retakeourgov-logo-icon-webred  

Later this year the United States Supreme court will decide case number 14-114, King v. Burwell. The outcome of this case could very well decide the fate of the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

The essence of this landmark case is as follows:

Section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code, which was enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("ACA"), authorizes federal tax-credit subsidies for health insurance coverage that is purchased through an "Exchange established by the State under section 1311" of the ACA.

The question presented is whether the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") may permissibly promulgate regulations to extend tax-credit subsidies to coverage purchased through Exchanges established by the federal government under section 1321 of the ACA.

The ACA (Obamacare) provides subsidies to a family of four earning anywhere from $95,400 to $119,280 per year. These earning thresholds are 400% of the 2014 Federal Poverty line.

A ruling in favor of King would prevent the Obama administration from distributing health insurance subsidies through Exchanges established by the federal government. Such a ruling would be a major blow to President Obama since his signature legislation relies on redistribution of wealth via federal insurance exchanges.

State pushback against Obamacare required the Obama administration to implement federally run exchanges in 37 of our 50 states. The inability to deliver subsidies to people in these 37 states would render the government run health insurance market unworkable. Fixing this insurance market place would require a legislative rewrite of Obamacare, providing a chance for conservative legislators to reign in this big government overreach.

This video explains why conservatives should be optimistic that the outcome of King v. Burwell will be to their liking.

Link to Supreme Court docket

Link to Scotus blog with more info about King v. Burwell

Page 1 of 2

It's a 16.6% Tax Increase

Below is an email exchange between Bob Hamer and Thayrone X of WAAM Radio. Bob encourages Thayrone to quit calling the Snyder Tax Hike a 1% increase, as increasing the sales tax from 6% to 7% is actually a 16.6% increase. Thanks Bob for pointing this out! Read more ...

Prop 1 is a Bait and Switch

Because the state will not assure us the one percent increase in the sales tax will go directly to road repair, this is another bait and switch by our elected leaders. Much like the lottery years ago. We were sold on the “fact” that the money from the lottery would be used to help fund schools.

Read more ...

Prop 1 Funds Affirmative Action and Mass Transit

I can’t believe our parting Lawmakers would leave us with such a mess as the May 5 election Proposal 1. It is so confusing. Most will think it is just a simple proposal to change the Michigan Constitution to raise our sales tax from 6 percent to 7 percent. Motor fuel taxes are increased on gasoline/diesel fuel. Vehicle registration fees are increased and no longer tax deductible for federal taxes. That is just the tip of the iceberg.

Read more ...

Politicians Addicted to Taxes

This May voters in Michigan will go to the polls, but not to elect any politicians. We will be asked whether the legislature should raise the state sales tax. Sounds simple enough. One percent is a tiny amount, right?

Read more ...

Fund Our Roads with Hollywood subsidies

The first step of what could be a major victory for Michigan’s middle class takes place in Lansing this week. The House Committee on Tax Policy will be voting on House Bill 4122. Passing this bill out of committee is the first step in eliminating taxpayer funded subsidies to wealthy Hollywood elites.

Read more ...

Demand Accurate Prop 1 Ballot Language

Dear Election Officials and State Board of Canvassers,

I am writing to request that the title for Prop 1 and the specific ballot language for Prop 1 accurately reflect what Michigan citizens will be voting on when they cast their ballots on May 5, 2015.

I am proposing this as the title:

Read more ...

MI Citizens do with less - so should Lansing

In response to Senator Mike Kowall’s commentary, “Michigan Senate sets an ambitious agenda for 2015,” I would like to respond.  Personally I would have preferred that the MI Senate had set an ambitious 2014 lame duck session and simply addressed one goal – fixing Michigan’s roads.   Instead the Senate voted down Bolger’s House Bill 4539, which would have generated an additional $1.2 billion/year in new road funding without increasing taxes on MI residents.

Read more ...
Vote Analysis

Contribute

 Contribute Online

retakeourgov-nascar

 Contribute Via Mail

United States Bill of Rights

Declaration of Independence

Login Form