RSS
Home
Forget the Constitution, says Congress
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
White House officials have confirmed what many Americans have only suspected: a total disregard for the significance and authority of the U.S. Constitution. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded to a CNS reporter's question regarding the constitutional authority of mandated health care, “Are you serious? Are you serious?” When assured that the question was serious in nature, Pelosi ignored it moved on to an inquiry she could comfortably answer.
Why did Speaker Pelosi bother to argue the sincerity of the question and then refuse to answer it? If Pelosi truly believed she had valid constitutional authority for the health care democrats want to pass, why not simply address the question? Ignoring the issue established no credibility on democrats' part that they are acting in accordance with the U.S. Constitution. Perhaps Speaker Pelosi's incredulity can simply be attributed to shock that anyone dared to pose such a serious challenge to democrats' agenda to shove government run health care down the throats of so many unwilling Americans.
The Speaker's media spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, told CNS that asking the Speaker about the constitutional authority of mandated health care was “not a serious question.”
“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
Really? Ensuring that the U.S. government acts and legislates in accordance with its Constitution isn't serious enough to address? Apparently they have all forgotten the oaths to defend and uphold the Constitution that they took when being inaugurated into their offices. If they ever took them seriously at all.
CNS followed up on the question through an email to the Speaker's spokesman, “Where specifically does the Constitution authorize Congress to force Americans to purchase a particular good or service such as health insurance? If it is the Speaker’s belief that there is a provision in the Constitution that does give Congress this power, does she believe the Constitution in any way limits the goods and services Congress can force an individual to purchase? If so, what is that limit?”
Elshami responded by sending CNS an old press release from Sept. 16, which stated that Congress retains “broad power to regulate activities that have an effect on interstate commerce. Congress has used this authority to regulate many aspects of American life, from labor relations to education to health care to agricultural production.”
Sorry, that didn't answer the question. Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has these “broad powers”? The Speaker, in the press release sent to CNS, cites the commerce clause in response to concerns that mandated health care violates the tenth amendment.
The tenth amendment says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
What's that, Speaker Pelosi? The tenth amendment says that the federal government has no powers that are not expressly given to it, or prohibited to it by the States? And it also says that such powers as the federal government does not retain must be decided by the States, or the people? Since Speaker Pelosi cited the commerce clause as her authority for federally mandated health care, this clause must be examined in conjunction with the tenth amendment.
Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that Congress has the authority, “To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;”
The term regulation, however, means one of three things: to control, to adjust it to a certain standard, or to adjust it so as to ensure accuracy of operation. Liberals subscribe to the first definition, no doubt, but such control over commerce still does not invest Congress with the authority to force people to purchase government run health care. The commerce clause merely gives Congress the power to regulate commerce, not people. Even if government run health care is passed into law, Congress merely has the power to oversee it, not the consumers for whom it was purportedly created. If Americans are forced to buy government run health care, the government has stepped past the bounds of the Constitution to control and regulate the people, not simply its commerce.
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs took an even less convincing approach, when asked about concerns regarding the constitutional authority of a federal mandate to purchase health care: “I won't be confused as a constitutional scholar, but I don't believe there's a lot of -- I don't believe there's a lot of case law that would demonstrate the voracity [sic] of what they're commentating on,” he said.
Of course Gibbs would never be confused as a constitutional scholar! He clearly had no answer regarding such concerns to defend himself or the administration with! Regarding the veracity of questions regarding constitutional authority of mandated health care, the Congressional Research Service recognized the potentials problems in a report prepared for Congress, “Although the federal government provides health coverage for many individuals through federal programs such as Medicare, it has never required individuals to purchase health insurance. While it seems possible that Congress could enact an individual coverage requirement that would pass constitutional muster, there are various constitutional considerations relevant to the enactment of such a proposal.”
The report further says, “Despite the breadth of powers that have been exercised under the Commerce Clause, it is unclear whether the clause would provide a solid constitutional foundation for legislation containing a requirement to have health insurance. Whether such a requirement would be constitutional under the Commerce Clause is perhaps the most challenging question posed by such a proposal, as it is a novel issue whether Congress may use this clause to require an individual to purchase a good or a service.”
Hardly sound footing upon which to base arguments for mandated healthcare. The commerce clause states nothing about powers to force individuals to buy certain goods, because such power simply isn't there. It is unconstitutional for the federal government to mandate health care for its citizens.
CNS further notes that, “In 1994, when the Clinton administration attempted to push a health care reform plan through a Democratic Congress that also mandated every American buy health insurance, the Congressional Budget Office determined that the government had never ordered Americans to buy anything.”
Indeed, the CBO analysis stated, “The government has never required people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government.”
The government run health care that the far left liberals propose is simply extra-constitutional. No where in the document does clear evidence exist that the federal government has any authority to mandate health care or any other perceived “goods” for its citizens. It does not exist in the commerce clause, nor anywhere else. And as it is written in the tenth amendment, those powers not enumerated to the federal government, nor prohibited by the States, must be decided by those same states, or the people residing in them.
Not by Congress, or any other part of the government.
Related Articles:
Comments
