First Florida, then Texas, and now Kansas and Tennessee have been told by the Obama administration that…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
Obama Admin Also Pressuring Kansas, Tennessee to Expand Medicaid or Lose Funds

First Florida, then Texas, and now Kansas and Tennessee have been told by the Obama administration that unless they expand Medicaid under the rules laid out in ObamaCare the federal government will withhold payments from local hospitals.

Florida’s Republican Governor Rick Scott is so angry at the move he’s promised to sue the Obama administration for violating a 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling prohibiting the feds from conditioning Medicaid funding on ObamaCare expansion.

Yet this is precisely what the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is doing. According to Kaiser Health News, CMS “confirmed Tuesday that it gave officials in [Kansas and Tennessee] the same message that had been delivered to Texas and Florida about the risk to funding for so-called ‘uncompensated…[more]

April 23, 2015 • 03:19 pm

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
Jester's CourtroomLegal tales stranger than stranger than fiction: Ridiculous and sometimes funny lawsuits plaguing our courts.
Home Press Room CFIF Endorses "Right to Refuse" Constitutional Amendment
CFIF Endorses "Right to Refuse" Constitutional Amendment Print
Thursday, February 28 2013

The Center for Individual Freedom today sent the following letter to Congressman Steven Palazzo (R-MS) in support of H.J. Res. 28, his proposed Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would effectively overturn the Supreme Court’s decision upholding ObamaCare’s mandate tax and permanently prevent Congress from ever again forcing Americans to choose between the purchase of goods and services or tax penalties.


February 28, 2013

The Honorable Steven Palazzo
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congressman Palazzo:

On behalf of the Center for Individual Freedom (“CFIF”) and its more than 300,000 supporters and activists nationwide, I write in full support of H.J. Res. 28, your proposed Amendment to the United States Constitution that, if passed and ratified, will prevent Congress from taxing individuals and businesses as punishment simply for failing to purchase goods and services.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court took the extraordinary step of upholding ObamaCare’s mandate forcing virtually all Americans to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the federal government as a valid exercise of Congress’ taxing power outlined in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.  In other words, a Supreme Court majority, for the first time, put its stamp of approval on the novel idea that Congress has the power to punitively tax inactivity. 

Experts predict that as many as 11 million mostly middle-class Americans will be slapped with ObamaCare’s mandate tax once it takes effect in January 2014.  In fact, the Congressional Budget Office (“CBO”) estimates that 7 in 10 Americans making less than $94,000 per year and who are without health insurance will be hit with the mandate tax. 
 
H.J. Res. 28, also known as the “Right to Refuse” Amendment, is simple and to the point.  It states clearly that, “Congress shall make no law that imposes a tax on a failure to purchase goods or services.”

This commonsense Amendment will effectively overturn the Supreme Court’s decision upholding ObamaCare’s mandate tax and permanently prevent Congress from ever again forcing Americans to choose between the purchase of goods and services or tax penalties. 

For those reasons and more, CFIF wholeheartedly endorses H.J. Res. 28 – the “Right to Refuse” Amendment – and urges every Member of Congress to co-sponsor and pass it without delay.

Sincerely,
/s/       
Jeffrey Mazzella
President

Question of the Week   
Which one of the following former U.S. Presidents wrote that he considered the 1820 Missouri Compromise “the knell of the Union”?
More Questions
Quote of the Day   
 
"The routine problem with those who'd deny us the use of drones is that they don't offer practical alternatives. Contrary to the blather from the left that 'there's no military solution' to global jihad, the cold fact is that there's only a military solution -- and it will take a great deal of time and bloodshed.Two millennia of apocalyptic and messianic insurgencies around the world demonstrate --…[more]
 
 
—Ralph Peters, LTC, USA-Ret., Author, Columnist and Commentator
— Ralph Peters, LTC, USA-Ret., Author, Columnist and Commentator
 
Liberty Poll   

Do you support or oppose fast-track authority, now being debated in Congress, for the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal?