Sigh. Do we need to break out the Etch-A-Sketch?
An adviser to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney went off-message on MSNBC Monday, arguing that the health-care mandate in the Affordable Care Act is not a tax.
“The governor disagreed with the ruling of the court, he agreed with the dissent that was written by Justice Scalia, that very clearly said that the mandate was not a tax,” Eric Fehrnstrom said. “The governor believes what we put in place in Massachusetts was a penalty and he disagrees with the Court’s ruling that the mandate was a tax.”
Disappointing video at the link. Disappointing, because the quote is accurate.
Mitt Romney is obviously in a bit of a bind on this particular issue, but his consistent calls to repeal ObamaCare have helped erase bad memories of MittCare and Fehrnstrom’s own “Etch-A-Sketch” comment from the primary.
Today’s comment, though, makes it pretty tough for Romney to lead the fight against ObamaCare as ObamaTax, when his top adviser says Romney doesn’t even believe hat the mandate is a tax at all. The White House’s own lawyer called the mandate a tax in his Supreme Court arguments. That argument is the one that won the day and kept ObamaCare alive. That ruling, love it or hate it, gives President Obama the title deed to a nasty new tax that he promised not to impose.
Calling the mandate a tax isn’t exactly a new argument. We called it a tax when I was comms director at the Republican Party of Texas and ObamaCare was still being debated. We called it tax because it’s a tax, and numerous other conservatives also called it a tax at the time. The IRS even stands behind its implementation. Obama himself had to defend the bill against the charge that the mandate is in fact a tax. Had he been open about what it was, it would never have been politically feasible and would not have passed. Now the Supreme Court has ruled that it’s a tax. Chief Justice John Roberts and the liberal wing of the court — a group who nearly always vote as an ideological bloc, but the medic never calls them on it — bought the conservative argument that the mandate is in practical terms and purposes a new tax.
A Romney campaign source sends along this explanation:
The Supreme Court left President Obama with two choices: the federal individual mandate in Obamacare is either a constitutional tax or an unconstitutional penalty. Governor Romney thinks it is an unconstitutional penalty. What is President Obama’s position: is his federal mandate unconstitutional or is it a tax?
Romney has said and will continue to say that Obamacare is a killer and a massive tax hike – $500 million and greatest hike since 1992. But he also said from the beginning that he agrees with the dissenting view on SCOTUS.
“Congressional Republican aides tell the Plum Line that the two messages are not in conflict. Republicans, one aide argued, agree with the dissent — that the mandate is not a tax but an unconstitutional overreach — but now that it is defined as a tax, it can be criticized as such.”
Our point is Obama’s campaign, in avoiding calling it a tax, are essentially arguing Obamacare is unconstitutional.
The Mandate is either a tax or it is an unconstitutional penalty.
I think this is a bit too cute and gives away a massive talking point: That Obama dishonestly imposed a huge new tax on the very Americans to whom he promised no tax hikes. This point gets at Obama’s honesty, his competence and his pro-big government proclivities. Pincering him on whether it’s a tax or a penalty, from the point of view that it’s not a tax, may obscure the ghastly and intentional thing he has done to millions of Americans who are struggling just to get by in the Obama economy.
Romney is this close to making this a good issue.
The Mandate is either a tax or it is an unconstitutional penalty.
So far, so good. That needs to be followed with:
If Obama thinks it is a penalty, not a tax, then he has a Constitutional duty following the Court’s decision to suspend implementation and support repeal. If he thinks it is a tax, then he and the Congressional Democrats lied to us when they said it was not a tax, and imposed a massive new tax that will fall mostly on those making less than $250,000 a year.
Four more years!
First McCain, and now Romney. Who’s next?
Is there no Republican capable of fighting for the heart and soul of this once-great country?
It’ll be a great country again, self-confident and proud, not shy at exclaiming to the world “I am America and *you* can’t do what I can do”.
– waste time appearing on MSNBC than spend a few minutes reading Bryan’s advice.
Proving Rupert Murdoch’s point so soon?
By the way, Pat, one good result of America regaining her pride and self-confidence will be that all the anonymous trolls will crawl back under the rocks from whence they came!
Way to bobble an easy gimme, Romney team. You can’t even get 4 simple syllables right: “ObamaTax. ObamaTax. ObamaTax.”
Geez, we’re in deep yogurt.
It is neither a tax (it can’t be, it wasn’t formed properly to be a tax), nor an unconstitutional penalty.
It’s an authoritarian Marxist power grab.
It wasn’t presented to the American people OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVES as a tax, the President very explicitly outlined his dogged (insert pun here) determination that it was NOT a tax. In a representative self-governing land, that would constitute a fraud on the people and EVERY representative who voted for it by telling their constituencies that it was NOT a tax, must….MUST…now face that same constituency and explain that they were lied to and conned…or…that they willingly participated in a fraud upon the people.
If those representatives, some of whom were bribed to accept this…non-tax…have to describe the now “trade terms” of that bribe for that TAX…or…request a re-vote because of the material misrepresentations made in order to allow themselves to be so bribed.
If, however, it is not a tax…then the administration needs to explain to the voting public why they allowed THEIR LAWYERS to skulk into court and argue that it IS a tax. The White House’s lawyers argued that it was. Either they are lying or the White House is lying, or both.
Let’s assume it’s not a tax. It then is a penalty for failing to participate. A fine. A snarling bite from the feral government. But, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is NO power within the feral government to so bite its people. Since it is not a tax as the Pathological Liars of the Left insist, and it CAN’T BE a penalty, this snarling bite from the feral government…then it MUST BE…by basic boolean logic…
The first official act of the Marxist overthrow. A fiat from an authoritarian regime. The Stalin embryo of iron-fisted brutish force. It is, the overthrow’s opening gambit. The primal act of a totalitarian ruler.
It can be nothing else.
“The governor believes what we put in place in Massachusetts was a penalty…”
So, why does the Department of Revenue collect it with MA DOR Form 1 on April 15th? Why do I have to enter information from a Form 1099-HC to avoid it? That sure makes it look like a tax to me!
Someone had better get their message straightened out on this or they are going to get skewered. And rightly so!
I happen to agree with Romney on this, and the headlines to the effect that Romney’s team says it’s not a tax are misleading. People on our side are jumping the gun and making too much of this.
Romney is correct: the court ruled Obamacare a tax, which is why it wasn’t overturned. It’s also an additional reason it can be repealed through reconciliation.
At the same time, Romney firmly believes Obamacare is NOT a tax and should have been ruled an unconstitutional expansion of the Commerce Clause. The only reason it wsn’t is because Roberts and the other liberal members of the court legislated from the bench to keep it constitutional.
Seriously, what is surprising about the Romney team stating these basic FACTS that are commonly understood by everyone on our side of the aisle? Are you worried Romney won’t support a repeal, so you have to haul out the etch-a-sketch quote again to tamp down enthusiasm on our side, possibly depress turnout, and give Obama an easier time? Or are you worried the average voter is too stupid to understand what Romney is saying?
So now we’re going to pound on Romney for….agreeing with Scalia, Thomas, and Alito on the objectively-true point that the mandate penalty was designed and intended to be a penalty, not a tax?
Really? We’re so desperate to push a new tax-hiking meme that we’re going to accept falsehoods and embrace judicial rewriting of law?