An article at the WSJ, outlines an interview of President Obama on ABC’s “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos. In the interview, Stephanopoulos asked the President about the “Individual Mandate” in Baucus’s senate healthcare bill, which the President supports. The “individual mandate” would require anyone that did not purchase health care to pay a penalty (according to Mr. Obama, not a tax) of $3,800 a year.

This mandate would, in effect, force people to spend money (on a service which the Government provides) and fine them if they didn’t want to. If that’s not a tax, I don’t know what is. Here are some quotes from the interview:

“Well, hold on a second, George,” Mr. Obama replied. “Here’s what’s happening. You and I are both paying $900, on average—our families—in higher premiums because of uncompensated care. Now what I’ve said is that if you can’t afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn’t be punished for that. That’s just piling on. If, on the other hand, we’re giving tax credits, we’ve set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we’ve driven down the costs, we’ve done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you’ve just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances.  And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that’s . . .”

“That may be,” Mr. Stephanopoulos responded, “but it’s still a tax increase.” (In fact, uncompensated care accounts for about only 2.2% of national health spending today, but that’s another subject.)

Mr. Obama: “No. That’s not true, George. The—for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore . . .” In other words, like parents talking to their children, this levy—don’t call it a tax—is for your own good.

Mr. Stephanopoulos tried again: “But it may be fair, it may be good public policy—”

Mr. Obama: “No, but—but, George, you—you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase.”

“I don’t think I’m making it up,” Mr. Stephanopoulos said. He then had the temerity to challenge the Philologist in Chief, with an assist from Merriam-Webster. He cited that dictionary’s definition of “tax”—”a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.”

Mr. Obama: “George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. . . .”

Mr. Stephanopoulos: ”I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.”

Mr. Obama: ”My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but . . .”

Mr. Stephanopoulos: “But you reject that it’s a tax increase?”

Mr. Obama: “I absolutely reject that notion.”

The Congressional Budget Office forecasts that the mandate will result in $20 Billion in revenues over 10 years (from people that opt out of Obamacare, or who can’t afford it). If that revenue isn’t tax revenue, then what is it?

Obama’s argument basically says that if the Government is providing a service (for your own “good”) with charges that it “mandates”, it can’t be called a tax. If that is the case, then taxes don’t exist at all under the Obama administration. Wouldn’t he look nice if he were able to claim that he didn’t increase taxes on the “middle class” during his next election?