Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
And the Supreme Court is zeroing in on whether the health care law says that if you don't comply.
You'll pay a tax.
Or a penalty.
Very distinct difference there that was day one in court here's a question hand.
The Justice Department has said that the mandate is constitutional.
Because congress has the power to tax.
Americans but now in the second part of the argument the Obama administration -- argue that it is not actually attacks but simply a penalty.
If individuals do not pay for their health insurance -- -- -- this the word tax is never mentioned though in the written law.
Justice Samuel Alito suggested in yesterday's.
Proceedings that it can't work both -- So really today here arguing that the penalty.
Is not attacks.
Tomorrow you're going to be back and will be arguing that the penalty is -- tax.
Our presidential candidate and congresswoman Michelle Bachmann.
Is one of the health care law's most outspoken critics she will be at hearings tomorrow she is also practiced law tax attorney.
Michelle Bachmann congress and welcome good to have you here is -- I think.
Good morning -- oil is down from for everybody at -- in terms of what happened yesterday.
With regard to this issue of attacks and what it revealed to us about how the justices are thinking so far.
Well yesterday was very important because it depending -- -- -- yesterday went.
That would indicate whether the justice would continue going and take up the all important issue of the individual mandate today.
Then on Wednesday they'll take up the issues -- ability and I'll also take up the spending clause there's really four issues that the judges are looking at.
But the very first one is is this case even -- right to come before the Supreme Court in it hinges on this issue of whether or not.
The penalty that an individual American would pay for failing to buy health insurance is actually a penalty.
And so it seemed yesterday during the course of the hearings that most of the justices including the liberal judges were thinking that this should be considered a penalty.
Which means the court can hear the case there's a lot from that eighteen cent correction from the nineteenth century that says that if that -- if that yet but matter as a.
A lawsuit can't be filed before -- court.
Because government can't be stopped from.
Collecting attacks until it's actually put into effect so it seems as if they've gotten past that point and now there on this issue of the mandate.
In today's proceedings we're listening to -- that Shannon -- did earlier.
And she spoke to one of the attorneys who was you know in favor of continuing to uphold this health care law and he said that he sees no problem.
With the commerce law in this case he's it whenever you have commerce that represents 16 of the US economy.
It is ridiculous -- his -- my word but that was the sentiment that he expressed to suggest that the congress cannot.
Oversee that process for 16 of the US economy.
Well that's a pretty radical view because it if a person -- that view that means that congress can regulate any activity whether we.
I have activity occurred don't have activity that's really been out here.
Because congress is attempting to regulate in activity.
And so -- -- -- congress could force us to do anything ever going to purchase a car they could force us to buy an electric car that we don't want.
If we don't have a gym membership they could force us to buy a gym membership that's absurd at that point we no longer have a constitutional republic.
We have a dictator ship and that's not what America is.
It -- away from the court for just a moment congresswoman Bachmann talk about that the GOP presidential.
Candidate politics that that exist over this Rick Santorum the -- day basically said.
That Mitt Romney he felt was the worst Republican.
In this race to win the nomination because of his background with the Massachusetts Health Care Reform that he put in place.
Is that a fair statement and do you think that regardless of the outcome in the court that Mitt Romney would have a tough time in -- one on one debate with the president when it comes to this issue.
No question that this will be the signature issue of that 2012 campaign this is pres Obama's signature legislation.
Of his presidency.
It's the number one reason why the economy isn't turning around and white people aren't hiring so this will be this -- point.
Because after all socialized medicine is the crown jewel of socialism and that's what we're talking about.
Whoever the nominee is whether it's Santorum Romney Paul.
Each one of the four nominees that were -- hurt candidates -- remain in the race have committed themselves to full scale repeal.
Now and I I I think this is something right made a distinct difference in the presidential race.
When we first began we had major candidates including our Romney who would say that he was going to issue a waiver for -- -- during the course of the campaign.
Every one of the candidates came over to where the point where I was which is full scale repeal.
And no less whoever the people choose for the Republican Party nominee.
That nominee will have to abide in standby full scale repeal because the Republican congress -- and -- do that effectively.
He will have to if he's going to be the nominee he'll have to do.
-- that -- you make a great point -- harassment Bachmann because that was an issue that you got a ton of support for.
When you're in the debates in this race and clearly it looks like you've had an impact -- national conversation thank you so much for being with us today to this -- thinking.
Filter by section