Morris falsely claims under House health bill, "You can actually go to jail for not having health insurance"
November 09, 2009 9:53 pm ET
From the November 9 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
Why is Rupert Murdoch so clueless about Fox News?
Media Matters: Dobbs, dropped
Oh, by the way, Nancy Pelosi was asked where in the Constitution it allows the federal government to require an individual citizen to purchase an economic product. She never answered that question. Perhaps Media Matters can report on her non-answer, and find where anyone on the Pro side of this bill has provided an answer to that question.
Tax troubles
Morris had been labeled as one of the biggest tax delinquents in his home state of Connecticut, owing an estimated $280,000 in unpaid taxes and a total of $452,367 in unpaid taxes and fees. In 2003 the IRS filed a $1.5 million tax lien against him. Morris said that he has reached an agreement with Connecticut and his name will be removed from the next delinquency list. Morris says that he is committed to paying his taxes: "Following a difficult period in my life, I fell into arrears. But since then, I have paid almost $3 million in state and federal taxes.
j/k
We all know that the way the criminal justice system is set up, if you have money and commit the same crime as someone who's poor, the poor shmoe is going to jail. The rich guy, eh, maybe gets a slap on the wrist - a la Paris Hilton. Unless of course you're a rich guy who steals money from other rich guys, then like Madoff, you're screwed.
Representative David Camp asked the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation what the enforcement of penalties in H.R. 3962 for 'willful failure to comply' would be.
The response letter from Committee Chief of Staff, Thomas Barthold is available online but I dont know how to link it. It stated that according to the "Internal Revenue Code" there are 4 civil penalties (fees, fines, and more penalaties) that pertain failure to comply. There are also the following 2 criminal penalties
Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.”
Based upon that, it doesnt appear that claim that Dick Morris (and others) is making is false.
It seems that those who are saying that the claim of jailtime is false are saying "come on get real, the Government won't send anyone to jail" when it appears that the Government will have the power to do just that.
just like the stupak amendment
kinda like some of president bush's signing statements where he blatantly said he would not enforce certain aspects of law that came against the interests of big business like big oil, and defense contractors.
i mean by such precendent, a president could choose not to have the fines and or jail time enforced.
Maybe it's time for a 4th arm of government with super-executive power over the other three whose sole purpose would be to ensure that all members of all three branches uphold the Constitution under the penalty of felony prosecution.
i could go on and on and on if i want to.
second, one way of looking at it is like with car insurance....you need it and get should get penalized in a similar fashion.
The following laws should be repealed:
Seatbelt laws
Helmet Laws
Mandatory insurance laws
Mandatory drug sentence laws(rockefeller laws)
banning smokeing laws
So, if I am correct, then ever time this is brough up, it is a true statement about a bill that was passed by the House!!!
I see two possibilities - either A) any bill that has a penalty or fee within it could be enforced with 7203....or....
B) the committee's "Internal Revenue Code" has other sections pertaining to other ways of criminally enforcing penalties and 7203 is the one that they would use specifically for this bill.
i think dick morris has bigger problems to worry about than being thrown in jail for not having health insurance.
What I like even better is the just because its in there doesn't mean it will be enfornce argument. What? And then to smear Bush for his sins of the past. My mama always said two wrongs don't make a right. So don't try to justify this with "precendent" set by Bush. That has nothing to do with THIS legislation. Again, stick to the point.
Just face the fact that it is ridiculous that the government should be able to force anyone to purchase a service. And that it's even more ridiculous that you be fined (and potentially imprisioned) for not purchasing that service. I have health insurance and will continue to have it, but for someone to be forced to purchase something is unAmerican.
so.....we have so far flood insurance that must be purchased and car insurance as well.....so having to have these is unamerican you say?
well then that being the case then any home destroyed by hurricanes or flooding, then the family is told by everyone "tough luck, your on your own"
or the person who is hit by some drunk driver who doesn't have insurance and the victum is a para or quadriplegic and should be told.."sorry can't help you, your SOL"
very compassionate
Dont buy a house in flood zone and you wont need flood insurance.
According to this bill, No way out of buying health insurance.
That is the difference.
and another thing its in the bill now. doesn't mean it will be in the bill still when it becomes law.
thats a difference too.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."
However, for this topic, it has nothing to do with personal responsibility and everything to do with money. The government wants to force healthy people to buy insurance because it will then off set the costs for sick people who need insurance. It broadens the risk pool and spreads the cost out. You and I need to sacrifice for the good of the people. So someone who has made good choices, eats right and lives healthy, will have to foot the bill for people like my dad, who eats crappy food and smokes. He's overweight, has had three heart attacks and has emphysema. He made bad choices, why should you have to pay for it?
You can leave it to 'trust' if you want, I no longer trust my government.
Prosecution is authorized under the Code for a variety of offenses. Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
• Section 7203 – misdemeanor willful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
• Section 7201 – felony willful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.” [page 3]
Soros has you fools brainwashed. Do some of your own research.,