Posts Tagged ‘Unconstitutional’

President Obama is Unconstitutional

Posted by Troy on 25th January 2013 in Current Events, Political

Thank you to the court which has said what I’ve been saying: This President is Unconstitutional!  Recess appointments were provided for when Congress used to meet for 3 months and then THEY WENT HOME!  It was not so the President could appoint whoever he wanted over the weekend or what have you.  If one Senator wants to sit in the building and declare themselves “in session,” that is a check and balance.  If we say that the President has the ability to say when the Senate is in recess, what would be to stop him from saying that they are in recess just because they are out to lunch?  This was clearly is way AROUND the Constitution, and that’s something he’s very interested in on a day to day basis.

Long Live the Constitution!

Proposed Unconstitutional Moves

Posted by Troy on 9th January 2013 in Current Events, Political

In response to the issues facing us today, some people are proposing broad, unrestrained, executive power as the solution.  In layman’s terms, turning the President into a dictator.  Here are some of the suggestions:

1)  For the debt limit – Let’s just mint a one trillion dollar platinum coin.  This would be used to pay off the debt.  Wow, yeah, the rest of the world couldn’t figure out that this is the same as printing one trillion more dollar bills and paying off debt, monetizing the debt.  Peachy.

2)  For the debt limit – Give the President the power under the Fourteenth Amendment to raise the debt limit as he sees fit.  I still don’t understand what interpretation supports this.  Congress has control over all spending.  That includes the debt limit.

3) Gun control – Use some sort of executive order to work around Congress to counter a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

Here’s an answer to all of these tactics.  If he uses any of these tactics, he is acting in direct opposition to the Constitution.  All of these issues are meant to be addressed by the three co-equal branches of government.  Laws are meant to be written and passed by the Legislative Branch, signed into law and enforced by the Executive Branch, and interpreted by the Judicial Branch.  When one branch takes it upon themselves to make, interpret, and enforce the laws, that is the act of a dictator, and he MUST be impeached.  Of course, people are too chicken to say it.  He could burn the Constitution on live TV, and anyone calling for his impeachment would be called a racist extremist.  Oh well, huh?

Long Live the Constitution!

Severability Analogy

Posted by Troy on 4th April 2012 in Current Events, Political

I have said that the court should throw out the entire Affordable Healthcare Act if the individual mandate is found unconstitutional.  The reason I say this is that there is no severability clause in the law.  As such, the law must be struck down in its entirety as there is no way to say that individual sections would have passed on their own merit when Congress originally voted on Obamacare.  Here is an example:

Boy A wishes to trade his Tim Tebow trading card for Boy B’s Hank Aaron card and $5.  Boy A hands Boy B the trading card, and Boy B gives him $5.  Boy B explains that the Hank Aaron card belongs to his dad, and his father said that he had no authority to trade it.  Since half of Boy B’s obligation has been overruled, must Boy A bear the cost and accept $5 for the Tim Tebow card?  Of course not!

However, in addition to the first deal, the boys came to another agreement to trade a Hot Wheels Lamborghini for a Matchbox Hummer.  Even though the first deal got struck down, the second deal should still stand because these deals were separate.  The first deal has nothing to do with the second deal.

Why the Supreme Court Must Overturn the Entire Healthcare Act

Posted by Troy on 29th March 2012 in Current Events, Political

A lot of people are saying that the Supreme Court is wrong not to read the entire 2,70o page document and salvage what they can of the act.  Justice Ginsburg advocates that the Supreme Court should go through the bill and salvage what they can.  This may sound reasonable, but they must not do this for the same reason why we should not have a line-item veto.

The line-item veto sounded like a wonderful thing.  If a bill had one bad provision, the President could strike out that one line and send it back for approval.  The Supreme Court ruled that this was not Constitutional because it hurt the separation of powers.  In addition, this wrecked the lawmaking process.

Imagine a situation in which the Congress put together a bill.  To get some Representatives on board, they gave them some concessions.  The reluctant Congressman goes along with it due to the concessions.  The President strikes the measure that got the Congressman on board.  In the end, the law gets signed, and the Congressman gets the shaft.

That brings us to Obamacare.  Before it was actually brought before the Supreme Court, Obama said that if the mandate was unconstitutional, the whole thing would have to go.  This is why he did not put a severability clause in there to start with, even though his legal team begged him to do so.  The individual mandate is the funding mechanism.  Without it, the whole thing falls apart.  What would have been a disaster after five to fifteen years becomes a disaster in five to fifteen months.  Without a severability clause, Congress said that the bill is meant to be taking as a whole, and it should.  That bill was the result of months of negotiations, backroom deals, and payoffs.  If the Supreme Court start going through and saying this stays and this goes, then the bill becomes something else entirely.  The bill the Justices create by taking out the individual mandate and other provisions may not have gotten a single vote if such a bill had been presented before Congress.  The Supreme Court are judges, not legislators.  They should not try to write legislation on their own.  The only responsible thing, given the lack of a severability clause, is to kill the entire bill.  If Congress doesn’t like it, they can do one of two things.  They can either go back to the drawing board and try to write a Constitutional health care bill, or they can try to amend the Constitution.  Of course, the Left will never actually try to amend the Constitution.  They are a firm believer that it is easier to ask forgiveness than to ask permission.

Long Live the Constitution!

Obamacare – Day 2 – The commerce clause

Posted by Troy on 27th March 2012 in Current Events, Political

Originally, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution was intended to ensure smooth operation of trade between the States and foreign countries.  About twelve years ago, the Supreme Court heard a case about an old lady in Washington who was busted for growing marijuana.  The thing is, she had a prescription for it.  As such, it was legal for her to have marijuana.  The Feds couldn’t figure out what to do, so they prosecuted her under the Commerce Clause.  Their case was that she was supposed to smoke medical grade pot, not just stuff she grew.  Medical grade pot is grown in Texas.  As such, she is interfering with interstate commerce.  In the dissenting opinion, one Justice said, “If we rule this way, we give unlimited power to the Federal government because what doesn’t affect interstate commerce if you take it out to the nth degree?”

I grow rosemary.  How is that any different?

Now they say they can require you to own health insurance because most people will use some sort of medical treatment, and it is unfair that the young and healthy don’t buy insurance.  As such, only the old and sick buy insurance, and this raises cost.  So, rather than identify that insurance is the problem, we are going to force everyone to buy a product.   What’s really amazing is how stupid the young people are that they can be convinced to demand to be forced to buy a product.

As I laid out in 2084, their plan is designed to fail.  Inevitably, the only solution that is based upon a common pool will be to initiate Death Panels that do an actuarial analysis of the value of the patient’s life.  The reason that medical costs are so high is as follows:  In World War II, employers came up with the idea of health insurance so that they could get around compensation limitations that were in place as part of the rationing program.  As more people got on insurance, doctors were able to charge more for their services.  As doctors charged more for their services, more people felt the need to get insurance out of fear of not being able to afford medical care.  As more people got insurance, doctors were able to charge more.  As the market for insurance got saturated (everyone who could and would buy insurance had already done so), insurance companies had to raise their rates to cover the increased charges by the medical profession.  After that, it’s a spiral.  It’s all simple, self-interested, human behavior that an eighth grader can figure out.  We see the same thing happening with dental work, and we are about to see it play out with pet insurance too.

As I discussed yesterday, the Health Care Act is not covered by the powers of taxation.  It also isn’t covered by the Commerce Clause.  There is no way that the Founding Fathers would have given the government the power to deem that possible future economic transactions are to have occurred currently and demand action on a citizen.  Under this same thought process, Congress could declare that you are probably going to buy stuff and charge you the present value of all National Sales Taxes for the next twenty years at the current date.  Why not?  Under their logic, it is the same thing.

You want to fix medical costs?  Get rid of insurance completely.  There will be about five years of chaos.  After that, prices will regulate.  Third party payment systems are always doomed to failure in any market because it breaks the link between the consumer and the supplier.  Without this link, goods and services will not be priced correctly.  If you put out a product “for free,” people will take it just to take it.  This is one reason why I always sell my books instead of just give them away.  I figure if they’re not willing to pay for the book, they will just take it and not read it.

If you think the prices and supply of healthcare is bad now, just wait until it’s “free.”

Long Live the Constitution!

Obamacare goes to court

Posted by Troy on 26th March 2012 in Current Events

Today was stage one of the Obamacare argument.  Basically, the government’s point today was that no one was harmed by the “tax” yet, so it cannot be challenged in court.

Judge Alito pointed out that today they were arguing that it was a tax.  Tomorrow, however, they are arguing that it is not a tax.  The importance of this definition is significant.  Before Obamacare was passed, it was important to the government that it  was not called a tax.  At the time, it was important that  it wasn’t a tax so that the people at large wouldn’t pitch a fit.  After it was passed, it was important that it was called a tax because there is no way that the law is Constitutional otherwise.

Throughout the entire 2,000 page tome that is Obamacare, there is no place where the penalty for not purchasing insurance is called a tax.  It is always called a penalty.  The only reason why it is in the Internal Revenue Code at all has to deal with the collection of the penalty.  However, all this is beside the point.  There are only two types of “direct” taxes which are available under the Constitution.  The first tax is not to be paid by individuals themselves but is levied against the states on the basis of their proportionate share of the population.  The other is the income tax.  The entire reason why we had to pass the Sixteenth Amendment was so they could do another direct tax based on individual income.  The proposed “tax” would be an odd direct tax based upon whether or not a specific product had been purchased.  In fact, there is no example in history of a tax for NOT doing something.

Needless to say, the idea that Obamacare is a tax fell flat on its face.  Tomorrow, they start to hear debates on the individual mandate.  As a lover of the Constitution and of America, I pray that Obamacare is shot down.  If we say that Congress can tell us we have to buy something just because we are alive, they will have unlimited power.

Long Live the Constitution!

H.R. 3166: Enemy Expatriation Act

Posted by Troy on 2nd January 2012 in Current Events, Political

Congress has before them a bill which will enable them to strip someone of their citizenship.  This would enable them to bypass all of our Constitutional rights.  While they are intent on giving illegal immigrants and foreign born combatants Constitutional rights and others are interested in distributing our wealth to foreign countries, you can bet that these parties will not have any worries about taking away an American’s rights.  Write you Senators and Representative.  This law is completely unnecessary.  If someone commits an act of war and is working with the enemy, they can be tried for treason.  There are already procedures in place for this.

Long Live the Constitution!

Obamacare – George Will Questions if Congress can Mandate Obese go to Weight Watchers

Posted by Troy on 11th July 2011 in Current Events, Political

George Will makes the point, if under the commerce clause we give Congress the right to mandate we buy insurance, where does their power end?  Could they force fat people to enter into a weight loss program because it affects interstate commerce?  His opponent retorts that Congress has any power they give themselves unless they are overruled by the Supreme Court.  Perhaps that is how it actually works, but this should not be how it should work. 

George Will didn’t go far enough.  It is clear that populations affect interstate commerce.  Can Congress dictate that people move to less populated states?  Do they have the right to liquidate citizens in over-populated cities and states as long as the Supreme Court remains silent? 

Of course not, but how is that any different?

Long Live the Constitution!


Posted by Troy on 13th February 2011 in Current Events, Political

A Florida judge has ruled that the health care bill is unconstitutional because of the individual mandate.  Also, he points out that, since they didn’t add a severability cause, the whole bill is unconstitutional.  I find it interesting that Obama’s legal team suggested they put one in there, but Obama chose not to do so.  Why?  He had to know that that would be the point of contention.  Why give an enemy a point of weakness to attack?  This is the sort of thing that leads to conspiracy theories.  But to what end?  He poured on such political capital.  He made this bill the make or break of his Presidency.  This was to be his legacy.  Why?  It’s senseless…

I will say that I am glad the judge ruled the way he did.  Even if you think that it’s a good idea for the government to tell us we must buy health insurance, there is no way you would support that power.  It’d be good if we all ate more broccoli.  So, why not let them tell us that as well?  There are those who point out that the Constitution is not a perfect document, that it has been changed just because of this, and I agree.  It’s not perfect, but it’s meant to be amended by rule of law.  That’s the difference between our system and parliamentary systems.  If they don’t like a rule, they just change it.  To change our rules, you have to get the governed to consent to it.  The fact of the matter is that, particularly on the Left, they just want to blatantly ignore the restrictions of the Constitution because they know that their ideas would never have the widespread support needed to pass with the People.

Long Live the Constitution.