I’ll Gladly Take The Constitution Over Precedent

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

I’ll Gladly Take The Constitution Over Precedent

Written By : Brian Garst

The LA Times gloats that precedent is against the states seeking to protect their sovereignty in the face of Obamacare unconstitutional onslaught.

Reporting from Washington – Lawsuits from 14 states challenging the constitutionality of the new national healthcare law face an uphill battle, largely due to a far-reaching Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that upheld federal restrictions on home-grown marijuana in California.

At issue in that case — just like in the upcoming challenges to the healthcare overhaul — was the reach of the federal government’s power.

…They said the Constitution gave Congress nearly unlimited power to regulate the marketplace as part of its authority “to regulate commerce.”

…The decision throws up a significant hurdle for the lawsuit filed last week in federal court by 13 state attorneys — all but one a Republican. The Virginia attorney general filed a similar, but separate suit.

The article later got more ridiculous: “While the Bill of Rights put clear limits on the government’s power to interfere with an individual’s freedom of speech or free exercise of religion, the Constitution does not put clear limits on Congress’ power.”

Bull.

The Constitution puts quite clear limitations on the power of Congress. It gives Congress specific and enumerated powers, and anything else is off limits. It can’t get any clearer. That the courts, at the behest of Progressives who fundamentally don’t like the Constitution, have got it wrong for 80 years doesn’t change this.

Even after the horribly decided Raich case, there’s still no clear precedent showing that Congress has the authority to force purchase of a good. If they have such a power, then they have all powers and we’re no longer living in a Constitutional Republic.

Given the courts’ sorry history in the defense of liberty and constitutionality, I’m hardly holding my breath on these challenges. But to say that there is any precedent to support what this bill does is simply false. Even for a government with a history of overreaching, this is something new.

Still, maybe the states don’t have precedent on their side, but they have something better: the Constitution.

Cross-posted at Conservative Compendium.

WEC

The Individual Mandate is clearly Unconstitutional!

The Individual Mandate attempts to regulate INACTIVITY!

The federal government is attempting to force individual who are NOT engaging in commerce to do so! These individual who freely choose to pay their own HC bills are not harming anyone nor can be said to be disrupting commerce! And they are being dictated to buy a specific private product from another private entity by use of government power!

In short, the Federal government is attempting to force you to Contract with another private party!

Yes, the Individual Mandate is a huge and unprecidented danger to personal freedom and Individual Rights!

Anything less the its abolishement by the courts essentially sets us up for Unlimted governmental powers – this is a tremendous threat to freedom and Individual Rights!

This transfer of unchecked power from the citizen to the state is essentially an attempt by a small cabal of leftist radicals to overturn the American Revolution itself!

Soverignity will essentially be transfered from the citizen to the state – a CounterRevolution that transfers power to a small group of politically connected elites and unelected politicians – a regression back to a all-powerful, centralized government run by a new Aristocracy of politcans, uber wealthy, and unelected technocrats!

We will no longer be citizens but serfs who are enslaved to our new Masters who have deem themselves worthy of dictating every particular of our lives and lay claim to our incomes to go with their new power to dictate we engage in any behavior them deem “good for us” (while prohibiting all they see unfit)!
The power that this would give the Federal government is so vast that it we cannot in any creditable way to that we would truly be free and independent people in any meaningful way!

Underestimating this or saying its not cause for alarm is truely a severe underestimation of the threat to our Liberty!

The GOP & Conservatives needs to strongly advocate for the cause of Human Freedom – if its lost here, where will it ever be regained?
tblrk2006

Posted by WEC
2010-03-27 03:30:44

This is correct. They cannot call the absence of commerce, commerce. There is no proof that person will ever need health care insurance while they choose to be uninsured. The govt is basically saying that people without insurance are guilty of milking the system while not paying into it…..all without proof that is happening. A lot of young people choose not to get insurance b/c they are healthy. That is their damn freedom to do so. You can still pay for a doctor visit with cash or credit card last time I checked. Yes, it is a good idea to purchase catastrophic health insurance…..but it is a freedom and personal responsibility of that individual….not barak hussein obama. Not to mention we are now placing doctors and health care providers in a possition that make them second to the person in need or want of the care.
D-Vega

You are forced, you are taxed otherwise.

Its not different than other taxes that you pay under certain circumstances.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

The stats can just refuse to assist the federal government in prosecuting citizens living there for failing to obey this law – and work against every step of the way.

Taxing someone as punishment for failing to do something is a bit more like a fee or a fine than taxing, its deliberate punishment. That’s state based coercion no matter what you name it, no matter what the circumstances are. That might be acceptable in different circumstances, but to force people to do something unconstitutional is another issue entirely.
Realpolitik

The Constitution is a document that was designed to LIMIT the power of the Federal government and protect the rights of the smallest minority on the planet – the individual!

It does not recoginize a “collective” right to anything!

Posted by WEC
2010-03-27 03:30:44

When the power of corporations are removed, get back to me with the rest of your commentary.
Realpolitik

Posted by Realpolitik
2010-03-27 12:45:18
The above post got slipped into the wrong thread. Sorry.
D-Vega

CT, I would be fine with states opting out.

But they can’t then go back to the fed asking for money for medicaid and health costs.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Its unconstitutional for the federal government to even pass this bill, let alone enforce it. Whether or not states have the option to ignore it doesn’t make that any less true.

Here’s how it works, in brief:

The Federal government can do only what it is specifically permitted to do by the US Constitution.

The state governments are able to do anything except what is specifically denied them in the US Constitution.

At least, that’s what the founding fathers, who wrote the damn thing said and thought.
wylie_e_coyote

“When the power of corporations are removed, get back to me with the rest of your commentary.”

Gee how novel – we have the radical left espousing illogical hate and fear about it chosen target of demonization….

Some twisted petty authoririan who illogically complains about “corporations” as some sort of villianous enemy of the people we should hate and fear – yet corporations are no more then a voluntary association of citizens joined together by private contract/agreement to engage in commerce. He presuppose them “evil” and possed of near magical powers to do you untold harm.

Yet the most powerful corporation or person cannot do anything too you without your volutary conset! They would not make a dime of profit if they do not please you and other citizens with their good or serivce! They cannot compell you to participate or use force against you! They cannot discriminate by age, race, sex, or creed lest they lose out to more just competitors if a truly free market is allowed to exsist!

On the other hand, government is championed as all-good and all benevolent. Yet at the end of the day, government is the application of force to a problem. And while force is appropriate in some situtions (for example, collective defense of our rights – this is why our best and most functional parts of government are the militrary and police) it is not a particularly fair, impartial or effective way to provide services or promote charity!

Lets review:

Who can use force against you – the government!

Who can imprision you – the government!

Who can take your property involuntarily – the government!

Who commands the regulatory power to bankrupt any individual or firm – the government!

Who taxes 4 trillion dollars involutarily from private citizens each year and can direct it to groups it favors – the government!

Who can print money at will – the government!

So what is the great threat I should fear? – the “corporation” which is at its essesance a voluntary association of my fellow citizens that operates by consent only or the government who operates by force?

People like these trolls call themselves “progressives” yet adovacte the most regressive notion of government on the planet earth – centralized control by a small group of elites who have unchecked power!

These elites will claim to wield power and justify the supression of Freedom as being “for the good of the people” – this is the song of tyrannts and despots the world over for eaons!

Its is fact that in such an enlarged and all powerful government, the small and the weak will always have less access then the rich and powerful! The greater the government power is expanded the more the rights of the individual is diminished and the less chance the individual has for equality under the law.

Logical thinking is not a strong point of the troll
Jack Schite

Another corporate apologist on meth.
Jack Schite

“Yet the most powerful corporation or person cannot do anything too you without your volutary conset! ”

oh yes I must remember that when I am driving cross country and my only option is Walmart for food and sundries, Bank of America for banking, Chevron for gas, etc.

Walmart is basically a reseller for Chinese cheaply made products, taking money that formerly went to middle class occupations and giving it to the Wall family. BofA posts billions in profits and cuts the hours of workers to increase profits even more. Chevron posts record profits when it creates scarcity of the product the nation runs on – petroleum.

And you think you actually have a choice? You are simply owned by the system into accepting a lifestyle they can profit from. Thinking you have much choice is like believing Fox is fair and balanced.

Here in san Francisco we have real options that were pretty much eliminated in most of America, including farmer’s markets, credit unions, public transit.
tomw

How does it affect the good old standby used to stuff things into Federal jurisdiction, “interstate commerce”, when insurance is issued and regulated state by state with absolutely no interstate commerce involved?
How is it legal for legislation to limit the profit percentage to a supposedly private company? How is it legal to force insurance companies to pay 85% of their premiums in claims?

Currently, the “mean, evil, profit-hungry” insurance companies pay about 5-6 times as much in Federal tax than they make in profit? [~25% tax vs ~4% profit, from what I have read]

Why would one want a faceless, Federal bureaucrat deciding your level of care – with NO recourse, and NO competition? At least competition will allow you to vote with your checkbook, and change providers, if your particular vendor is recalcitrant and denies claims arbitrarily. Those that provide bad service would be driven from the market. Currently, Medicare refuses more claims, as a percentage, than do private providers.
I don’t want health care to come under the thumb of politics, as then you will have to have someone ‘send you’ to get service or you will be ignored. Political control of access to health care is a life-and-death power over constituents. If you don’t vote the right way, you may not get your procedure done, or you will be last in line… “The Medical Equipment Allocation Board has allowed us only two Mysterion Machines to handle chemotherapy infusion. You will have to wait until one becomes available.”
I can’t wait until the buzzards in DC get to decide what my physician can prescribe and can proscribe whatever they want.

Not.

tomw
D-Vega

Seems to me that corporations are printing money (borrowing against nonexistent assets), and seizing property involuntarily as well (see KELO).

Not to mention the HUGE amount of influence corporations have in gov’t. That is the real issue here.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Corporations cannot print money nor create national debt. All they can do is borrow against expected future profits and assets under extremely limited and legally controlled limits and conditions. This system of credit has built civilization and progress for almost four hundred years now, from the Dutch to the British to the US and beyond. That’s why there’s more money in the world now than there was last year, last decade, and last century: free markets create wealth.

Governments have no assets nor generate any economic growth, they only can shuffle money about that is already in place and take from others. When the government prints money without worth, it is devaluing money, not creating wealth.

This fear and hate of corporations is astonishingly ignorant of history and reality. There’s good reason to be annoyed at specific acts by specific corporations, but not the legal classification in general.
http://www.conservative-compendium.com Brian_Garst

Kelo is an indictment of government far more than corporations, and it proves the point of those who argue for limited government. Corporations are only truly dangerous when they are able to control the power of government. The less power of government available to them – and since all power of government is available to them, this means the less power of government in general – the less dangerous corporations are. The problem with Kelo isn’t corporations, it’s the government.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

The above post got slipped into the wrong thread. Sorry.

Wrong thread and wrong web site. Your idiocy is not welcome here.
Mike_M

Regulating something and imposing it are two completely different things. There is no precedent for the Federal Government forcing people to buy a product.

Replace health insurance with any other product and the absurdity becomes apparent instantly. Can the government mandate everybody buy a bag of lollipops once a month? Force everybody to open a credit card? Tell everyone to buy a new car once every five years or go to jail? Buy a house by age 25 or pay a $5000 dollar fine?

Health insurance, as a financial risk management product which in and of itself has no bearing on whether or not you can see a doctor, is no different.
Mr_e_m_t

CT, I would be fine with states opting out.

But they can’t then go back to the fed asking for money for medicaid and health costs.

Posted by D-Vega

Works for me, as long as the “fed” isn’t allowed to tax me for it.

Btw, i love the knowledge that after “x”amount of years of paying taxes etc, i won’t be seeing a dime of medicaid/medicare money when i reach retirement age since obama is going to make sure they are both crushed by years end.
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

Here in san Francisco we have real options that were pretty much eliminated in most of America, including farmer’s markets, credit unions, public transit.

Posted by Jack Schite
2010-03-27 14:25:26

And the bath houses you frequent.

Apparently instead of travelling to France, you should get out more in the US and learn something about it, instead of cruising for rough tricks and expecting us taxpayers to spring for your HIV medications.
Jack Schite

Interesting fantasy world from Dick.

I’m straight, but your self-loathing shows you as a closet case.

A therapist would do you wonders Dick. Might even turn you partially human. Might.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

What kind of moron thinks farmers markets, credit unions and public transit were eliminated in even in one area of America, let alone most of it? The isolated stupidity of the left is just astonishing. They go on and on about how well-traveled they are, but they’re almost totally clueless about their own country.
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

Jack, what is your record for batches of fries in one shift? You never have told us that.

Based on your stupid drivel, a trip back to third grade might do you some good. Nixon only sees your level of blatant stupidity from hard core leftists. Oh wait…
Living_Right_in_CA

And the most ignorant factless stupid satement of the year is????

“oh yes I must remember that when I am driving cross country and my only option is Walmart for food and sundries, Bank of America for banking, Chevron for gas, etc.”
posted by Jack “Don’t Know” Schite

ROFLMAO travels the countru and only knows of BOA? Raise your hands if you EVEN got to a branch office anymore? What a moron! UFB

If I Was Your President (Boyfriend Spoof)

Premium Right Ads

Blogads Right

Previous Features

40 Of The Most Bad-Ass, Masculine, Manly, Alpha Male Quotes Of All Time

Why Men Are Becoming Wimpy, Video Game Playing Slackers Who Don’t Want To Get Married

Horror You Will Never Get Out Of Your Brain Again: Bronies

The 10 Best Obama Ate A Dog Images From Around The Web

User Info

Features

Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN