On Top of Everything Else, Obamacare Slaps Tax on Religious Freedom
Not only does health care law expands the role of government to unprecedented levels, its taxes also decimate our religious liberties.
The Affordable Care Act, often called Obamacare, gives the federal government the tools to tax religiously-affiliated schools, hospitals, universities and soup kitchens right out of existence if they object to a government mandate.
Last week, I voted to repeal Obamacare because the entire law is bad policy, the mandate expands the role of government to unprecedented levels, and the taxes decimate our religious liberties. This cannot stand.
We have heard a lot about the mandates in the law, but we have not heard much about these hidden taxes on religious freedom. Obamacare includes provisions that trigger penalties already written into our current tax code if the employer chooses not to comply, based on religious or moral convictions, with the Department of Health and Human Services mandate. The Internal Revenue Service allows the government to tax employers to the tune of $100 per day, per employee.
That equals an astounding $36,500 per employee, per year. If a religiously affiliated grade school has 50 employees, they would be taxed $1,825,000 per year, every year, just for exercising their constitutionally protected rights. With taxes so severe and burdensome, it’s hard to imagine that any institution could keep its doors open.
This is the question facing religious institutions and concerned employers today: will you violate your conscience and religious beliefs or pay a hefty tax to follow your faith?
Out of all the taxes in Obamacare, of which there are 21, this to me is the most egregious for its brazen disregard for religious liberty, one of the bedrocks of our country.
That’s why I introduced the Religious Freedom Tax Repeal Act of 2012. This bill will block the taxes that will be levied upon those religious institutions and those who have moral or religious objections in the private sector from having to pay for mandates under Obamacare that violate their religious or moral views.
How did we get to a place where our most precious freedoms are under attack? The Constitution stated: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
If you recall, in February, President Obama and his Department of Health and Human Services announced a “compromise” that was no compromise at all. When Americans across the country and across the political spectrum protested the HHS mandate, the president still decided to force religiously affiliated organizations and employers to facilitate a government mandate that violates core tenants of their faith.
The mandate also states that religious employers are exempt only if their purpose is to instill religious doctrine, to hire and serve exclusively people of their own faith, and qualify as a church or religious order according to a very narrow definition in the tax code.
Under this definition, even Jesus and Mother Theresa would not qualify, to say nothing of the religious charities that have provided relief and services throughout history. The exceptions are essentially irrelevant as most religious institutions providing health, educational or charitable services to others have no protection.
The Obama Administration is forcing employers to choose between either covering various drugs and services contrary to their religious beliefs or refusing to offer health plans to their employees and paying hefty taxes.
In addition to repealing the full law, I will continue to work in Congress with my co-sponsors to stop this religious freedom tax.
Patrick
9:52 pm on Sunday, July 15, 2012
Your view of the American landscape as we know it, continues to be viewed through a flawed filter. You preach to us commoners about the so called horrors of required healthcare coverage under the rouge of religious freedoms, while you bask in the benefits of having it (for life) provided by the government, paid for by us tax payers. What gives you the right, but not us? I'm out of a job, I'm paying my for my own health care, which just went up another 30% and live one bill away from financial ruin like others. These parts of the health care bill that protect us little people (not drug companies) is a good thing. It is modeled after the 1993 efforts of Republicans and the 2007 Romney plan passed in Massachusetts. It strengthens the middle class and helps to stabilize. It’s working so well in Massachusetts that 98% of the public have affordable insurance via market driven exchanges. No one bashed it then or that fine?
We're growing increasingly tired of the Obama bashing verses focusing on doing the job we elected you people to do, which is legislate together. While you continue to repeatedly vote to repeal what a conservative court has now ruled to be the law of the land, you have yet to vote on one jobs bill. Where is the leadership of prior generations? This dysfunction is getting old and transparent. Please help the recovery and stop the distractions! We need more jobs and the security of having the same access to affordable health care like you!
TOM
7:28 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
PATRICK you sound like a parasonic sheep thats on the koolaid!!
St. Swithin
9:39 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Patrick - nicely said. It's a shame Rep. S. doesn't actually read the Patch. This is just a spam that his aides put out.
@TOM - A 'parasonic sheep'? I'd like to see one of those! Perhaps you should pay attention when your spell checker puts that little red line under a word.
John Wilson
12:12 pm on Monday, October 1, 2012
Patrick -
Great reply!
Senselessbrenner has always found ways to "stir the pot" create divisiveness and fear among the masses.
If this was a different era, he would be our HITLER!
This buffoon is a total waste to the human gene pool...
Tom McHunter
7:19 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Like the church I go to, places of worship have been getting a free ride for years. Most on the N. Shore are run like businesses, operating under the tenants of a non-profit status, with high pay and existing healthcare for their leadership. The ACA does not "violate my conscience and religious beliefs..." no more than forcing me to have car insurance keeps me from driving my kids to soccer. I’m not sure about your other statements since they are designed to feed our fears. But, I would be more apt to consider your words as true, if you first gave up *your* Federally socialized healthcare plan?
Keith Best
7:58 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Obama is attempting to steal religious freedom, one of the tenents this country was founded on. That is why we must elect Mitt Romney this Novemeber.
We need CHANGE, for the HOPE'S not working. NOBAMA 2012!
Lyle Ruble
8:56 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Keith Best...Big Yawn!
Keith Best
9:21 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Lyle Ruble......Finally! A comment from you that sums up what you are about.
John Wilson
10:22 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Keith Best - Women’s health care, more specifically, as this is what he is targeting, women’s reproductive rights, are not the rightful purview of a congressman gone completely amok – he lost his loin cloth and cannot find his cave – nor is it the rightful purview of a religious affiliated institution. The rightful purview here is between the woman and her chosen physician…
In closing, let me state here that TRUE places of religion do enjoy a TAX EXEMPT STATUS – even though by any cogent and reasonable standard they are businesses – loosely affiliated religious institutions do not enjoy that status. The tax burden for every American is greatly increased because these TRUE places of religion are TAX EXEMPT, never pay any money into the support of the country, and yet, feel free to use their money and influence in the background to undermine the very secular institutions that allow them to exist. This makes LOBBYISTS look downright saintly…
Lyle Ruble
10:41 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Keith Best...It's all about your "Chatty Cathy" talking points. There is nothing new that you have to add. Your nothing but the Waukesha County Republican Party Mouth Piece.
Keith Best
11:41 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Lyle Ruble-- I write exactly what I believe. If you can't understand that, that's your problem.
I don't resort to name calling or personal attacks. I represent my views as well as the Republican Party of Waukesha County, since they coincide. You may disagree and that is your right, but I will continue to write what I believe, and am proud to do so.
Keith Schmitz
4:56 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Somebody shows up with a Keith Best doll, pulls its string, and out comes is any one of 15 delight whacko phrases.
John Wilson
12:16 pm on Monday, October 1, 2012
Keith Best -
I want freedom FROM religion!
You flat-earthers have just about killed everything beautiful on this planet!
Paul Callahan
9:17 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
I am glad the Senator's post is labelled an opinion since it is devoid of many facts and twists others. It's time to be CONstructive instead of DEstructive, Senator. Do your job. Work on making America a better place instead of continual divisive political grandstanding. Just my opinion, of course.
Keith Best
9:24 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Paul Callahan---Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner is doing the job we sent him to Washingto D.C. to do. Do your homework. He is not a "senator".
John Wilson
10:19 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Paul Callahan... Keith Best is correct on one point, Senselessbrenner is not a senator... of course, he is not a REAL congressman either!
No one wants their congressman to be devoid of all reason and blindly follow the path of the credit card companies that own him... Senselessbrenner has an OPINION on everything, even things not in existence yet, and the beauty of it all is that you do not even have to ask him for his opinion, he gives it freely... he may be seen talking to trees and lamp posts...
Keith Schmitz
5:02 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Did we send him to Washington to lie to us?
Paul Callahan
9:32 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Oops, absolutely correct. I typed too fast. Does not change my opinion nor the facts he omitted and distorted. Thanks for the comment, Keith.
The Donny Show
9:38 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Only if Obama had told the story differently we all would see his genius!
Is he not the most self-loving person ever? It is us dumb commoners that just dont see his GRAND Intelligence! If only we knew what a great leader he was!
Keith Schmitz
4:57 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Think you are looking for the word uppity.
Patrick
9:42 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
This opinion piece is hypocrisy at its best and pandering at its worst. What many do not know or understand is that Americans pay TODAY on average 7k for every man, woman and child for healthcare. This is more than twice the cost of any other nation on the planet. It is fundamentally flawed and this WILL bankrupt us if health reform is not enacted as is occurring now. Many of our "legislators"are bought and paid for by drug companies and big business through donations and lobbying efforts. They no longer have the middle class best interests at heart. The health care reform bill was modeled after REPUBLICAN policies of the 90's that were weaved into a successful plan implemented by Romney in 2007, which has been very successful with 98% coverage. I might add it is also market based with private insurance companies (again Republican ideas). What I'm afraid we have above in this legislators opinion piece is nothing more than "anything but Obama" and obstructionism. Its what is going to be the death of our nation as prior generations new it. Especially when these individuals are standing in the way of recovery or worst yet, trying to capitalize off of it. No effort to create jobs, just focus on distractions. Shameful that many do not understand the reform bill or take the time to learn for themselves. After all, just look to Massachusetts- it is the successful model.
John Wilson
10:10 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Parick - Pls keeping speaking TRUTH to STUPID... sooner or later - probably later - TRUTH will win the day...
CowDung
10:19 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
What does Obamacare do that actually addresses the amount that Americans pay (on average) for healthcare?
Has Romneycare really been a success story in Massachusetts? You may call it successful because 98% of the people are covered, but many reports rate it as a dismal failure as costs have been spiraling out of control and access to healthcare has gotten worse for many people.
St. Swithin
10:54 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Cowdung -
link for the "many reports" that rate Romneycare a failure, please?
As for cost controls, Obamacare contains quite a few - There are limits to how much insurance can raise prices; standards for the ratio of care to overhead an insurance company can spend, and the whole thing is tied in with Medicaid/Medicare cost controls. It's quite a kludge, in my opinion, but it breaks the Republican stonewalling of the past two decades and hopefully can be refined in the future. In fact, some of the worst parts have already been changed in Congress. If people like Rep S would actually offer sensible tweaks to the ACA instead of posturing about religious freedoms the whole country would be better off.
CowDung
10:58 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/pnhp-massachusetts-healthcare-system-failure
http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/content.cfm?content_id=228526&page=1&topic=WS_HLM2_HEP
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/february/massachusetts_is_no_.php
St. Swithin
12:54 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
@Cowdung
Thanks for the links. However all three links point to the same study. That study states that the main problems with 'Romneycare' are the rising premiums and unnecessary overhead at the insurance companies. Obamacare addresses these issues. Also, the study recommends "a national, nonprofit, single-payer system" as a way to solve these issues. I like it! How about you?
CowDung
1:11 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
The trouble is that Obamacare will end up driving the insurance companies out of business. You can't demand that they accept people with pre-existing conditions without financial penalty and have no caps on payouts and then cap the cost of the premiums. Even the 'fines' that are required for those that don't buy insurance are bad--it's cheaper to pay the fine and only buy insurance when you need it, and drop it again when you don't.
Johnny Seed
2:51 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Cowdung- You have it wrong and Patrick is on point. Right now we pay for all the medical care of those uninsured already. Anyone can tell you medical costs are overinflated to cover the uninsured this is common knowledge, what is wrong with making uninsured contribute to there medical care. And if you think insurance companies are going to go out of business your crazy, the profits and CEO pay is astronomical. Generally the people that are complaining to our congressmen are the ones that have something to lose, in this case its most frauds and cheats. Affordable Healthcare Obamacare protects the middle class taxpayers and provides a safety net for some poor while asking them to make a contribution to there healthcare.
CowDung
3:02 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
How exactly are the poor going to be able to make a contribution to their healthcare costs? One of the issues with Romneycare is that people that used to get free health care are now having to pay for it...
Johnny Seed
6:31 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Cowdung- Wisconsin was part of test for affordable healthcare bill it is called Badgercare Plus it provides low income familys a way to provide low cost health insurance for there children. A couple of years ago my friends income was reduced by 40% for about 10 months and they were able to pay 23.00 a month to insure their 9 year old son.
Geoff Tolley
1:48 pm on Tuesday, July 17, 2012
CowDung said: "The trouble is that Obamacare will end up driving the insurance companies out of business. You can't demand that they accept people with pre-existing conditions without financial penalty and have no caps on payouts and then cap the cost of the premiums"
The cost of premiums is capped to 125% of the amount spent on actual healthcare in the case of individual policies. Since spending on the healthcare of those with pre-existing conditions and those who require a lot of medical attention is wholly included in the latter, the only insurance companies that will go out of business are the ones that are grossly inefficient at providing actual healthcare to their customers who are paying for it.
Some state markets are dominated by utterly inefficient insurance companies, which is why the PPACA allows states with utterly inefficient markets to apply for temporary relaxations of this requirement to give such companies time to become more efficient so as to avoid their exit from the individual policy marketplace altogether. Some such waivers are granted; some are not.
Efficient insurance companies will survive and thrive; those which exist simply to exploit policyholders to pay for their own bureaucracy will not.
Bert
5:19 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012
Dung - Obamacare reduces the cost of that uninsured individuals place on the rest of us in two ways. For those who can afford insurance but choose not to purchase it, they now must purchase it. Thus, when they catch a bad case of the cancer, you and I don't get stuck with the bill. For those who can't afford insurance and will take advantage of the subsidies in Obamacare to gain coverage, the fact that they will now be getting preventative care that they couldn't afford before means that they will be less likely to end up in the (much more expensive) ER with a serious preventable illness.
As for the affordability of this package, it's not only the model in MA, but in a bunch of other countries as well. Germany, for example, has the same kind of mandated system provided for by private insurance companies. The system works well, is solvent, and the private companies remain profitable. The whole "sky is falling" argument about this is simple fear-mongering, that ignores the realities of every other similar system already in existence as well as the numerous studies that have shown how the plan will work.
John Wilson
10:05 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
The corpulent, ever bloviating ignoramus and ill-tempered, radical, right wing, gavel busting congressman from Wisconsin’s 5th district is back again, sowing division and discord over alleged “religious freedom violations…” apparently, we don’t have enough idiocy here in Wisconsin, yet…
Conversely, the use of the tax code, as written and enforced – the very one that Mr. Senselessbrenner helped design and promote/push into law – is now something odious and tyrannical, as it compels all businesses, including “religious affiliated businesses” to follow the tax code.
It is interesting and noteworthy here to understand that Mr. Senselessbrenner is purposely conflating religious institutions, such as a church, a synagogue, a mosque, with loosely affiliated religious hospitals, clinics, academic institutions, which typically employ and service people of all religions and non-denominational people, atheists and agnostic, as well. This, I an inane attempt to blur the very clear distinction between religion and loosely affiliated religious institutions. It is not working…
Framing this non-issue as an attack on religious freedom is deceitful and clearly disingenuous... One thing that Mr. Senselessbrenner has always been good at...
sparky
10:31 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Considering the Congresmans family made bundles on feminine hygene products you would think he would be more sympathetic towards womens healthcare.
Greg
10:55 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
Womens health care??? Do they have a cold?
Patrick
11:41 am on Monday, July 16, 2012
I encourage everyone to read for themselves the link attached. This is a short read from Forbes (conservative), speaks directly to the successes of the model used to craft the national reform. Contrary to all the rhetoric above, ITS WORKING and VERY popular among citizens and businesses alike. The public is done being fooled.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/01/20/romney-care-massachusetts-healthcare-reform/
Greg
2:43 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
As the linked article clearly shows, the ACA is something that should have been implemented at a state level. Massachusetts went through a lot of hoops and great expense to get a couple of percent more people covered.
I don't know that I consider Forbes "(conservative)", but I don't think the author is even close to conservative. His normal beat is Russia and China, not health care.
Do you understand that the ACA is probably not going to be "free" for anyone that has to pay now? If you are one bill away from financial ruin, the ACA may not be a great savior.
You say "The public is done being fooled", I say, as the public, I still don't have enough answers.
Keith Schmitz
5:00 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
State's rights is another flimsy phrase for coming out with a way for the states to avoid doing something.
Bert
5:23 pm on Thursday, July 19, 2012
ACA leaves the states a ton of leeway in designing their own insurance exchanges for individuals. It also provides significantly more money for the states to use to expand the low-income health programs they already have.
John Wilson
4:04 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Greg - Let me see now, ACA passed into law on March 13, 2010, that was 2-years, 4-months and 3-days ago. The Internet is replete with government information regarding the PPACA bill, including the actual bill; practically everyone in America has been discussing this bill, since its passage; insurance sites. AARP and many other sites have put out massive amounts of good information on this bill... and yet, you, speaking for all the public, "still don't have enough answers."
A suggestion, GOYA, Get Off Your Ass and READ! There is simply no excuse, especially after all this time has passed, for any reasonably intelligent citizen of this country to claim ignorance or lack of knowledge on something that effects EVERYONE, and 18% of our GDP...
Greg
4:54 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
SIUYA, I have read YPA. No excuse? So you completely understand how the ACA will affect every citizen, the health care industry, the health insurance industry, state taxes, federal taxes, etc.? YAFOS.
Keith Schmitz
5:01 pm on Monday, July 16, 2012
Why do you weep for the health insurance? They will have plenty in the way of profit and if they don't, no lose because they add nothing to the health care delivery system.
Bernard Forand
10:59 am on Monday, October 1, 2012
KEY word here is AFFILATED! Any religion conducting a business that is directed to the secular Free Trade Markets will abide by the law. Including Taxes, Insurances, Education, Hospitals and so on, that fall into the secular domains’. Its not for religions’ to continuously seek to rewrite our secular laws. Those Freedom Of Religion laws are there to protect religions. They are not there for any religion to use to lobby some representative to advance their desires to infiltrate our secular laws on the separation of church and government. When they do. They need to be held accountable from the micro infraction to the macro. F James should already have knowledge of this. This action he is advocating is in defiant to our U.S. Constitution. This a leader???