Someone near me (doesn’t matter who) brought up the notion that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA, aka “Obamacare”) singles out Muslims for exemption from the mandatory coverage clause.
The person referenced a web page apparently rounding the top of some search engines which talks about this mysterious word. It’s “ask marion” or something (I refuse to add a link to contribute to the page ranking of such a made up load of claptrap).
The author of the web page made an outrageous and easily disprovable lie. She said, “Obama used [the word dhimmitude] in the health care bill.” The rest of the web page is her expressing outrage based on this fabrication.
She even includes a link to snopes.com, which suggests that her claim is a “mixture” of truth and non-truth. Most people will probably not read the whole article, and will only see the red and green dot, and then conclude that she’s not making it up. She even goes so far as to claim it’s on page 107 of the bill.
Maybe it was on the House Resolution, once (House Resolution 3962). But it is definitely not in the actual law.
Her claim is not even close to true.
Did I rely on some liberal leftist journalist to check this out?
No. I relied on the easy-to-check source material itself.
And so will you, now!
Here we go!
Grab any search engine (try www.usa.gov, the primary portal and search engine for the United States Government) and look for the official title of the bill: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Do not click Wikipedia (because it is not an official source and can be edited by anyone).
Find the official text of the Act at a United States Government web site (ends with “.gov”). I found it at the U.S. Senate Democrats web site, http://democrats.senate.gov/pdfs/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act-as-passed.pdf.
It’s a 906-page PDF. Download it.
It’s also at http://docs.house.gov/energycommerce/ppacacon.pdf. The pages won’t match, but the sections numbers will.
Scroll to page 107. She must have been referring to something important. She was. Here are pages 107 and 108 in their entirety copied, without editing, from the text. For cross-reference purposes, this is Section 1411, sub-section (b), paragraph (5).
H. R. 3590—107
(3) ELIGIBILITY AND AMOUNT OF TAX CREDIT OR REDUCED
COST-SHARING.—In the case of an enrollee with respect to whom
a premium tax credit or reduced cost-sharing under section
36B of such Code or section 1402 is being claimed, the following
(A) INFORMATION REGARDING INCOME AND FAMILY
SIZE.—The information described in section 6103(l)(21) for
the taxable year ending with or within the second calendar
year preceding the calendar year in which the plan year
(B) CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES.—The information
described in section 1412(b)(2), including information with
respect to individuals who were not required to file an
income tax return for the taxable year described in
subparagraph (A) or individuals who experienced changes
in marital status or family size or significant reductions
(4) EMPLOYER-SPONSORED COVERAGE.—In the case of an
enrollee with respect to whom eligibility for a premium tax
credit under section 36B of such Code or cost-sharing reduction
under section 1402 is being established on the basis that the
enrollee’s (or related individual’s) employer is not treated under
section 36B(c)(2)(C) of such Code as providing minimum essential
coverage or affordable minimum essential coverage, the
(A) The name, address, and employer identification
number (if available) of the employer.
(B) Whether the enrollee or individual is a full-time
employee and whether the employer provides such minimum
(C) If the employer provides such minimum essential
coverage, the lowest cost option for the enrollee’s or individual’s
enrollment status and the enrollee’s or individual’s
required contribution (within the meaning of section
5000A(e)(1)(B) of such Code) under the employer-sponsored
(D) If an enrollee claims an employer’s minimum essential
coverage is unaffordable, the information described
in paragraph (3).
If an enrollee changes employment or obtains additional
employment while enrolled in a qualified health plan for which
such credit or reduction is allowed, the enrollee shall notify
the Exchange of such change or additional employment and
provide the information described in this paragraph with
respect to the new employer.
(5) EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.—
In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption
certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement
or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following
(A) In the case of an individual seeking exemption
based on the individual’s status as a member of an exempt
religious sect or division, as a member of a health care
sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible
for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary
H. R. 3590—108
(B) In the case of an individual seeking exemption
based on the lack of affordable coverage or the individual’s
status as a taxpayer with household income less than 100
percent of the poverty line, the information described in
paragraphs (3) and (4), as applicable.
(c) VERIFICATION OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN RECORDS OF
SPECIFIC FEDERAL OFFICIALS.—
(1) INFORMATION TRANSFERRED TO SECRETARY.—An
Exchange shall submit the information provided by an applicant
under subsection (b) to the Secretary for verification in accordance
with the requirements of this subsection and subsection
(2) CITIZENSHIP OR IMMIGRATION STATUS.—
(A) COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY.—The Secretary
shall submit to the Commissioner of Social Security
the following information for a determination as to whether
the information provided is consistent with the information
in the records of the Commissioner:
(i) The name, date of birth, and social security
number of each individual for whom such information
was provided under subsection (b)(2).
(ii) The attestation of an individual that the individual
is a citizen.
(B) SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY.—
(i) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual—
(I) who attests that the individual is an alien
lawfully present in the United States; or
(II) who attests that the individual is a citizen
but with respect to whom the Commissioner of
Social Security has notified the Secretary under
subsection (e)(3) that the attestation is inconsistent
with information in the records maintained by the
the Secretary shall submit to the Secretary of Homeland
Security the information described in clause (ii)
for a determination as to whether the information provided
is consistent with the information in the records
of the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(ii) INFORMATION.—The information described in
clause (ii) is the following:
(I) The name, date of birth, and any identifying
information with respect to the individual’s
immigration status provided under subsection
(II) The attestation that the individual is an
alien lawfully present in the United States or in
the case of an individual described in clause (i)(II),
the attestation that the individual is a citizen.
(3) ELIGIBILITY FOR TAX CREDIT AND COST-SHARING REDUCTION.—
The Secretary shall submit the information described
in subsection (b)(3)(A) provided under paragraph (3), (4), or
(5) of subsection (b) to the Secretary of the Treasury for
verification of household income and family size for purposes
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, in consultation with
the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Homeland
Riveting stuff. So, I’ve highlighted the important part, as you can tell if you read the stuff before and after it.
I don’t see “dhimmitude” there at all.
Maybe ask marion got the page wrong.
Open the search feature. Search for “dhim”. Just “dhim”. Not even “dhimmitude”, although you can if you like. It’s just easier to spell “dhim”.
Hm. That’s not encouraging for ask marion.
Try it with other letters, just to make sure that it finds partial matches. Try “tude”. Try “over”. Whatever you want. Those should find something. You just want to make sure that your search is working, that it’s not case sensitive, and isn’t looking for whole words. Click the down arrow next to the search box.
No check marks next to those options.
And no matches for “dhim”.
So, let’s go back to where we were.
I am not a lawyer, but in simple terms this is just saying that there are requirements to fulfill for people who believe they should be exempt from the responsibility to pay for coverage (the “individual mandate”). The exemption must be qualified with an “exemption certificate,” which is described elsewhere.
Ah-HA! This must be where the Muslims are getting their built-in, guaranteed exemption, right?
Well, it obviously doesn’t say so right out in the open here. We’ll have to keep looking.
There is a cross reference to another section of this document, as well as a cross reference to the U.S. Code (the official laws of our great nation). We’ll go to these other sections to see if we can find the “dhimmitude” thing.
“Section 1311(d)(4)(H)” simply means “Section 1311, sub-section (d), paragraph (4), clause (H)”. If you go to the Table of Contents of the PPACA, you’ll find that section 1311 starts Part II of Subtitle C, and can be found on page 55. Sub-section (d) begins on page 58. Paragraph (4) begins towards the bottom of page 58, titled “FUNCTIONS.” It’s talking about what an insurance exchange must do at a minimum. Clause (H) begins on page 59. Here it is, copied verbatim.
H. R. 3590—59
(H) subject to section 1411, grant a certification
attesting that, for purposes of the individual responsibility
penalty under section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986, an individual is exempt from the individual
requirement or from the penalty imposed by such section
(i) there is no affordable qualified health plan
available through the Exchange, or the individual’s
employer, covering the individual; or
(ii) the individual meets the requirements for any
other such exemption from the individual responsibility
requirement or penalty;
You can read the stuff before and after it, but there’s nothing before or after that talks about exemptions. (Be careful; the indentation is sometimes a little goofy; pay attention to the outlining numbers and letters only.)
This clause (H) basically means that the exchange must, subject to section 1411 (that’s the section we partially looked at earlier), grant certificates of exemption. Exemption to what? To the law that says everyone must pay into the “individual mandate” which is described in section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The who-di-what? That’s just a reference to the laws of the United States, the “Code”.
Let’s go see that code. That must be where the “dhimmitude” is.
We’ll go back to our search engine, searching for “United States Code”, clicking only on a link from an official source (usually something ending with .gov). It looks like the Government Printing Office has a copy, which just makes sense. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/, and click on “United States Code” over on the right side (under “Featured Collections”).
We want the most current stuff, so we choose the latest year. On this system, it’s dated 2010. If you find a newer one, good for you. I didn’t find one.
What a mess! There are a lot of laws!
We just need section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code. The titles of the codes seem to be arranged alphabetically.
We’ll click on Title 27 – Internal Revenue Code, and there we’ll see that there are a lot of Subtitles grouping many sections.
I think we want “Subtitle D - Miscellaneous Excise Taxes (sections 4001 - 5000C)”.
Clicking that reveals a link to “CHAPTER 48 - MAINTENANCE OF MINIMUM ESSENTIAL COVERAGE (section 5000A)”. Bingo.
I’m getting excited! We’re about to find “dhimmitude” written right into the very laws of the U.S.
I feel a little like Nicolas Cage’s character Benjamin Gates in National Treasure, about to reveal a secret plot to turn the U.S. into an Islamic, sharia-style state! I better get my hair cut nice for all the swarms of reporters begging to interview me on live TV.
Let’s click the link to download that bad puppy as a PDF.
Five pages, all about the “individual mandate.” First, we search for “dhim” again.
Drat. No hits. Well, it can’t be that easy, or else it would have shown up in a basic web search. Let’s try reading this a little.
Subsection (a): Requirement to maintain minimum essential coverage
That won’t have it. It’s just saying what this section is.
Subsection (b) Shared responsibility payment
That’s just saying we have to share the responsibility.
Oh, boy! That sounds like socialism to me!
The responsibility should be left to the individual, not the government.
Of course, when someone’s life is at stake and they can’t pay their responsibility, the hospital and providers will have to be responsible, and that means they’ll spread the costs around, and then insurance will have to pay, so it winds up being shared responsibility anyway, except that uninsured people who could buy insurance but choose not to are just getting away with free health services. That sounds like theft to me.
But hey, a system that encourages outright theft beats anything even slightly resembling socialism, right?
Let’s keep going.
Subsection (c) Amount of penalty
This just says how they’ll charge you if you try to avoid paying.
In business, this would be seen as proper cash flow management.
In government, it’s just the government trying to take your money to “redistribute the wealth.”
It’s a good thing that we don’t think about voting for people based on whether they claim to be good business people. Otherwise, they’d get really good at taking care of the cash flow, if you know what I mean.
Subsection (d) Applicable individual
It gets more interesting now. Specifically, Paragraph (2) which talks about “Religious exemptions”. Jackpot!
It has a back reference to Section 1311(d)(4)(H) of the PPACA. Those people get exemptions. But we already read that part!
There’s this little bit:
(i) a member of a recognized religious
sect or division thereof which is described
in section 1402(g)(1), and
(ii) an adherent of established tenets or
teachings of such sect or division as described
in such section.
Another reference, this one to Section 1402(g)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code (it’s not back in PPACA; there is no Section 1402(g) in PPACA, it ends with 1402(f)). Those people get exemptions.
We’ll come back to these. Let’s finish reading this section 5000A.
Some stuff about “health care sharing ministry.” It specifically targets any not-for-profit group that takes care of its members, and those members don’t go to public hospitals for unpaid-for care. Not just Muslims.
So, if you are in a cult, religion, or some other group that believes, for example, that the only medication you need is the “laying on of hands” or “lots of sincere prayer” then you don’t have to pay into the individual mandate, but then you will also probably meet your Maker before the rest of us, so have fun with that.
Subsection (e) Exemptions
Oddly, there really isn’t much in the Exemption subsection about religious groups. Just various explanations why you may not have to be part of the “individual mandate” for this that and the other reason.
Subsection (f) Minimum essential coverage
Subsection (g) Administration and procedure
Nothing interesting here.
Let’s go to that back-reference to section 1402(g)(1).
Going back to the GPO search site, we can find that section 1402 of the Internal Revenue Code is in Subtitle A, “CHAPTER 2 - TAX ON SELF-EMPLOYMENT INCOME (sections 1401 - 1403)”. We’ll open the PDF for that.
It’s a 20-page document. Section 1402 begins on page 5, titled “Definitions".
Of course, you have already searched for “dhim” and found nothing.
You have also been searching for “muslim” and “islam”, right? No?! Go back and do that! Now!
How are all the Muslim people going to exercise their dhimmitude over the U.S. if they don’t put it into the law somewhere?
So, on to 1402(g)(1). Page 5.
Subsection (g) is “Members of certain religious faiths”, and paragraph (1) is “Exemption”. Here it is, verbatim:
Any individual may file an application (in
such form and manner, and with such official,
as may be prescribed by regulations under this
chapter) for an exemption from the tax imposed
by this chapter if he is a member of a
recognized religious sect or division thereof
and is an adherent of established tenets or
teachings of such sect or division by reason of
which he is conscientiously opposed to acceptance
of the benefits of any private or public
insurance which makes payments in the event
of death, disability, old-age, or retirement or
makes payments toward the cost of, or provides
services for, medical care (including the
benefits of any insurance system established
by the Social Security Act). Such exemption
may be granted only if the application contains
or is accompanied by—
(A) such evidence of such individual’s
membership in, and adherence to the tenets
or teachings of, the sect or division thereof
as the Secretary may require for purposes of
determining such individual’s compliance
with the preceding sentence, and
(B) his waiver of all benefits and other
payments under titles II and XVIII of the
Social Security Act on the basis of his wages
and self-employment income as well as all
such benefits and other payments to him on
the basis of the wages and self-employment
income of any other person,
and only if the Commissioner of Social Security
(C) such sect or division thereof has the established
tenets or teachings referred to in
the preceding sentence,
(D) it is the practice, and has been for a period
of time which he deems to be substantial,
for members of such sect or division
thereof to make provision for their dependent
members which in his judgment is reasonable
in view of their general level of living,
(E) such sect or division thereof has been
in existence at all times since December 31,
An exemption may not be granted to any individual
if any benefit or other payment referred
to in subparagraph (B) became payable (or, but
for section 203 or 222(b) of the Social Security
Act, would have become payable) at or before
the time of the filing of such waiver.
Wait, what?! Look at what I highlighted.
The only way to get an exemption is to refuse to accept the benefits of any insurance at all?!
Hey, ask Marion.
I think you need to explain this a little better.
Because right now, it looks a lot like you just made up some anti-Islam bullshit to scare people away from the Affordable Care Act.
And I bet you think that you’re doing something Jesus would be proud of you for doing.
I bet you’re wrong.