Ted Cruz signs on to ObamaCare!

[JimL]

And the title of the thread that YOU wrote says "Ted Cruz signs on to ObamaCare!"

This is like your goofy claim that there's "no mechanism for people to give money to the government".

Check your PinkoCommieCentral talking points, Jimmy - I think they may have retracted what they faxed you 2 days ago.

If it makes you feel better, have it your way CP.

[Cow Poke]

If it makes you feel better, have it your way CP.

It's not about "feeling better", Jimmy -- that's your domain.

I'm interested in the truth - FACTS.

The FACT is that you blew it. AGAIN

Perhaps you could ask a Mod to change your thread title from the deceptive "Ted Cruz signs on to ObamaCare!" to something more honest and factual.

[rogue06]

Paying the fine isn't "ignoring the law," as the GOP drilled into our heads previously. It's the "smart" economic decision!

Oh please. Cruz would be breaking the law and subject to a fine. No different than if someone broke any other law and was forced to pay a fine as a consequence.

Whether or not it was the smart economic decision (like how some companies may choose to violate some rule and pay a fine because it's cheaper than obeying the law) would hardly matter. He would be crucified by a press that has already shown a strong hostility toward him. They would incessantly be asking whether a deliberate lawbreaker is fit to hold the the office of the presidency. Liberal talking heads would constantly be asking what sort of laws would he choose to ignore if he was president since he already shows a propensity for breaking any that he sees fit to do.

[rogue06]

Wrong. Members of Congress are not compelled to enroll in the exchange, they are perfectly free to purchase their Insurance in the private market. Of course if they do so they won't recieve the Government contribution. And by the way, there is no fine for purchasing his insurance outside of the exchange. I guess he just wants the Government subsidy that he doesn't want his constituents to have. What a guy!

Not according to MSNBC.

Chris Hayes, the host of All In With Chris Hayes, gloated that Cruz "doesn't have much choice" about signing up for Obamacare before declaring that

"The way the law is written, members of Congress who don't get insurance from Medicare or a spouse are required to enroll in Obamacare, and that provision itself was the result of a dumb rhetorical bluff in which Republicans said to their Democratic colleagues: 'Well, if you love Obamacare so much, why don't you marry it by requiring it for Congress?' To which Democrats said: 'OK, fine. Fine. Let's do that.'”

So apparently U.S. Senators and Representatives who "don't get insurance from Medicare or a spouse are required to enroll in Obamacare." That is that they most certainly can be "compelled to enroll in the exchange" and are not allowed to purchase it from the private market.

[Cow Poke]

Not according to MSNBC.

Chris Hayes, the host of All In With Chris Hayes, gloated that Cruz "doesn't have much choice" about signing up for Obamacare before declaring that

"The way the law is written, members of Congress who don't get insurance from Medicare or a spouse are required to enroll in Obamacare, and that provision itself was the result of a dumb rhetorical bluff in which Republicans said to their Democratic colleagues: 'Well, if you love Obamacare so much, why don't you marry it by requiring it for Congress?' To which Democrats said: 'OK, fine. Fine. Let's do that.'”

So apparently U.S. Senators and Representatives who "don't get insurance from Medicare or a spouse are required to enroll in Obamacare." That is that they most certainly can be "compelled to enroll in the exchange" and are not allowed to purchase it from the private market.

I've see that claim, but I've also seen the claim that members of Congress CAN buy outside the exchange, but they'd lose their 75% federal subsidy available to congress. Then I've seen that DC is a "closed market", and he'd have to buy in Texas rather than DC.

I just think it goes to show how convoluted this whole Obamacare thing is.

[Sam]

Oh please. Cruz would be breaking the law and subject to a fine. No different than if someone broke any other law and was forced to pay a fine as a consequence.

Whether or not it was the smart economic decision (like how some companies may choose to violate some rule and pay a fine because it's cheaper than obeying the law) would hardly matter. He would be crucified by a press that has already shown a strong hostility toward him. They would incessantly be asking whether a deliberate lawbreaker is fit to hold the the office of the presidency. Liberal talking heads would constantly be asking what sort of laws would he choose to ignore if he was president since he already shows a propensity for breaking any that he sees fit to do.

[Zymologist]

The individual mandate isn't a fine for breaking the law, so far as the legal argument is concerned. It's a tax that's waived for those who have insurance. Maybe that's a pedantic point but it's true — we went over that in 2012.

A list of talking points provided by the White House would seem to disagree with you:

"What President Obama is proposing is not a tax, but a requirement to comply with the law.

People are required to obey the speed limit and have to pay a penalty if they get caught speeding? Does anyone consider that a tax?

People are required to have car insurance and can be fined if they are caught without it. Is that a tax?

What we’re talking about is a penalty for the few people who will refuse to buy health insurance – even though they can afford it – and who expect the rest of us to pick up the tab for their care."

[Sam]

A list of talking points provided by the White House

From the legal standpoint, which we can hold Cruz to since he -is- a lawyer, the individual mandate is a tax. You may remember this from the 2012 SCOTUS ruling upholding the individual mandate as constitutional.

[Sam]

And again, what to do with the 16 million+ that Cruz would leave in the dirt if any one of the previous repeal efforts had gone through? Why ignore the fact that 1) being insured is much better than being uninsured and 2) the ACA has directly led to 16 million more people with health care coverage?

[Zymologist]

From the legal standpoint, which we can hold Cruz to since he -is- a lawyer, the individual mandate is a tax. You may remember this from the 2012 SCOTUS ruling upholding the individual mandate as constitutional.

Yeah, I remember. I just find it interesting that the SCOTUS explicitly contradicted the White House's comments on the matter.

[Sam]

Yeah, I remember. I just find it interesting that the SCOTUS explicitly contradicted the White House's comments on the matter.

Well, interesting as it may be, the fact is that the law treats the Individual Mandate as a generally-applicable tax that is waived for people with insurance coverage. Cruz isn't breaking the law by not getting covered; he's choosing to be taxed.

[Joel]

Well, interesting as it may be, the fact is that the law treats the Individual Mandate as a generally-applicable tax that is waived for people with insurance coverage. Cruz isn't breaking the law by not getting covered; he's choosing to be taxed.

I think that's worse, actually.
Imagine if the government decided to change more/all crimes into taxes. The government could penalize anyone for anything, by calling it a tax. And because the person technically "isn't breaking the law", but is "choosing to be taxed" the government gets to apply that penalty without due process: without a trial, without presumption of innocence, without 4th amendment privacy protection, with forcing the person to testify against themselves. And without Constitutional limits, because SCOTUS has effectively made the taxing power absolute.

On the other hand, I imagine many/most uninsured people will just check the box on the 1040 form saying yes, I had coverage.

[rogue06]

Keep in mind with the press when a Republican slows the rate of increase for something it is portrayed as a spending cut despite the fact that it continues to increase. They will portray it as a fine for breaking the law. It is as simple as that.

[KingsGambit]

Keep in mind with the press when a Republican slows the rate of increase for something it is portrayed as a spending cut despite the fact that it continues to increase. They will portray it as a fine for breaking the law. It is as simple as that.

Off topic but this is the same principle that politicians used to portray "cutting the deficit" as somehow being helpful in paying off the national debt and it's a pet peeve of mine.

[Sam]

Keep in mind with the press when a Republican slows the rate of increase for something it is portrayed as a spending cut despite the fact that it continues to increase. They will portray it as a fine for breaking the law. It is as simple as that.

So Cruz may have a political obligation to avoid bad press but we agree that he doesn't have a legal obligation.

And still we wait for the alternative GOP plan that's just as good as Obamacare without all the hassles or taxes. I don't hold out much hope: