NOT SO FAST: OBAMACARE "TAX" IS UN-APPORTIONED Therefore, It's Constitutionally Prohibited

Subj: [We The People] NOT SO FAST: OBAMACARE "TAX" IS UN-APPORTIONED, UNCONSTITUTIONAL

July 21, 2012 NOT SO FAST: OBAMACARE "TAX" IS UN-APPORTIONED Therefore, It's Constitutionally Prohibited Editor's Note: Of all the mandates in the Constitution, there is only one that is repeated twice: direct taxes must be apportioned. Judge Roberts has admitted this. Writing for the majority in the Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare, Roberts confessed direct taxes "must be apportioned among the states." To avoid this constitutional restraint, Roberts falsely declared Obamacare's individual mandate is not a tax on the ownership of personal property and "is thus not a direct tax that must be apportioned among the several states." The decision is erroneous. Most troubling is the fact that both the majority and the dissent refused to deal honestly with the issue of direct taxes.    On June 28, 2012, five of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court upheld the most controversial provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"): Section 5000A, popularly known as the "individual mandate." Right-click to download the decision. Under 5000A, those who can afford to but do not purchase health insurance will be required to make an additional payment to IRS for each month they go without the insurance. The payment will be exacted from the worker's income and will be legally unavoidable. Justice Roberts wrote: "Under the mandate, if an individual does not maintain health insurance, the only consequence is that he must make an additional payment to the IRS when he pays his taxes. See §5000A(b)." The Obama administration argued in Court that what it called the "shared responsibility payment" was authorized under the Commerce Clause. Judge Roberts ruled the Commerce Clause does NOT authorize this type of payment. However, Chief Justice Roberts then held Congress had the power under the "Tax Clause" to exact the payment. We sharply disagree and here challenge the logic of the Court's decision that Congress has the power under the Tax Clause to require the People to buy a product or pay a tax to the Government for not purchasing the product, without apportioning the tax among the several states. Congress's taxing power is specified in three sections of Article I: Article I, Section 2, Clause 3: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states which may be included within this Union .." Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises. but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." Article I, Section 9, Clause 4: "No capitation, or other direct, tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken." Of all the mandates in the Constitution, there is only one that is repeated twice: direct taxes must be apportioned. It means exactly what it says. READ THE FULL UPDATE!    YOUR DONATIONS MAKE ALL THIS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT.   One-Time or Monthly donations via PayPal To make a one-time, donation to the Foundation, click here or use the PayPal "Donate" button below.    No PayPal account or log-on is necessary!