-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up
February 12, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Quick Hits from CPAC
February 11, 2012 | 42 comments
-
The Origins of Romneycare and Coultercare
February 9, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Rick Santorum Pulls the Trifecta
February 8, 2012 | 8 comments
-
Mark Levin on Clint Eastwood
February 7, 2012 | 5 comments
The Spectacle Blog
As I've said before, in Barack Obama's world there are no trade-offs or costs to be weighed against benefits. There are only false choices to be repudiated by wise thinkers. And everything can be worked out in a perfectly nuanced fashion, under his leadership. This is well illustrated by his response when asked whether he supports jailing people who don't buy health insurance:
During an exclusive interview with ABC News' Jake Tapper today, President Obama said that penalties are appropriate for people who try to "free ride" the health care system but stopped short of endorsing the threat of jail time for those who refuse to pay a fine for not having insurance."What I think is appropriate is that in the same way that everybody has to get auto insurance and if you don't, you're subject to some penalty, that in this situation, if you have the ability to buy insurance, it's affordable and you choose not to do so, forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there's a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are -- are burdened by because of the fact that people don't have health insurance, you know, there's nothing wrong with a penalty."
Under the House bill those who can afford to buy insurance and don't' pay a fine. If the refuse to pay that fine there's a threat - as with a lot of tax fines - of jail time. The Senate removed that provision in the Senate Finance Committee.
Mr. Obama said penalties have to be high enough for people to not game the system, but it's also important to not be "so punitive" that people who are having a hard time find themselves suddenly worse off, thus why hardship exemptions have been built in the legislation.
Penalties strong enough to alter behavior but not strong enough to penalize.
View all comments (10) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/11/10/president-obama-as-king-solomo
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Herbert Hoover's Long-Awaited Magnum Opus
- Let's Return to the Gold Standard
- The Man From La Fortaleza
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Becky| 11.10.09 @ 12:49PM
Why is the assumption that without insurance, no one pays for the medical care they recieve. I don't have dental or eye insurance, and my current medical insurance contains a large deductible which is a deal considering the cost of a cadillac plan many employers offer. We pay for out own insurance and medical needs and are lower middle class. We don't own a new home or cars, nor live extravagant and we are content.
I thought we shouldn't jump to conclusions about people's motives and actions. Those who currently do not buy insurance that can afford to do so will probably by those fined under Obamacare. Maybe Standish prison doesn't have to close if the Dems can push this thing through and change it to take effect immediately.
Are we despostic yet?
Tim| 11.10.09 @ 2:00PM
Healthcare went from a commodity, to a "basic human right" to a government mandate? Progressive.
Jeff Perren| 11.10.09 @ 6:34PM
Unconstitutional, immoral, and impractical. It will create a whole new class of criminal and violate the rights of every American. Never in history have Americans been forced to buy a product or service, and the auto insurance example (immoral as that is, too) is not a precedent. No one is legally required to drive.
To vote for this legislation is to endorse dictatorship de jure, a big step toward it de facto.
Clearly, this is what the Progressives wanted all along. This legislation has gone well beyond a welfare program to aid those who can't afford insurance to become another large step toward totalitarian control of every citizen.
There is no honorable way to support this in any form. The entire effort should be scrapped; health care and insurance needs to be de-regulated to bring down costs and expand liberty, not filled with progressive steroids to further erode freedom.
Jim Hlavac| 11.10.09 @ 10:22PM
I'm sure soon will come the mandates to buy spinach to keep us healthy so we don't "Burden" government run care -- and a fine and jail term for those of us who say "it's spinach and I say the hell with it." Now, if they just kept their noses out of it they wouldn't have to worry that someone didn't buy what they don't want. It is the government that can't afford health care, because it is inept and corrupt, and so now they want us all to join the ineptitude and the corruption so that these two are easier to hide. Amazing
Yosemeti Sam| 11.11.09 @ 7:27AM
" President Obama As King Solomon ...."
Funny rhetorically polemically jocular premise!
What we got here is a diabolic figure - not by
any stretch of the imagination a male of wisdom: in reality, a documented recoiling historical Champion of infanticide. Interpolate that fact -
jack - into his 'leadership' performance to date:
jack-in-the-box accomplishments.
From this rhetorically putative guiding fountain of wisdom we've got - an America in a tailspin.
What creeps forth from this mannequin of the
atheistic democrat party et al left is - a phony baloney cynically empathetic pol writ large.
Aided and abetted by the swampland LMSM.
Pete| 11.11.09 @ 11:05AM
"forcing you and me and everybody else to subsidize you, you know, there's a thousand dollar hidden tax that families all across America are -- are burdened by because of the fact that people don't have health insurance, you know, there's nothing wrong with a penalty."
No, we are burdened by the federal government forcing us to subsidize their union buddies and czars, create a bullshit new green industry out of thin air, and pay ACORN to fix elections for them. And there will be a penalty to pay.