Democrats’ slippery legal slope: Cato expert says mandate “not a valid tax”

Democrats continue to declare ObamaCare is not a tax bill. Fortunately, lobotomies haven’t been given to all Americans. Yet.

The only reason ObamaCare wasn’t tossed out by the Supreme Court is the narrow argument Democrats’ lawyers built—if the mandate failed on the Commerce Clause (it did as we predicted), it could still be upheld as a tax and not a penalty.

Another essay by Byron York explains the deception President Barack Obama’s lawyers used to argue their case for the bill that socializes U.S. healthcare.

Basically, ObamaCare promoters got to have it both ways. Or did they?

Michael F. Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute, says the mandate is “not a valid tax.”

In a well-constructed essay, Cannon explains there are three kinds of legal taxes (not that this was a concern for Democrats who passed the bill):--income, excise and direct.

The ObamaCare mandate penalty/alleged tax fits none of those types of taxes because each must meet “specified constitutional constraints.”

Cannon wrote:

“Because the mandate penalty under PPACA does not satisfy any of the constraints, it is not a valid tax.”

I think he has a good point. Republicans in the House and Senate should take note.

Initially I was stung by Chief Justice John Roberts' reasoning. However, after a fellow Tweeter pointed me to Cannon's essay, I don't feel quite as annoyed.

(Filed by Kay B. Day/June 29, 2012)