Obama FACT CHECK: Obama says insurance mandate is not a tax, but legislation says otherwise

**petegz28** · 09-23-2009, 09:30 PM

FACT CHECK: Coverage requirement enforced with tax

Obama insisted this weekend on national television that requiring people to carry health insurance _ and fining them if they don't _ isn't the same thing as a tax increase. But the language of Democratic bills to revamp the nation's health care system doesn't quibble. Both the House bill and the Senate Finance Committee proposal clearly state that the fines would be a tax.

And the reason the fines are in the legislation is to enforce the coverage requirement.

"If you put something in the Internal Revenue Code, and you tell the IRS to collect it, I think that's a tax," said Clint Stretch, head of the tax policy group for Deloitte, a major accounting firm. "If you don't pay, the person who's going to come and get it is going to be from the IRS."

Democrats aren't the first to propose that individuals be required to carry health insurance and fined if they refuse. The conservative Heritage Foundation called for such a mandate in the 1990s' health care debate, although its proposal differed from the ones pending in Congress. Heritage has since dropped the idea and now favors using tax credits to encourage people to buy coverage _ carrots and not sticks.

During the 2008 political campaign, Obama opposed making coverage mandatory because of the costs. His position has shifted now that it's becoming clear such a requirement will be part of any legislation that Congress sends him. Conservative activists are calling it a violation of his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class.

"This is exactly what George Bush Sr. did when he said he wouldn't raise taxes, and it cost him the next election," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. "Obama is doing the same thing, but he's insulting people by telling them that if you don't call it a big purple banana, somehow it wouldn't be a tax."

Some liberals acknowledge that Obama might be vulnerable on the insurance requirement. But they say most people will understand as long as the legislation provides enough of a subsidy to make the coverage affordable. That's a central issue this week as the Senate Finance Committee starts voting on legislation.

"I think it's a metaphysical question as to whether it's a tax or not," said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future. "The real question that will determine whether people are upset is whether the insurance is affordable."

In an interview that aired Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Obama insisted that the insurance requirement is not a tax.

"For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is...that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore.

"Right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance," Obama added. "Nobody considers that a tax increase.

"You just can't make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase," he added.

But a Democratic staff description of Sen. Max Baucus' bill calls the proposed fines an "excise tax." Penalties of up to $950 for individuals and $3,800 for families would be imposed on those who don't get coverage. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said Monday he expects the family penalty to be slashed in half to $1,900.

The House bill uses a complex formula to calculate the penalties, calling them a "tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage."

The coverage mandate is part of a political bargain under which the insurance industry would agree to take all applicants, regardless of prior medical history.

"If we're going to have coverage without regard to pre-existing conditions, it makes sense," said economist Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center. "Otherwise people will come in the door the day they get sick." He sees no distinction between the requirement to get coverage and the fines themselves.

"The fact that it is imposed on people and they have no choice in paying it, and the fact that it's administered through the tax system all make it look like a tax," Williams said. The center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution.

It wouldn't be the first asterisk added to Obama's campaign pledge on taxes. Earlier this year, he signed a tobacco tax increase to pay for children's health insurance. Even that can be read as a violation of his expansive campaign promise.

"I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12, 2008. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."

He repeatedly promised "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime."

http://www.newser.com/article/d9asbj...otherwise.html

**petegz28** · 09-23-2009, 09:33 PM

Quote:

"For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is...that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore.

Read this a few times and try to keep a straight face while you do.....I couldn't

Taco John · 09-23-2009, 09:48 PM

I think Obama believes that if he couches his socialist ideas in conservative "take responsibility for yourself" language, that Americans will be fooled and go for it. It's actually a hat tip to the idea that people do believe in responsibility for one's self.

**banyon** · 09-23-2009, 09:52 PM

fines aren't taxes. I don't like the idea, but it's misconstrued here.

**BigRedChief** · 09-23-2009, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banyon

fines aren't taxes. I don't like the idea, but it's misconstrued here.

I don't care what they call it or how they make it happen but we(the taxpayer) shouldn't be paying for the medical bills of individuals that could have affored health insurance but decided not to then they get in trouble and we bail them out.. Thats total BS and needs to stop.

Taco John · 09-23-2009, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banyon

fines aren't taxes. I don't like the idea, but it's misconstrued here.

Misconstrued in the legislation?

In BOTH the house and the senate?

Wow.

**banyon** · 09-23-2009, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Misconstrued in the legislation?

In BOTH the house and the senate?

Wow.

In the OP.

max sleeper · 09-23-2009, 10:05 PM

"For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is...that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore.

Sounds good! Notice the last line... you would think conservatives would be all for not having other people carry your burdens for you anymore! You have no car insurance you get a fine. By a local government office! This is not a tax to the car owner! It is a fine to get that person to buy auto insurance or face another or even go to jail. You can take every idea that Obama comes up with and try to spin it all you want. It makes since... everyone gets health insurance and we all start taking care of our own bills! Now I have given you the attention you so want... Go Chiefs!

Direckshun · 09-23-2009, 10:22 PM

Quote:

"For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is...that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore."

I read this and it sounds like a conservative idea to me.

Am I wrong?

Taco John · 09-23-2009, 10:34 PM

Calling a tax a "fine" doesn't make it any less of a tax.

**banyon** · 09-23-2009, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Calling a tax a "fine" doesn't make it any less of a tax.

Do you pay a tax on not having car insurance? Why not?

KCWolfman · 09-23-2009, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banyon

fines aren't taxes. I don't like the idea, but it's misconstrued here.

Really?

I have been to a doctor once as an adult, over 25 years. If I pay not to go to a doctor then it is a tax.

Taco John · 09-23-2009, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I read this and it sounds like a conservative idea to me.

Am I wrong?

Would mandating that everyone stand with their hand on their heart for the pledge of allegiance due to their civic responsibility to one another be considered a progressive idea?

KCWolfman · 09-23-2009, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banyon

Do you pay a tax on not having car insurance? Why not?

I don't have to drive a car, then I don't pay for insurance.

Your analogy is awful.

Taco John · 09-23-2009, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banyon

Do you pay a tax on not having car insurance? Why not?

I have car insurance. If I didn't I would be taxed for it if I got busted by a police man. Or "fined," if you prefer that parlance. Whatever you want to call it, the end result is the same: I'm writing a check to the government.

09-23-2009, 09:30 PM
petegz28 Supporter Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Olathe, Ks Casino cash: $206469	FACT CHECK: Obama says insurance mandate is not a tax, but legislation says otherwise FACT CHECK: Coverage requirement enforced with tax Obama insisted this weekend on national television that requiring people to carry health insurance _ and fining them if they don't _ isn't the same thing as a tax increase. But the language of Democratic bills to revamp the nation's health care system doesn't quibble. Both the House bill and the Senate Finance Committee proposal clearly state that the fines would be a tax. And the reason the fines are in the legislation is to enforce the coverage requirement. "If you put something in the Internal Revenue Code, and you tell the IRS to collect it, I think that's a tax," said Clint Stretch, head of the tax policy group for Deloitte, a major accounting firm. "If you don't pay, the person who's going to come and get it is going to be from the IRS." Democrats aren't the first to propose that individuals be required to carry health insurance and fined if they refuse. The conservative Heritage Foundation called for such a mandate in the 1990s' health care debate, although its proposal differed from the ones pending in Congress. Heritage has since dropped the idea and now favors using tax credits to encourage people to buy coverage _ carrots and not sticks. During the 2008 political campaign, Obama opposed making coverage mandatory because of the costs. His position has shifted now that it's becoming clear such a requirement will be part of any legislation that Congress sends him. Conservative activists are calling it a violation of his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. "This is exactly what George Bush Sr. did when he said he wouldn't raise taxes, and it cost him the next election," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. "Obama is doing the same thing, but he's insulting people by telling them that if you don't call it a big purple banana, somehow it wouldn't be a tax." Some liberals acknowledge that Obama might be vulnerable on the insurance requirement. But they say most people will understand as long as the legislation provides enough of a subsidy to make the coverage affordable. That's a central issue this week as the Senate Finance Committee starts voting on legislation. "I think it's a metaphysical question as to whether it's a tax or not," said Roger Hickey, co-director of the Campaign for America's Future. "The real question that will determine whether people are upset is whether the insurance is affordable." In an interview that aired Sunday on ABC's "This Week," Obama insisted that the insurance requirement is not a tax. "For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is...that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore. "Right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance," Obama added. "Nobody considers that a tax increase. "You just can't make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase," he added. But a Democratic staff description of Sen. Max Baucus' bill calls the proposed fines an "excise tax." Penalties of up to $950 for individuals and $3,800 for families would be imposed on those who don't get coverage. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said Monday he expects the family penalty to be slashed in half to $1,900. The House bill uses a complex formula to calculate the penalties, calling them a "tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage." The coverage mandate is part of a political bargain under which the insurance industry would agree to take all applicants, regardless of prior medical history. "If we're going to have coverage without regard to pre-existing conditions, it makes sense," said economist Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center. "Otherwise people will come in the door the day they get sick." He sees no distinction between the requirement to get coverage and the fines themselves. "The fact that it is imposed on people and they have no choice in paying it, and the fact that it's administered through the tax system all make it look like a tax," Williams said. The center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution. It wouldn't be the first asterisk added to Obama's campaign pledge on taxes. Earlier this year, he signed a tobacco tax increase to pay for children's health insurance. Even that can be read as a violation of his expansive campaign promise. "I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12, 2008. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes." He repeatedly promised "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime." http://www.newser.com/article/d9asbj...otherwise.html
Posts: 56,384

09-23-2009, 09:48 PM	#3
Taco John 12on Paul Join Date: Jun 2001 Casino cash: $10084457	I think Obama believes that if he couches his socialist ideas in conservative "take responsibility for yourself" language, that Americans will be fooled and go for it. It's actually a hat tip to the idea that people do believe in responsibility for one's self. __________________ Ehyeh asher ehyeh.
Posts: 49,357

09-23-2009, 09:52 PM	#4
banyon Supporter Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Dodge City, Kansas Casino cash: $76625	fines aren't taxes. I don't like the idea, but it's misconstrued here. __________________
Posts: 32,045

09-23-2009, 10:05 PM	#8
max sleeper Crappie Killer Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: kings river Casino cash: $2688	"For us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase," the president said. "What it's saying is...that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore. Sounds good! Notice the last line... you would think conservatives would be all for not having other people carry your burdens for you anymore! You have no car insurance you get a fine. By a local government office! This is not a tax to the car owner! It is a fine to get that person to buy auto insurance or face another or even go to jail. You can take every idea that Obama comes up with and try to spin it all you want. It makes since... everyone gets health insurance and we all start taking care of our own bills! Now I have given you the attention you so want... Go Chiefs!
Posts: 338

09-23-2009, 10:34 PM	#10
Taco John 12on Paul Join Date: Jun 2001 Casino cash: $10084457	Calling a tax a "fine" doesn't make it any less of a tax. __________________ Ehyeh asher ehyeh.
Posts: 49,357

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode