Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
Bill Murchison :: Townhall.com Columnist
Can Washington Make You Buy Health Insurance?
by Bill Murchison
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Yes, yes, says White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. Congress has the power to make everyone buy health insurance. "I don't believe there's a lot of case law that would demonstrate the veracity" of comments to the contrary.

Thank you, Mr. Justice Gibbs. We'll see about all that when -- if -- the matter of Congress' power over private commercial judgments of this nature gets to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Arguing with Idiots By Glenn Beck

Meanwhile the knock-down, drag-out over health insurance "reform" shouldn't be allowed to fuzz up another immensely vital question; to wit, how in James Madison's name have we reached the point that Congress can so much as contemplate telling you, and you, and you, and all of us that we'll buy health insurance, like it or not, Buster? Why do we have to? Because the government says so, isn't that reason enough?

For Mr. Justice Gibbs, and the people who employ him, it is. Just about anything Congress decides to do in the name of uplift seems to be constitutional: In other words, in accord with written stipulations as to what the national government may and may not do.

Several problems arise concerning this fine theory:

-- It's nonsense. It contravenes the whole constitutional concept of divided powers: particular functions reserved to particular branches of government. And other powers divided between states and the national government.

-- It threatens liberty. A government that knows no limits to its power can be counted on to step more and more heavily on citizens' rights and privileges. All for the "general good" naturally! Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Bill Murchison is a senior columns writer for The Dallas Morning News and author of There's More to Life Than Politics.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Bill Murchison's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate ©Creators Syndicate
feeble reasoning by SCOTUS 2


Having gotten the never minds out of the way, let's proceed to what SCOTUS and the Congress have ignored.
1) During the federal convention debates it was considered whether or not to give the Congress power for incorporating businesses and this was rejected(Aug.18th). In that it is clear that the power of commerce did not and does not extend to private citizens or the businesses they establish. To have power concerning businesses is to be able to regulate an activity affecting commerce and this power was not given.
2) In addition to the above power for incorporation being rejected the Congress was granted limited powers concerning the economy and business. From Article 1, Section 8 what is commonly called the patent clause;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

The above is a power that has been granted, yet if under commerce the federal government may regulate any activity affecting commerce or the economy why then was this limited grant placed as a power of the Congress? It is an absurdity to say that Congress may choose what to regulate when we have here a clear limitation on such regulation. Thus SCOTUS clearly was wrong, but then they are political appointees and not some infallible gods descended from above to grant us their wisdom.

feeble reasoning by SCOTUS 1
In WIckard vs. Filburn the justices sitting at that time said that even a farmer growing wheat to feed his family could be regulated as it was an activity that "affected" interstate commerce.

Never mind that during the framing of the
constitution such power was considered necessary due to certain STATES, STATES NOT PEOPLE, impacting the trade of other states due to circumstances favoring them such as VA and MD having ports.

Never mind that forcing people to conduct their lives in a certain way is to make them slaves and essentially the property of others, and that in the Preamble one of the stated purposes for enacting the US constitution is TO SECURE LIBERTY.
Never mind that the 9th and 10th amendments were placed in the US constitution to establish limits for the federal government that it cannot pass.

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.