Community | September 26, 2009 | 40 comments

Can't Afford Governments Mandated Health-care ? You May Go to Jail !

source: http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Flout_the_mandate_penalty_Face_the_IRS.html?showall

Image
akamaial
~ 9/24/09
Americans who fail to pay the penalty for not buying insurance would face legal action from the Internal Revenue Service, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The remarks Thursday from the committee's chief of staff, Thomas Barthold, seems to further weaken President Barack Obama's contention last week that the individual mandate penalty, which could go as high as $1,900, is not a tax increase.

Under questioning from Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.), Barthold said the IRS would "take you to court and undertake normal collection proceedings."

Ensign pursued the line of questioning because he said a lot of Americans don't believe the Constitution allows the government to mandate the purchase of insurance.

"We could be subjecting those very people who conscientiously, because they believe in the U.S. Constitution, we could be subjecting them to fines or the interpretation of a judge, all the way up to imprisonment," Ensign said. "That seems to me to be a problem."

Ensign's argument , however, wasn't persuasive to the committee -- which rejected an amendment from Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) to eliminate the individual mandate.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) was the only Republican to vote with Democrats to preserve the mandate.

~ 9/25/09
ENSIGN RECEIVES HANDWRITTEN CONFIRMATION

http://www.politico.com/livepulse/0909/Ensign_receives_handwritten_confirmation_...

This doesn't happen often enough.

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) received a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance.

Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and could face up to a year in jail or a $25,000 penalty, Barthold wrote on JCT letterhead. He signed it "Sincerely, Thomas A. Barthold."

The note was a follow-up to Ensign's questioning at the markup.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Orwellian Nightmare
  2. tags:
    Health Care Reform,  Health Insurance,  Political Issues,  News and Politcs
  3.     
    |

40 comments // Can't Afford Governments Mandated Health-care ? You May Go to Jail !

  • galwayman
  • Steward2
  • Steward2
    • 0
      Steward2  

    • Friday, June 05, 2009
      What happened to three hots and a cot?

      It turns out that there may only be two hot meals or less food on some days in prison due to cutbacks:
      Helen Smith
      Location: Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
      I am a forensic psychologist in Knoxville, Tennessee who enjoys commenting on popular culture, politics and psychological issues.

      The recession is hitting home for inmates, too: Some cash-strapped states are taking aim at prison menus.

      http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2009/06/what-happened-to-three-hots-and-cot.html

    • 2 years ago
  • 2helenahandbasket
    • 0
      2helenahandbasket  
    • Steward2:

      Well, as far as I'm concerned they can tighten their belts like the rest of us. States can't afford to support their sorry asses anymore. They can do without like lots of folks are doing. I've heard that if you eat a really late breakfast and dinner you can do just fine on two meals a day.....

    • 2 years ago
  • 2helenahandbasket
    • 0
      2helenahandbasket  

    • What I'd like to know is..... with unemployment at 10-12% how the hell are folks who cannot find a job suppose to pay for health care? A young man who's very near and dear to my heart has been out of work for over a year, and struggling. Tell him he'll be forced to pay for health care and he'll repeat to you the old saying "you can't get blood from a turnip". Guess in jail he'll at least get "three hots and a cot".

    • 2 years ago
  • jubal
  • hunzedog
    • 0
      hunzedog  

    • i dont want government mandated drug pushers telling me what to do. they have had their nose where it doesnt belong my whole life.. screw them. my body my money my choice........make no mistake; this is the fight of our life !

    • 2 years ago
  • spacemikey
    • 0
      spacemikey [removed]  

    • I still think the problem is 1% of the population "owning" about 99% of the resources...

      And then wanting to bitch about "socialism" every time they're asked to have a little compassion. It's fuct up too when massive ass companies/corporations can get bailouts, that are in fact socialism....(note the only people getting much benefit from the bailouts are in that 1%)

      So what everyone who isn't in one of top percentiles of salary is just a loser? a beggar?, stupid? Would anybody like to lie and tell me we all have or had an equal opportunity to be excessively wealthy (or even wealthy for that matter)? Or that there would be anybody known of as "rich" if we were all able to work an honest job and be compensated fairly?

      What the current system is fair? Pay is determined by value to society? Then why are school teachers paid so little? Isn't one of the most valuable things an education? Then why aren't educators paid more? Wait wouldn't that promote a better system of learning, more of a chance for everyone to have a better future... That my disrupt the imbalance of power....

      Oh yeah that's right, if you straighten up this slanted system, the wealthy might just loose that wealth. There wouldn't be such salary gaps, and there wouldn't be hypocritical class conflicts.

      The system is warped, that's the problem. We're all living on "stolen" ground ask the natives... Nobody is "entitled" especially those who have FAR more than they can use...

      All a bunch of damn thieves, and if the government weren't so preoccupied with "man-dates" maybe we could get some shit straight around here.....

      I pay for to much already, the government gonna hand over "loans" (that will never be paid back, to massive corporations) and then turn around and tell me I got to pay a "penalty" for not buying "man-dated" insurance, that's just gay.... they can go fukc themselves...

    • 2 years ago
  • Abraham99
    • 0
      Abraham99  
    • spacemikey:

      Spacemonkey, you got it right!
      Teachers are constantly screwed. The parents sit home and can't take care of even one kid. They all send their kids to a teacher who sits there and is supposed to be a father and a psychologist and a doctor and a baby sitter and a teacher. The teacher has to handle 25 or 30 kids and each one has separate needs and gaps and lows and highs.
      Some punk nothing idiot once said, "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach."
      Now that piece of condescending BS has given a bad rep to all teachers.
      The new phrase should be, "Those who can, teach. Those who can't, make up phrases about others."
      Anyway, you are also right about the pay inequities and the way the government is now going to make us pay even if we don't want to. This is not Seventh Day Adventist collecting which is always your choice anyway. No. This is forced charity. They are telling us we must support people who don't have health insurance, even if we have more important priorities...like paying other taxes and paying debts and feeding our own families.

    • 2 years ago
  • Abraham99
    • 0
      Abraham99  

    • Shame on the way they are pushing this healthcare thing.
      We all know what it really means. Masks off.
      Mr. Obama wants us to pay for poor people's healthcare...there now, was that so hard to say?

    • 2 years ago
  • akamaial
    • 0
      akamaial [removed]  

    • A factor of the capitalistic free market is that if you don't like, need , want or approve of a product or service...you can say no and walk away....

      Now, when government mandates controls concerning a product or service through legislative law and taxation, that freedom of choice has been stripped away, and failure to comply brings penalties, fines, and even penalization.

      Hmmm, and this administration and it's socialist liberals can't get a handle on why America's majority want government intrusion out of their lives.
      Go figure, huh?

    • 2 years ago
  • regjoeschmo
    • 0
      regjoeschmo  

    • they get fined if they drive without insurance, there are other options like busses for those who cannot afford to drive, but who has the choice of life?? why should they fine you for living without insurance??

    • 2 years ago
  • carmalite
    • 0
      carmalite  

    • People in my state get fined if they do not have car insurance. And if people can't afford health insurance, they will be helped to get it. So there is nothing to fear but the shrill propaganda machine.

    • 2 years ago
  • galwayman
    • 0
      galwayman  

    • I agree with jubal anyone making under 30K should not have to play for health care,however I also believe the public option must be part of any health care plan no one should be forced into buying a government plan if they choose to purchase a private one.while this may create a have have not situation,this is still America and everyone should have the right to choose for themselves. I have never said any different in any of my posts on this subject! what I have said is that the current system is broken,and needs to be fixed!

    • 2 years ago
  • montesooma
  • rmann0581
  • regjoeschmo
    • 0
      regjoeschmo  

    • Is this supposed to save us money or make more for them?? Court dates and incarceration brings more federal funding to the states.....

    • 2 years ago
  • cabinettags
    • 0
      cabinettags  

    • There are LOTS of folks that struggle through making 12-14,000 a year. They pay little or no income tax. This dollar figure would come out of food money. They start locking folks like this up the fur will fly.

    • 2 years ago
  • cztheday
    • 0
      cztheday  

    • Thanks, neo. I was about to post something similar...but I was absolutely NOT going to say ONE WORD about Senator Ensign being the "Moral Conscience of the Senate"...but shouldn't he be breaking rocks someplace? Just sayin'

    • 2 years ago
  • akamaial
  • Ihatethemall
  • neocongo
    • 0
      neocongo  

    • Typical right wing spin. Here's the actual title to the article:

      "Flout the mandate penalty? Face the IRS"

      So the facts are that if you can't afford insurance, you would receive assistance. If you refuse to avail yourself of said assistance, you would then have to pay a fine, which if you refused you would then face jail.

      Welcome to Fox's America. Where the truth sure as HELL ain't coming out of a right winger's mouth.

    • 2 years ago
  • akamaial
    • 0
      akamaial [removed]  
    • neocongo:

      --" a handwritten note Thursday from Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff Tom Barthold confirming the penalty for failing to pay the up to $1,900 fee for not buying health insurance."
      So-o, what you are saying is that you welcome government mandating another intrusion into your life that you must comply with or face the consequences of incarceration? ...oh yeah, how could I forget, to quote Obama on ABC's "This Week,"- - ." In other words, like parents talking to their children, this levy—don't call it a tax—is for your own good.

    • 2 years ago
  • neocongo
  • akamaial
  • pjacobs51
  • Steward2
    • 0
      Steward2  

    • As they have mandated in Child support they will impute your Income at the Highest Level, at aprox 62% as they do in Child support,the judge is the "King",,again they have gotten away with it,thus they Will continue to do so

    • 2 years ago
  • spacemikey
    • 0
      spacemikey [removed]  
    • Steward2:

      Yeah the child support thing is so bad I've known of fully competent decently paid hard working men, opting to due jail time rather than paying ungodly amounts of child support....
      And I can't blame them, because the system is highly biased in females favor even if she is a fat lazy incompetent slob.

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  

    • I think that they should do as some countries do with tickets and fines....that they should set a percentage and that is the price on pays for health care based on their yearly income and then divided by 12 for monthly payments.

      Making it possible for those that have low paying jobs to have a low paying rate and those that get tons of money paying the same amount percentage wise covering a wider range.

    • 2 years ago
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  
    • J_Jammer:

      Good point Jammer, but those that make a lot would balk at your proposal because they would look at all the 0's and think "why is my hard earned wealth going to provide healthcare to some smokers and alcoholic drug addicted lazy fat asses."

    • 2 years ago
  • J_Jammer
    • 0
      J_Jammer [removed]  
    • J_Jammer:

      More wouldn't mind. The minority who have a problem that make a problem for no reason are always going to lose.

      Plus they'd pay a small percentage anyway.

      How it works in Norway is that someone gets into trouble their fine for speeding (so to speak) is based on a percentage of their earnings. That way those that make a lot feel the fine.

    • 2 years ago
  • Steward2
  • CooperTrooper
  • akamaial
  • Steward2
    • 0
      Steward2  

    • This is No less than what they do to their so Called "dead beat dads" which has been proven ,they are not Dead beat at all just Dead Broke from/by the government vis the fed mandate of Child support of and by the states taking ,embezzling all they have and redistributing it to their former spouse an Incentive the states Cannot live Without,there ore Kidnapping our kids For Money,,such they will do the same for heath Care,it has been a Money Maker for Child support,,
      TITLE IV—GRANTS TO STATES FOR AID AND SERVICES TO NEEDY FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN AND FOR CHILD–WELFARE SERVICES[1]

      http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title04/0400.htm

      Sec. 434. Payments to States

      Sec. 471. State plan for foster care and adoption assistance
      Sec. 473. Adoption assistance program
      Sec. 473A. Adoption incentive payments

      Sec. 473B. Timely interstate home study incentive payments
      Sec. 474. Payments to States; Allotments to States

    • 2 years ago
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  

    • I am against the individual mandate unless there is premium assistance offered to low income individuals and families. Families earning a gross of less than 30K should not have to pay anything for basic health care coverage.

    • 2 years ago
  • Darevalo
  • regjoeschmo
  • jubal
    • 0
      jubal  
    • jubal:

      Not really, if you are referring to the Earned Income Credit. What kind of insurance is $2500 per year going to buy for a family of four?

      Many families make too much money to be considered for Medicaid (state run healthcare insurance) and yet they don't make enough to buy private insurance.

      Of course we are talking about at least one third of all the families in America and that can be quite expensive and is what those who are opposed to a "government option" focus on.

      This government mandated insurance was introduced by Baccus in HR3200. I seems very clear to me that this was inserted into the oppositions bill and into the debate at large in order to derail health care reform. No body wants to be mandated into anything. We are all liberty lovers at heart, whatever our particular political bent is.

    • 2 years ago
  • regjoeschmo
    • 0
      regjoeschmo  
    • jubal:

      well, why not reform the medicaid to allow for people to pay for that based on a sliding scale... oh wait that is an option in some states, definately in NJ.... but then again that would derail the mandated coverage for everyone.... there is most defianately a better solution, and letting the federal Govt control things is not in anyones best interests, they have a long running track record of complete failure......

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:
from the community

top videos