Hello everyone, as you probably know, the United States Congress is about to pass the Affordable Health Care for America Act and there has been much bally-hoo back and forth about whether or not it’s best for America. However, many of you may or may not know that one of the provisions of the act is to enact “non-compliance” tax on any non-dependent individual residing in the United States who does not either purchase private health insurance or enrolls in the public option. If you do not believe me, this is described in full detail in actual bill: H.R. 3962, Division A, Title V, Subtitle A, Part 1, Subpart A.
http://en.wikisource.org/w
To put this into simple terms, this means that you will be FINED and deemed a CRIMINAL for not having health insurance. Hence, this unfairly negatively affects the healthy, the wealthy, those whose life-styles implicate minimal risk, and the otherwise preferably uninsured. You will be fined for not having purchased a service. That would be like reserving a hotel room and being charged a “non-service-fee” for NOT requesting room service and paying its subsequent costs; I’m sure most of you would deem that unfair.
Now most of you are probably wondering how this violates the Supreme Law Of The United States Of America. Article 1, Section 9 (Limitations of Congress) of the United States Constitution reads, “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”
Furthermore, according to the precedent set by the supreme court case, Cummings v. Missouri, “A bill of attainder, is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial and includes any legislative act which takes away the life, liberty or property of a particular named or easily ascertainable person or group of persons because the legislature thinks them guilty of conduct which deserves punishment.” In this case, the group of persons are the uninsured who will soon be forced to give up their monetary property, their perception of the healthiest life for them, and their liberty to choose to live the way they do because Congress will “rule” them guilty of “non-compliance”.
Moreover, in Calder v. Bull, the Supreme Court stated that an ex post facto law is defined as, “1st. Every law that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal; and punishes such action. 2d. Every law that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. 3d. Every law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed. 4th. Every law that alters the legal rules of evidence, and receives less, or different, testimony, than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense, in order to convict the offender.” In the case of this health care bill, the action is question was the choice a person made to live uninsured. Until now, that choice implicated no crime committed… But soon, that choice a person once made will be deemed criminal by Congress and will be punishable by law.
In another example of Supreme Court precedence, in U.S. v. Lovett, the court stated, “Legislative acts, no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a trial, are ‘bills of attainder’ prohibited under this clause.” In that case, the Supreme Court struck down Congress’ attempt to take away the pay checks of Government workers that Congress deemed a “Communist”. Today, Congress is attempting to take away the pay checks of all Americans that Congress deems, “uninsured”.
Basically, in due time, The Government will be able to fine you for not fitting their definition of “healthy”.
This is an affront to both the words and the intent of the United States Constitution and is an injustice upon the basic liberties of all American Citizens. May the Supreme Court see this supreme violation and stop this bill before it can be enforced.
