When it helps to create an obnoxious and freedom trampling law, it is not a tax, but when the law needs constitutional justification, that justification is based on its being a tax. There is a parallel now with the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, whose Paris Climate Treaty Secretary of State John Kerry signed on Earth Day without ratification by the U.S. Senate as is required by the Constitution for a treaty. Obama insisted the UNFCCC was not a treaty, so it did not need to be ratified by the Senate.
Twenty-eight Senators sent a letter to Secretary of State Kerry pointing out that his signing the UNFCCC violated laws passed in 1994 and 1990 which did not allow the funding of an affiliated organization of the United Nations that provided Palestine with a state membership. Palestine signed the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and crowed about its statehood status as a signatory. This has not in the least deterred Obama's intention to fund the Green Climate Fund set up by the UNFCCC and controlled by its executive and a large staff funded with an annual budget of $60 million.
Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Julia Frifield wrote to Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.):
It is our view that neither the restriction referenced in your letter, section 410 of Public Law 103-236, nor the restriction contained in section 414 of Public Law 101-246, have been triggered by the Palestinians’ purported accession to the UNFCCC. The UNFCCC is a treaty, and the Palestinians’ purported accession to it does not involve their becoming members of any UN specialized agency or, indeed any international organization.How interesting. The UNFCCC is not a UN affiliated organization, it is a Treaty. The laws prohibiting Obama's funding of a UN affiliated organization treating Palestine as a nation do not apply because the UNFCCC, despite its large staff and its association with the U.N., is not an organization of the U.N. No, it is a Treaty, and Palestine just happened to agree to the Treaty.
OK, so if it is a Treaty, why has Secretary of State John Kerry signed a Treaty under Obama's orders in clear violation of the constitutional requirement that a Treaty be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Senate?
Because as I have said of Obama since the early days of his first campaign for the presidency, his purpose is solely the advance of socialism. When he took the Oath of Office:
I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.Obama was lying. He has consistently thumbed his nose at the Constitution. He has, as he said when he was a state Senator in the Illinois legislature, viewed the Constitution as the enemy of socialism and therefore as his enemy. It is Obama's pleasure to undermine the Constitution in every way he can and to eschew the Rule of Law in every way he can. In funding a U.N. organization in violation of U.S. law and in signing a treaty in violation of the Constitution, he is, as usual, consistent with his personal creed that socialism is his ultimate political value. There is nothing subtle about his subversion. There will be nothing subtle about Hillary's subversion either if she becomes President.