OMB director inadvertently admits duplicity of Obama admin on ObamaCare

Posted by: ST on February 15, 2012 at 5:08 pm

The Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein reports:

Testifying before Congress this morning, President Obama’s acting budget director Jeffrey Zients directly undercut one of the administration’s key legal defenses of its national health care law as it nears a hearing before the Supreme Court.

In a hearing of the House Budget Committee Rep. Scott Garrett, R-N.J., pressed Zients on whether the penalty that the health care law imposes on individuals who do not purchase health insurance constitutes a tax. Eventually, Zients said it did not.

But this directly contradicts one of the arguments the Obama administration is making before the Supreme Court in defense of the health care law, which is that the mandate is Constitutional because it’s a tax and government has taxing power.

This has always been a tricky argument for the Obama administration, because admitting that the mandate is a tax means that Obama violated his pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. In September 2009, Obama told ABC’s George Stephanapoulos that the mandate was not a tax. But by the following June, his administration was arguing in court that it was.

This takes “straddling the fence” to a whole new level, doesn’t it?  I sure as heck hope the anti-ObamaCare lawyers include such official statements when they argue against Obama’s “health care reform” bill before the Supreme Court next month and – of course – the remarks help a majority of the Court decide against the administration.  It’d be great for that to happen at any time, but during an important election year? It would be epic.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

9 Responses to “OMB director inadvertently admits duplicity of Obama admin on ObamaCare”


  1. Carlos says:

    Duplicity associated with THIS administration?

    Tell me it ain’t so! I mean, with paragons of virtue like Obama, Holder and Sebelius leading the charge, how could this be so?


  2. Shimmer says:

    It’s a dessert topping that’s also a floor wax!

  3. Carlos says:

    As a side note, has anyone thought to point out that, in regards to Sebelius’ royal decree (that came directly from the throne), what with PP and schools and all such around, there are a multitude of places to get “free” contraception that have nothing to do with destroying the First Amendment and taking ever-larger chunks of freedom from those of us who are supposed to be “the government?”

    Yes, I realize those are still basically government-funded by taxpayer monies (which means yours and mine), but if that was made clear to a public still fawning over the “smartest man ever” maybe we could get back to the primary argument which is, what is government doing in this anyway?

  4. I can’t wait till the Obamacare lawyers are asked at the Supreme Court “you’re claiming it’s a tax. How is it possible to tax an American on something they have not yet purchased?”

  5. redgypsy says:

    Well, wait, they’ll start trying to tax us on “emanations” and “penumbras.” Sheesh.

  6. Drew the Infidel says:

    People get the government they deserve. I did not vote for this guy and will not in November; I’d vote for Jack the Ripper before that. But what puzzles me is in the 3+ years this clown has been in office, I have found one person who admitted they voted for him. One? In more than three years? WTF?

  7. Kate says:

    Unfortunately Drew, many will vote for him again, for the same “reasons”. But, there are quite a few independents who will definitely not be voting for him.

    I have real issues about “mandates” that are unfunded by the government and directed at private enterprise. The problem with these “laws” is that they do create funding….which I would say is a tax as it is levied on people who “qualify” for them under the law. I am not sure of the mechanism for how this “tax” would be collected or how fines would be collected, but the major instrument for such things is the Treasury Department, the same as the Income Tax etc.

  8. Neo says:

    This reminds me of the Chevy Chase SNL skit about the dessert topping that is also a floor wax.

  9. Carlos says:

    Kinda seems like those who vote for him will be voting for Jack the Ripper, Drew, but this one kills jobs and opportunity, all hope, and the Constitution.