dusty on September 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Instead of an excise tax lets excise the bill.
fourdeucer on September 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Awesome police state we’re building here.
Bishop on September 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Great, turn regular, law abiding citizens into criminals. Please wake me in Nov. 2012 when this nightmare is (hopefully) over.
evie on September 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM
poppieseeds on September 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM
We are of the same thinking on this one…
myrenovations on September 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM
see ya gotta either go GALT or go illegal alien, the only 2 ways to avoid the fine
again it rewards not working, ‘under’working ACORNesque working (tin in the backyard which is basically going GALT in a way)or being illegal
ginaswo on September 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM
If they pass that crap I will burn my registration card on the steps of the Capitol.
Chris_Balsz on September 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Turbo Tax Tim, to the rescue!
upinak on September 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM
unless the person is someone like Tim Geithner
Or,Charles Rangel,ahem!!
canopfor on September 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM
round up the 25-30 year old O supporters first.
rob verdi on September 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM
It’s time to pull out the effigies.
Dusty on September 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Freedom is not free.
Free healthcare is not free.
HornetSting on September 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Release the murders and rapists due to overcrowding and fill them with those that don’t want to, or can’t afford, government mandated health insurance. Yup, makes all of the sense in the world.
evie on September 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM
And they will discover that the IRS is woefully under-staffed to administer these provisions.
ICBM on September 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM
” . . . or a $25,000 penalty . . .”
If folks were refusing to pay their “excise tax” what do you think the odds of collecting this “penalty” are?
All I can say is they better start building jails right now!
Heck, I’ll ask my employer to drop my health insurance just so I can refuse to pay the “excise tax” if this travesty becomes law. Bet I won’t be alone.
Fatal on September 25, 2009 at 6:40 PM
In the end, there’ll only be wealthy lawyers, wealthier lawyers and the wealthiest lawyers. In the end.
Griz on September 25, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Who has the authority to sue the government for this extra-constitutional monstrosity? Would anybody have standing? Or is it like the way no American has standing to challenge whether or not a candidate for President is eligible to occupy the office?
JonPrichard on September 25, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Once Obama has us all in Prison for not having health insurance, he can than demand tax increases for the huge prison system he’ll need to hold us all.
portlandon on September 25, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Correction:
Sessions? Where did he come from?
RightWinged on September 25, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Fixed it.
MrScribbler on September 25, 2009 at 6:42 PM
So,Fine-Nazi`s will be asking for your over-do fines now!!
Sounds awfully East Berlin-ish to me!!
canopfor on September 25, 2009 at 6:43 PM
This fascist government gets more repressive with each passing day . . . how long can this continue?
rplat on September 25, 2009 at 6:43 PM
Come and get me, coppers.
katy the mean old lady on September 25, 2009 at 6:43 PM
If they pass this crap, something tells me it may be more than your registration card burning in the Capitol…
javamartini on September 25, 2009 at 6:43 PM
I am sensing a great surge in the force…..
I sense a Facebook post from Fort Wasilla about this that will coin the phrase…Obama’s Insurance Prisoners.
portlandon on September 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM
And the lefty morons were worried about Bush and the Patriot Act. THIS is the kind of thing that will destroy America — jail for the crime of not buying insurance; jail for the act of thinking bad thoughts about the Dear Leader; jail for criticizing your Congressman or Senator; jail for thought crime …
johnsteele on September 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM
ICBM,
which is why in a stunning turnaround the Obama admin creates “tax farmers” to assist in the great experiment.
rob verdi on September 25, 2009 at 6:44 PM
This is frickin insane. We do not want a soft tyranny. We are not children.
BadgerHawk on September 25, 2009 at 6:45 PM
There’s not enough prison space, they’re going to have to build some camps or something… /s
FloatingRock on September 25, 2009 at 6:45 PM
See that’s why they’re brainwashing school kids, so that they will inform on their parents for not having health insurance vis a vis the Hitler youth in the 1930′s and 40′s.
Hellrider on September 25, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Geithner should already be serving time…
With his new husbands, Z-Shady or Bang X or the ever-lovely Bubba.
TXUS on September 25, 2009 at 6:46 PM
This new president is rapidly making being a free American in America a crime.
He has even had the audacity to publicly state that he “fundamentally” wants to CHANGE the USA. …and is wasting no time in doing so.
…he essentially hates us! …unless we “Change” into what is acceptable to him personally.
We are in the beginnings of a dictatorship …it becomes more and more obvious each and every day this 20 year disciple of Jeremiah Wright occupies the White House.
Very bizarre & dangerous situation the voters have put this country into.
Teebone3 on September 25, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Waaaaaaaaaaait…..
Lemme see……….
Free food,
Free board,
Free medical care,
Free entertainment and exercise……….
Yeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh……………
That’s the ticket to a New Obamerica…..
/s
Lockstein13 on September 25, 2009 at 6:48 PM
Looks like a tax revolt will be America’s Cloward-Piven strategy to topple the Obama regime. Where’s he going to get the $$$ for all the prisons?
Taxes?
See sentence one above.
ROCnPhilly on September 25, 2009 at 6:48 PM
I’m in.
HornetSting on September 25, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Anyone else notice the little ‘felony tax evasion’ nugget added to the bottom of the note?
Monica on September 25, 2009 at 6:50 PM
This would be a great time for a Sci-fi horror flick!
Just play the last 9 months of the Obamaination of
Hopeys Grand Abyss!!
Acorn,young schoolers singing to dear leader,second
nuke plant in Iran,the list is into infinity!
Do it before some bright Lefty,comes up with their
version of ‘Primary Colours’,to rewrite the next 3
or so years before his re-election,jus sayin!!
canopfor on September 25, 2009 at 6:51 PM
Don’t forget hot loving every night, whether you want it or not.
Monica on September 25, 2009 at 6:51 PM
Papers please. Your papers….are not in order. Ver is your proof of ze health coverage? Vat? You hav none? Take him avay!
Next!
Bishop on September 25, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Yep. Just add FELON to the list we’ve been called:
Angry Mob
Nazis
Right Wing Extremists
Domestic Terrorist
Felon.
HornetSting on September 25, 2009 at 6:52 PM
Buy insurance we dictate, Or else we will incarcerate, Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama.
txag92 on September 25, 2009 at 6:53 PM
Looks like a tax revolt will be America’s Cloward-Piven strategy to topple the Obama regime. Where’s he going to get the $$$ for all the prisons?
Taxes?
See sentence one above.
ROCnPhilly on September 25, 2009 at 6:48 PM
ROCnPhilly: Another Tea Party Rally in DC,will re-hammer the
point,and it will un-nerve the Leftys for a sec
ond time!!:)
canopfor on September 25, 2009 at 6:54 PM
“FILL THE JAILS…!!!”
Seven Percent Solution on September 25, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Nobody will be going to prison for not buying health insurance…. they’ll be sentenced to community service with ACORN instead.
rw on September 25, 2009 at 6:54 PM
hehehehehehehe
When the end comes, you can have a place in my bunker.
Bishop on September 25, 2009 at 6:55 PM
F.U. Obama and Congressional Marxists. That’s my legal opinion.
elduende on September 25, 2009 at 6:56 PM
“FILL THE JAILS…!!!”
Seven Percent Solution on September 25, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Seven Percent Solutions:That must be the ‘Innocents’ Obama
speaked of in his UN Speech!!:)
canopfor on September 25, 2009 at 6:56 PM
Right, they’re going to go for a felony conviction which suspends voting rights in a lot of places. Suspended sentence to spare them the cost of incarceration. And then lots of fines.
It’s still preferrable to cooperating with fascism in America.
Chris_Balsz on September 25, 2009 at 6:57 PM
This just can not be Constitutional.
Terrye on September 25, 2009 at 6:59 PM
hehehehehehehe
When the end comes, you can have a place in my bunker.
Bishop on September 25, 2009 at 6:55 PM
LOL! I actually hijacked it from the Politico comments so you’ll be inviting some annonymous poster to your bunker. At least you’ll be laughing. Hope he/she is hot.
txag92 on September 25, 2009 at 7:00 PM
You could put that little diddy behind most of what obamster and the congress have done this year.
HornetSting on September 25, 2009 at 7:01 PM
Well they’re going to have to build new jails for all the new convicts that are going to be running around. Or are they going to let all the old convicts out to make room for the new ones.
If people can’t afford $1800 dollars how the hell are they going to afford $25,000.
I’m sorry but the democrats are a bunch of clueless @$$holes.
Where is the money going to come from? Unemployment is on the rise there is going to be less money coming in. How are the people on unemployment going to pay for it or are they exempt which even means less money.
What a Fkin mess
Brat4life on September 25, 2009 at 7:02 PM
Baucus is out of his mind…he squelches free speech and now imprisonment for not paying insurance premiums. MT must be proud.
d1carter on September 25, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Shades of 1930′s Germany.
Johan Klaus on September 25, 2009 at 7:04 PM
Don’t worry, they’re working on that too.
R Square on September 25, 2009 at 7:05 PM
So will this be applied to the illegal aliens as well? Remember libs always remind us that they are honest TAX PAYING people too. So, if they don’t have insurance, I guess we’ll be fining/jailing them just like the regular citizens.
gregbert on September 25, 2009 at 7:05 PM
‘Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison’ -H. D. Thoreau
Free Constitution on September 25, 2009 at 7:06 PM
Since when did the pols follow the constitution? Most of what they do is unconstitutional.
Johan Klaus on September 25, 2009 at 7:07 PM
Going Galt or…WOLVERINES!!!!!
Puddleglum on September 25, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Anyone who could be potentially charged with this crime would probably have standing, i.e., any adult citizen or legal resident.
You could go the long route…not pay the fine, and wait for prosecution and challegne the statute on appeal.
Or you could file something like a declaratory judgment action or ask for an injunction in which you say you are not going to buy insurance becuase you prefer whatver means you have now. And you want the court to order the government not to prosecute you because the statute is unconstitutional. Try the Fourth or Fifth Circuits. (Southeast and South Central). Avoid the Ninth Circus (west coast).
The second way is how liberals have attacked abortion statutes. Some doctor claims he’ll be prosecuted if he breaks the new law, so would the court evaluate the constitutionality before it is used.
Wethal on September 25, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Going to have to build gulags quick. It’s always what happens to dictatorships, first the gulags then the execution chambers.
250+ million people were murdered by the practices of the world’s various “*isms” in the name of hope and change.
tarpon on September 25, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Erwin Chemirinsky was on the radio yesterday and says Article I’s reference to “general welfare” justifies any tax Congress wants to pass.
Chris_Balsz on September 25, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Fail to buy government mandated health care and go to jail, where you will get free health care and a wonderful room mate.
Kissmygrits on September 25, 2009 at 7:13 PM
Honest! Let us see. Coming here illegally. Income tax evasion. Identity theft. Falsifying goverment documents. Driving without a license. Driving without insurance………ect., ect., ect..
Johan Klaus on September 25, 2009 at 7:15 PM
Er, if the First Amendment doesn’t suffice, God help us all, the Second is still there.
I think I may get a book on farming this weekend.
Harry Schell on September 25, 2009 at 7:17 PM
Ministry of Love
Joe Caps on September 25, 2009 at 7:18 PM
Monica on September 25, 2009 at 6:50 PM
and felonies are accompanied by gun ownership limitations yes?
frakkers
when we get arrested maybe we can cut the same deal as the terrorists and go to Bermuda
ginaswo on September 25, 2009 at 7:19 PM
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 327 (1819).
Daniel Webster, in arguing the case, said: “An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy,”
In his decision, Chief Justice Marshall said: “ “That the power to tax involves the power to destroy … [is] not to be denied” (p. 431).
Wethal on September 25, 2009 at 7:20 PM
Acceptance of guv largesse has impolicit ramifications, in incarceration or otherwise. Just as when you were a dependant of your parents, as they asume the finacial responsibility of your welfare, they are thus able to dictate your behavior. If they fail to do so, they can be held liable fo rthe results.
This rationale has already been asserted by the guv regarding the military and the banning of cigs. They have stipulated as they are on the hook for soldiers healthcare, they are are within their rights to dictate individual behavior. When they assume responsibility for your welfare they will likewise be within their “rights” to dictate your behavior, smopking or otherwise.
The legal precedent of responsibility entitles jurisdictive power within “parental rights and obligations”. By law if your child is determined to require certain behavior adjustment or medication, said parent is held liable to ensure that healthy decisions are enforced for the “well being” of the child. If the guv guv becomes responsible for your “well being” the same is true, they can be taken to court if they fail to “enforce” that which is prescribed.
Your Doc says no more red meat, no more after work cocktails, no more after sex cigs, no more sugary products? They will by law be obligated to enforce your compliance, as they are responsible, just as a parent is responsible for complance to doc’s orders.
Marx stipulated that Healthcare is the cornerstone in laying out a socialist society, and it is not hard to see why. Between that which might affect one’s health and those actions that take energy, their newest inclusion to lie within their sphere, is there anything that does not come into their responsibility to dictate to?
Here in lies the road to the ultimate nannny state where no decision falls outside the jurisprudence of those tasked with your well being. This is the road to serf-dom, it must, at all costs be stopped now in its tracks!
Archimedes on September 25, 2009 at 7:21 PM
Erwin is a smart guy but he is also way left of center. I dunno that there are other parts of the Constitution which would disqualify this. It seems a big reach to me but no doubt some lawyers are going to make some money fighting about it.
With the way individual freedom, even to do stupid things such as smoke, have been sliced away one little layer at a time, there may be no defense in the document.
We sure as hell are not where the Founders intended.
Harry Schell on September 25, 2009 at 7:22 PM
I think the next Tea Party in D.C. needs to involve pitchforks and torches.
And it better happen soon.
Dave R. on September 25, 2009 at 7:24 PM
Because my business has taken a huge hit, I recently rented out my home, moved in with my mother-in-law and dropped my health insurance which was costing $900 a month. All of those are facts. Not exactly what I want to be doing at age 61. But at least my mother-in-law doesn’t make me wear an orange jump suit! Obamacare must die. I prefer mom’s house to the Big House.
SleeplessinChicago on September 25, 2009 at 7:25 PM
IF the legislation passes, and I doubt it, you can guarantee this will wind up going all the way to SCOTUS. Nancy can yell and scream “commerce clause” all she wants, I don’t think SCOTUS will buy into it.
GarandFan on September 25, 2009 at 7:25 PM
Yes, we agree there. We let Pelosi run healthcare, she owns us. That’s all there is. Is there a legal way to stop this…
Harry Schell on September 25, 2009 at 7:26 PM
Chemirinsky is a total tool and any opinion of his is suspect because of it.
Blake on September 25, 2009 at 7:27 PM
I doubt there are many politicians, except in very safe blue state seats, who would stake their futures on presenting this interpretation to their constitutuents.
Law professors can be as wacky as the rest of academia. (think Cass Sunstein). Ward Churchill (ok, he’s currently unemployed)….Bill Ayres…
Wethal on September 25, 2009 at 7:27 PM
That just isn’t true and is quite easily demonstrated to be false. If Article 1 granted Congress the power to tax for any reason to promote the ‘general welfare’ then there would be NO reason for the 16th Amendment giving Congress the power to collect taxes on income.
JonPrichard on September 25, 2009 at 7:30 PM
Team Obama is beefing up the IRS.
(By Elizabeth Newell enewell@govexec.com March 9, 2009 )The head of the Internal Revenue Service on Friday said he is confident he will be able to hire enough employees to fill the gaps left by canceling the agency’s private debt-collection program.
“I believe we have strong support from the administration and the Congress for increased IRS enforcement resources going forward,” IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman said.
TN Mom on September 25, 2009 at 7:31 PM
We already have this in Australia. If your income is over a certain bracket, you MUST take out private health insurance OR pay a hefty penalty (tax)for not doing so. You can’t opt out of the system. We figured out years ago that it would be cheaper just to pay our occasional hospital and medical bills ourselves, rather than spending $1000 per quarter to insure against expenses. But no, they’ve already thought of that. Of course, private insurance doesn’t cover you completely in Oz anyway. Pays the hospital, but the gap for surgeon’s and theatre fees is absurd. You’re massively out of pocket for surgery in a private hospital even if you do have top cover.
Plus, if you’re in that higher earning bracket, you also have to pay a whopping 1.5% of your income for the public Medicare “levy” (tax.) So you’re taxed to support the public system, plus you pay for your own private insurance, and you get taxed if you want to opt out and just pay your bills direct.
Ozwitch on September 25, 2009 at 7:32 PM
oops. Incorrect link. Article at govexec.com
TN Mom on September 25, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Wolverines. I want to use my gun….
HornetSting on September 25, 2009 at 7:32 PM
IF the legislation passes, and I doubt it, you can guarantee this will wind up going all the way to SCOTUS. Nancy can yell and scream “commerce clause” all she wants, I don’t think SCOTUS will buy into it.
GarandFan on September 25, 2009 at 7:25 PM
SCOTUS has already boughtb into a ridiculous definition of the scope of the “commerce clause” for well nigh a 100yrs now. That sets precedence well beyond that of Roe v Wade which is considered “stare decis” now. Under what pretext do they reverse the scope the commerce clause?
The courts have become a power unto themselves and reverse prior positions in extreme rarity. Usually o0mly when it increases their mandate, not when it reduces it.
Archimedes on September 25, 2009 at 7:34 PM
It’s the typical revisionism about what the Constitution actually says. Yes, Congress can pass any tax it wants- the justification is that the Constitution gives them that power not the general welfare clause. I guess the left just sees the term welfare and get excited.
highhopes on September 25, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Erwin Chemirinsky was on the radio yesterday and says Article I’s reference to “general welfare” justifies any tax Congress wants to pass.
Chris_Balsz on September 25, 2009 at 7:11 PM
These two words have been used used to abrogate the entirety of the rest of the constitution for to long! It should be challenged at SCOTUS at the earliest opportunity!
Archimedes on September 25, 2009 at 7:37 PM
You can’t get rid of pre-existing conditions without an individual mandate. Otherwise, the slackers would not take out insurance until they got sick and then demand the “full Obama.” Insurance requires healthy people paying into the system for the eventuality that they will need services.
highhopes on September 25, 2009 at 7:38 PM
Dude…don’t mess with South Carolinians!
Hopefully, SC will pass a law exempting citizens from the Federal over-reach.
SouthernGent on September 25, 2009 at 7:40 PM
Ya mean Obama re-education camps?
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Obama knows what’s right!
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Your in Obama’s sights!
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Ya better do what’s right!
Mmm, mmm, mm!
DSchoen on September 25, 2009 at 7:40 PM
dont forget under the bill the IRS has access to our bank accounts directly
ginaswo on September 25, 2009 at 7:40 PM
So what the hell is next?……………….tax on soft drinks?
d1carter on September 25, 2009 at 7:41 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »