In what can only be described as an incredulous turn of events, the Obama administration has gone from arguing “it’s a tax” to “make less money” in its effort to stave off legal challenges to the healthcare reform law.
Originally, the administration had tried to argue that the penalty for not purchasing individual coverage was just a tax, and as such, clearly met constitutional muster under the Taxing Clause. But that argument has seen its better day, especially after being shredded apart by one lone Federal Judge in Florida.
Noting that the purchase requirement only kicks in after a minimal amount of income, acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal suggested to a Sixth Circuit panel that the way around the mandate simply is to make less money. In most cases, a LOT LESS money. Since even an hourly employee at McDonald’s would presumably make too much to avoid the mandate, most people would not make enough money to buy weekly groceries if they wanted to ensure that their income would not trigger the mandate.
This shows how desperate the administration is to salvage this mess – at any cost. Instead of going back to the table and finding workable solutions with Republicans, the Democrats have held steady while their ship sinks deeper and deeper in the troubled legal waters.
As I’ve mentioned previously on this blog, we all had better hope that the court system shuts the door on this silly idea that the Government can force people to buy individual products or services from private companies. Otherwise, we may all be forced to buy broccoli – if the Government says we must.
Our legal system has all but eradicated the 10th Amendment. Hopefully, the Tenth can regain some footing during this process.
CDR
