Tweet
I don’t know how many of you caught this exchange, related to the individual mandate, between Stephanopoulos and President Obama on Sunday …but I thought it was amusing..well maybe not amusing….but kind of annoying:
Obama's Nontax Tax
The first thing that popped into my head, merits aside, is how on earth is defining a term "stretching a bit"?
This, by the way, is one of the ways that President Obama drives me to the bottle, so to speak. He offers a sweeping promise — in this case, his campaign-trail pledge (everyone is familiar with) that, and I am paraphrasing, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not a single dime – which he reiterated, I believe in his address to Congress – with respect to health care. And then he breaks that promise, for example, by raising the tax on tobacco products (whether you care or not – it is still a tax on everyone), and his instinctive response, along with that of his defenders, is "Oh, come on, that doesn't count." Now, I guess, this extends to a new government charge for not having a health-insurance policy.
I am beginning to suspect that in President Obama's mind, there are always unspoken caveats and exceptions that are crystal-clear to him, so clear that he doesn't have to mention them. It appears that the meaning of simple words, like “tax” are always in dispute - a government charge for not having health insurance isn't a tax; defining a term represents stretching the truth; and so on.
"That may be," Mr. Stephanopoulos responded, "but it's still a tax increase." (In fact, uncompensated care accounts for about only 2.2% of national health spending today, but that's another subject.)
Mr. Obama: "No. That's not true, George. The—for us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore . . ." In other words, like parents talking to their children, this levy—don't call it a tax—is for your own good.
Mr. Stephanopoulos tried again: "But it may be fair, it may be good public policy—"
Mr. Obama: "No, but—but, George, you—you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase."
"I don't think I'm making it up," Mr. Stephanopoulos said. He then had the temerity to challenge the Philologist in Chief, with an assist from Merriam-Webster. He cited that dictionary's definition of "tax"—"a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."
Mr. Obama: "George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. . . ."
Mr. Stephanopoulos: "I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase."
Mr. Obama: "No. That's not true, George. The—for us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore . . ." In other words, like parents talking to their children, this levy—don't call it a tax—is for your own good.
Mr. Stephanopoulos tried again: "But it may be fair, it may be good public policy—"
Mr. Obama: "No, but—but, George, you—you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase."
"I don't think I'm making it up," Mr. Stephanopoulos said. He then had the temerity to challenge the Philologist in Chief, with an assist from Merriam-Webster. He cited that dictionary's definition of "tax"—"a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."
Mr. Obama: "George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now. . . ."
Mr. Stephanopoulos: "I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase."
The first thing that popped into my head, merits aside, is how on earth is defining a term "stretching a bit"?
This, by the way, is one of the ways that President Obama drives me to the bottle, so to speak. He offers a sweeping promise — in this case, his campaign-trail pledge (everyone is familiar with) that, and I am paraphrasing, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not a single dime – which he reiterated, I believe in his address to Congress – with respect to health care. And then he breaks that promise, for example, by raising the tax on tobacco products (whether you care or not – it is still a tax on everyone), and his instinctive response, along with that of his defenders, is "Oh, come on, that doesn't count." Now, I guess, this extends to a new government charge for not having a health-insurance policy.
I am beginning to suspect that in President Obama's mind, there are always unspoken caveats and exceptions that are crystal-clear to him, so clear that he doesn't have to mention them. It appears that the meaning of simple words, like “tax” are always in dispute - a government charge for not having health insurance isn't a tax; defining a term represents stretching the truth; and so on.
Comment