So the SCOTUS says it is a tax on all Americans which is constitutional according to them and that is the only thing that saved Obamacare, calling it a tax. When Obama himself argued all along it was not a tax and in the oral arguments the O lawyers argued it was not a tax. It is unconstitutional under the commerce clause, still.
But in the end it is only constitutional if it is a tax. Bait and switch by Obama Dems once again.
So why didn't the SCOTUS just throw it back at the Congress and tell them to make it a tax and than pass it? Roberts made himself the Legislative Branch by rewriting Obamacare in his opinion by calling the penalty for not purchasing insurance a tax, even in the face of all the lawyers who refused to designate the penalty as a tax.
The dissent opinion is: to say the penalty is a tax is to rewrite the law. For the SCOTUS to designate it as a tax is usurping the Legislative branch of our government because tax bills originate in the House, not the SCOTUS.
Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito Dissent: 'We Cannot Rewrite the Statute to Be What It Is Not'
If the SCOTUS is going so far as to rewrite the law for Obama, why didn't they just include something like, "oh, put a tobin tax on all derivative transactions by the TBTF banks and use that revenue to pay for this health care law"? or,
"oh, say, why not get uSA's industrial base back from the countries it was outsourced to by repealing all the free trade agreements and by raising tariffs on foreign goods. And end the monopoly the privately owned Federal Reserve has on the uSA money supply by seizing it and letting Congress control it. So then people can get employment and pay for this damn Obamacare tax we are now imposing on everyone"?
Excerpt from link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/supreme-court-to-rule-thursday-on-health-care-law/2012/06/28/gJQAarRm8V_print.html
Supreme Court upholds Obama’s health-care law
"In a 59-page opinion, Roberts wrote: “The Affordable Care Act is constitutional in part and unconstitutional in part.” He said the individual mandate “cannot be upheld as an exercise of Congress’s power under the commerce clause,” which allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce but “not to order individuals to engage in it.”
Roberts added: “In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress’s power to tax.”
Neither the plaintiffs in the case nor the Obama administration had argued before the court that the individual mandate was a tax. Instead, the court asked a Washington lawyer to present the argument that lawsuits against the health-care law were premature under an obscure 19th-century law, the Anti-Injunction Act, which bars suits against a tax until the tax is actually paid.
Under the health-care law, penalties for refusing to buy health insurance do not kick in until people pay their 2015 income tax returns.
In its ruling, the court did not accept that the Anti-Injunction Act precludes a decision on the health-care law, but it appeared to embrace the argument that the penalty amounts to a tax."
I think the only thing that will save this country is for God Almighty to step in with judgement of some kind and remove the government and the shadow government in some way all by Himself. If He does step in with judgement the possibility exists none of us presently alive will survive His judgement. What else can stop the SCOTUS from writing tax laws when they shouldn't be doing so and usurping the Legislative Branch?