Free Markets, Free People


Quote of the Day–lefty logic edition

When is a penalty not a penalty?  Ask Rep Shelia Jackson-Lee (D-TX).  Yesterday she told the House Judiciary Committee that the requirement imposed on individuals to buy health insurance doesn’t really constitute a penalty for non-compliance:’

“I would make the argument, one, that instead it is an incentive to do right–that it is not penalizing because penalty is punishment,” Jackson-Lee told the Judiciary Committee.

[…]

“You’re not punished if you have health insurance, in fact. And so you are, in fact, incentivized to have health insurance, rather than take the negative which is to suggest that because we have a penalty you are being punished,” Rep. Jackson-Lee said.

“I am helping you. I am helping you not to have 26 percent un-insurance in the state of Texas. I’m helping children be insured. I’m helping diverse minorities be insured,” said Rep. Jackson-Lee. “And I know during the civil rights argument–even though we were arguing under the Constitution–there were many policy statements being made: Do we want to live in a nation that discriminates against a person because of the color of their skin? In addition to the constitutional argument, do we want to live in a nation where there are people being uninsured causing catastrophic costs unto the nation and others have to pay. I think that is the question that needs to be considered by the courts.”

Unfortunately for Rep. Jackson-Lee, who may have never actually read the bill, the law is quite specific about non-compliance.

“If an applicable individual fails to meet the requirement of subsection (a) [having a government-approved health-insurance policy]… there is hereby imposed a penalty with respect to the individual.”

And:

Elsewhere, in a section entitled “Payment of Penalty,” it says that individuals failing to carry a government-approved health insurance policy must pay a maximum penalty of $750.

Meanwhile back in the runaway logic train of Ms. Jackson-Lee:

“But I also need to say whether or not it is more an incentive than it is a punishment,” said Rep. Jackson-Lee. “I am more inspired by incentive. And I welcome it being a parking ticket. We get parking tickets all the time, and no one complains about being required to do the right thing.”

*Sigh*

One of those bright stars – because of the level of intrusion we’re allowed this government to make – who are making decisions about your life.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

8 Responses to Quote of the Day–lefty logic edition

  • What’s impressive is not that she’s so incoherent.  It’s that she’s incoherent for a politician.

  • I bet she sounded good saying it, though.

  • I’m helping diverse minorities be insured,” said Rep. Jackson-Lee.

    Those damn monolithic minorities…they are out in the the cold, honey!  They can get their own insurance.
    [face palm]
    On behalf of Texas…where we even go bigger idiots…I apologize.

  • This is actually a variant of the standard Leftists concept that: (1) Leftists know better than you what is in your best interest and that therefore (2) it is moral to force you to do something you don’t want. Leftists regard ordinary people as children that require the constant supervision of Leftists “adults”. Sometimes adults have to punish wayward children for their own benefit.
    The way to undermine this type of argument is attack the passive voice, the royal “we’ and the ambiguous term “people” by asking hypotheticals that are personal e.g. “Rep. Jackson-Lee are you saying that you personally require the government to force you to do something that is in your self interest? Do you believe yourself to dumb to manage your own health care?”
    Just keep pushing. Don’t let them try to weasel out of the personal case. Nobody wants to stand up and admit that they need nanny to run their lives.
     

    • “Leftists regard ordinary people as children that require the constant supervision of Leftists “adults”. Sometimes adults have to punish wayward children for their own benefit.”

      Let’s just shift that argument back, oh, say 150 years, and supply a slight change of subject and object.

      “Slave holders regard black people as children that require constant supervision of Slave holder ‘adults’.  Sometimes Slave Holders have to punish wayward black people for their own benefit”.

      Yeah, I think that’s pretty close to the sentiment of a certain segment of society at the time.

  • Ah, Shelia Jackson-Dumpty – “Penalty” doesn’t mean “punishment” because that’s not what she wants it to mean today.

  • I would make the argument, one, that instead it is an incentive to do right–that it is not penalizing because penalty is punishment,” Jackson-Lee told the Judiciary Committee.

    First of all, the presence of this drooling idiot in the Congress is more evidence (if there need be any) of what a joke that institution is.  Could the voters of her district have found a more stupid person to represent them if they tried???

    Second, her “argument” is ludicrous.  It’s akin to arguing that the death penalty is an “incentive to do right”.  I wonder how she’d feel if somebody stood over her with a hickory club, threatening to beat the hell out of her if she didn’t “do right”.  Would she bask in the experience, enjoying the “incentive”, or would she be fearful and resentful of this literal Sword of Damocles hanging over her head?  I’m guessing the latter.