Obama Bypassing Congress to Enact New Taxes - second congress bypass

All along I have been hearing chatter about Obama's new cell phone tax. But what I didn't know is that he is bypassing congress to do this. I have reported previously about him threatening to bypass congress by using federal agencies. His first act was telling the EPA chief Gina McCarthy to enact rules to ensure that his climate change plan gets implemented since congress would not do this. Now this new tax will be his second. I plan on keeping track of each and every one of Obama's attempts to bypass congress.

BOULDER, Colo. | EPA chief Gina McCarthy said Wednesday that the Obama administration is finished waiting for Congress to act on climate change and plans to bypass the legislative branch in developing a federal response.

On climate change, Obama, EPA plan action without Congress


Ok now on to our supreme rulers most recent blatant thumbing of his nose to congress. Remember we are a country ruled by the people, and we elect our congress members to represent our will. I am not saying that the program funded by this is wrong, he is just going about this the wrong way.

Obama is sidestepping Congress once again. This time, the unconstitutional act is in an effort to raise $6 Billion in new taxes to put WiFi in public schools across America. Rather than waste his time with the Constitution and Congress, Obama is going straight to the FCC to lobby for the new taxes. The new tax will apply to every American who uses a cellphone.

The proposal has gone mostly unnoticed. It was quietly introduced over the Summer under the name ConnectEd. The White House proposal specifically states:

Now according to this, this act by Obama will be unconstitutional.

Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution clearly states: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes. You will notice it does not say the President, or a regulatory board under the influence of the President. According

Obama Bypassing Congress to Enact New Taxes


Here is a video that shows some pros and cons to Obama bypassing congress for this tax. Also on the tail end of this clip, Oliver stone, an extreme leftist, calls Obama a snake that we have to turn on. And he compares Obama to J Edgar Hoover.

Video - President Obama Going Alone

I wonder if someone will try to rationalize this by thinking that 'Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution clearly states: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes.' does not expressly forbid the president from the doing the same thing.

This reminds me of the "Pirates Code" from the film pirates of the carribean. In the words of Captain Barbossa:




Is the constitution just a guideline now?

Yarggg

From what I gather, Obama is simply asking the FCC to update its E-Rate program which is supported by the Universal Service Fund. Most of this has been implemented since the 1996 Telecommunications act passed by Congress. The FCC collects funds from telecommunication companies. In the end, FCC makes the decision whether to implement Obama's plan.

E-Rate

Administrator USF

Who Pays for Universal Service? All telecommunications service providers and certain other providers of telecommunications must contribute to the federal USF based on a percentage of their interstate and international end-user telecommunications revenues.

The FCC does not require this charge to be passed on to customers. Each company makes a business decision about whether and how to assess charges to recover its Universal Service costs. These charges usually appear as a percentage of the consumer’s phone bill.

www.fcc.gov...

Peace

reply to post by MDDoxs


And people really wonder why those of us that earn higher incomes seek to reduce our tax liability.

Yeah big Govt!!!!!!!

From your link:

He is further directing the federal government to make better use of existing funds to get this
technology into classrooms, and into the hands of teachers trained on its advantages.

Doesn't sound like a new tax to me. But of course, he must be lying because we all know that he is a reptilian shape-shifter, bent on the earth's destruction.

I just got oil and a new addition to the bill exists. It has a federal and state LUST tax. I guess from researching it the tax is for underground storage tanks. I suppose they seperated it from the tax they were collecting from the businesses and put it on the consumer. I doubt if they reduced the businesses taxes, so in essence it may be an additional tax. It doesn't add up to much on my bill, only a little over two bucks. Seems that the tax will not even cover the cost of the extra labor to collect the money. It probably means they created extra jobs within the government and were looking for ways to fund it.:shk:

Originally posted by kaylaluv
From your link:

He is further directing the federal government to make better use of existing funds to get this
technology into classrooms, and into the hands of teachers trained on its advantages.

Doesn't sound like a new tax to me. But of course, he must be lying because we all know that he is a reptilian shape-shifter, bent on the earth's destruction.

So you are saying that if it is a good program, then it is ok to do this? So what if he decides that everyone deserves a computer in their house? Can he increase income taxes to do this? Or maybe he can decide to charge everyone a fee so he can place a NSA video cam into every house. Because it is for the good of everyone to keep them safe?

So you think it is a good thing for the president to just decree new charges on your bills on whim?

And this is a tax. A fee is just another name for a tax. Will you pay more out of your pocket every month? So then there you have it..

reply to post by jam321


All he is doing.... Since when does a president have a hand in determining what you pay for anything?

reply to post by elouina


I'm starting to notice a pattern here, you seem to like to post lies.

Fact 1: This is not a "tax", it is an existing fee that is already in place and every cell phone user is already paying.
Fact 2: The proposal is to raise the current fee, not implement a new one.
Fact 3: The FCC has control over what the fee is set at, they don't need congressional approval to change it.

I'm noticing another pattern with the sources you use and other Obama haters use...they are all the same...WND, Ben Swann, NYPost, Daily Caller, etc. And they all have one thing in common, They distort the facts enough and in a way that they KNOW will confuse the less intelligent of our society...and damn does it work good.

I bet you rant against propaganda...but you are a victim of it.

reply to post by elouina

So you think it is a good thing for the president to just decree new charges on your bills on whim?

And this is a tax. A fee is just another name for a tax. Will you pay more out of your pocket every month? So then there you have it..

The President wouldn't be doing anything, it would be the FCC. And they wouldn't be adding charges onto your bill, your cell phone provider would be. The fee is paid by the company, not by the cell phone user. It's just that the corporations, which are beloved by the Right, pass this fee onto the customer so they can continue to make their millions of dollars and live in their mansions.

This is not a tax, this if a fee...a fee is a payment for a service, a tax is not.

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by jam321

 

All he is doing.... Since when does a president have a hand in determining what you pay for anything?

Oh and the "small fee" is $5 a month for this $4-6 billion proposal. Yes $5 a month which comes out to $60 a year per phone. You have 3 phones in your house? This would be $180 a year.

You are not looking at some stupid little $12 a year 911 fee, you are looking at what could be hundreds of dollars.

edit on 16-8-2013 by elouina because: (no reason given)

It's estimated at $5 a YEAR for each cell phone customer, not a month.

Get your facts straight, this is your own story.

Obama is a progressive.

He'd tax death if he could.
taxestaxestaxes.

Wealth redistribution any way he can.

reply to post by AlienScience


I see the pattern also you going to every thread calling people dumb. Who does the FCC work for? Who appoints FCC commissioner?? Yea so the potus is raising taxes.

Originally posted by AlienScience
The President wouldn't be doing anything, it would be the FCC. And they wouldn't be adding charges onto your bill, your cell phone provider would be. The fee is paid by the company, not by the cell phone user. It's just that the corporations, which are beloved by the Right, pass this fee onto the customer so they can continue to make their millions of dollars and live in their mansions.

This is not a tax, this if a fee...a fee is a payment for a service, a tax is not.

The head of the FCC serves at the pleasure of the President. Do you really think that he is going to go against Obama's wishes? By the way, what service is the FCC providing to earn that fee? In 1934 the Federal Government under FDR, declared that they owned all frequencies used by radio, since updated to include all frequencies used by any form of communication. Broadcasters have to pay a FEE to the FCC in order to be allotted a frequency.

Originally posted by AlienScience
reply to post by elouina

 

I'm starting to notice a pattern here, you seem to like to post lies.

Fact 1: This is not a "tax", it is an existing fee that is already in place and every cell phone user is already paying.
Fact 2: The proposal is to raise the current fee, not implement a new one.
Fact 3: The FCC has control over what the fee is set at, they don't need congressional approval to change it.

I'm noticing another pattern with the sources you use and other Obama haters use...they are all the same...WND, Ben Swann, NYPost, Daily Caller, etc. And they all have one thing in common, They distort the facts enough and in a way that they KNOW will confuse the less intelligent of our society...and damn does it work good.

I bet you rant against propaganda...but you are a victim of it.

1. No the lie is that this fee is actually a tax and a loophole that our "honest" president is using.
2. Oh so tacking it on to something else suddenly makes it ok?
3. Exactly thus why he is dictating that they do this for him. Oh an honest president that uses loopholes, lovely...

Local, state and federal governments, 911 systems and even school districts tack on taxes and surcharges to your wireless bill that end up costing American cell phone customers an extra 17.2%, on average, according to the Tax Foundation. That's up from 16.3% fifteen months ago.

For consumers accustomed to single-digit sales taxes, these double-digit fees can appear unusually burdensome. But unlike sales, income or property taxes, wireless taxes remain largely hidden -- tacked on to the end of your monthly wireless bill and often ignored.

They shouldn't be. A $60 cell phone bill actually costs the average customer $70.32.

The hidden 17% tax: Your cell phone bill

How can you spot an Obama lover is in a crowd? When they in say that presidential dictated fees are WONDERFUL!

Originally posted by AlienScience

Originally posted by elouina
reply to post by jam321

 

All he is doing.... Since when does a president have a hand in determining what you pay for anything?

Oh and the "small fee" is $5 a month for this $4-6 billion proposal. Yes $5 a month which comes out to $60 a year per phone. You have 3 phones in your house? This would be $180 a year.

You are not looking at some stupid little $12 a year 911 fee, you are looking at what could be hundreds of dollars.

edit on 16-8-2013 by elouina because: (no reason given)

It's estimated at $5 a YEAR for each cell phone customer, not a month.

Get your facts straight, this is your own story.

This is the only point I will agree with, it is $5 per year. I will correct my post. But still, the amount of the "fee" doesn't suddenly make this acceptable.

Originally posted by elouina

Originally posted by AlienScience
reply to post by elouina

 

How can you spot an Obama lover is in a crowd?

Look for the ''hope and change'' decal on there obama phones.

reply to post by JIMC5499

The head of the FCC serves at the pleasure of the President. Do you really think that he is going to go against Obama's wishes? By the way, what service is the FCC providing to earn that fee? In 1934 the Federal Government under FDR, declared that they owned all frequencies used by radio, since updated to include all frequencies used by any form of communication. Broadcasters have to pay a FEE to the FCC in order to be allotted a frequency.

Yes, someone needs to allocate frequencies...it isn't something a State can do because frequencies cross state lines. And it isn't something that should be controlled by a corporation because frequencies are a matter of national security.

So yes, if you want to use a frequency, you have to pay a fee to the organization that controls, regulates, and makes sure these frequencies are allocated correctly so they don't interfere with others.

Would you rather live in a world where no one controls and regulates who uses which frequencies?

reply to post by elouina

1. No the lie is that this fee is actually a tax and a loophole that our "honest" president is using.
2. Oh so tacking it on to something else suddenly makes it ok?
3. Exactly thus why he is dictating that they do this for him. Oh an honest president that uses loopholes, lovely...

1. The fee is an existing fee paid to the FCC for it's services. I know people hate government, but think about it for a minute what the world and our technology would be like if no one controlled and regulated the airwaves.

2. It's not tacking it on, this is an existing fee and an existing program, expanding one would almost have to increase the other.

3. There is no loophole, this is standard operating procedure. Not everything needs congressional approval, they don't dictate or have the authority to dictate every single thing every single agency operates or how they spend their funds or what they set their fees at.


This fee isn't administered to you, it is administered to the cell phone companies. If you don't like the company passing that fee onto you, have a discussion with them.

I for one have zero problem for this because expanding WIFI in public schools is one of the better ways to spend our money.

The question is, do you think expanding WIFI in our schools is a good idea or not? Do you think it is a good investment in our future? If so, how else would you propose to pay for it?

Originally posted by AlienScience
reply to post by elouina

 

So you think it is a good thing for the president to just decree new charges on your bills on whim?

And this is a tax. A fee is just another name for a tax. Will you pay more out of your pocket every month? So then there you have it..

The President wouldn't be doing anything, it would be the FCC. And they wouldn't be adding charges onto your bill, your cell phone provider would be. The fee is paid by the company, not by the cell phone user. It's just that the corporations, which are beloved by the Right, pass this fee onto the customer so they can continue to make their millions of dollars and live in their mansions.

This is not a tax, this if a fee...a fee is a payment for a service, a tax is not.

So the president is telling the FCC to do this, but he is not responsible? Now this is an absolutely ridiculous idea... And what do you expect a company to do, lose profits every time the government adds another "hidden fee"? Of course this will be passed on. And any moron in the street can tell you that fees and surcharges are taxes.