400 Capitol Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
- Toll Free 1.888.564.6273
- Local 202.783.3870
When protesting the expansion of federal power, Thomas Jefferson drafted the Declaration and Protest of Virginia and stated that rupture from the Union would be a calamity. However, “There is yet one greater, submission to a government of unlimited powers.”
Congress and President Obama have mandated that every person purchase health insurance. Harmfully, federal bureaucrats are vested with the power to determine what is or is not covered by said health insurance.
Presently, the Supreme Court of the United States is engaged in the process of deciding if Congress and the President have exceeded the powers granted by the Constitution of the United States.
Without a doubt, the Court's ruling will cite the Constitution, the commerce clause and a multitude of previous decisions made by the Court. From these sources, a majority of the Justices will craft their ruling. In other words, there are legal philosophies and previous rulings to support whether ObamaCare is a constitutional act...or not.
At the crux of this controversy is the question of individual freedom versus the coercive power of government. Is it ethical for the federal government to order every American to purchase health insurance and dictate the type and amount of medical benefits? Our Supreme Court will rule on the power and control of the federal government versus the personal liberty of all Americans. It is a decision of enormous importance to every American, to our unborn children and grandchildren, and to the freedom-seeking people of the world. It is an enormous game-changer in the scope of freedom as we know it.
Thomas Jefferson warned against entrusting so much power to the Supreme Court. In 1820, Jefferson wrote a letter warning people of the trouble with delegating this level of power to unelected judges:
To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.
America has come to this perilous decision, mainly because of the lust and abuse of power by many Presidents and Congresses. A horrendous failure of federal officials is their ignorance and disdain for the philosophy and restrictions on their constitutionally granted powers. Above all other issues and concerns, the Founders feared the coercive power of the federal government. Intentionally, the Constitution dispersed power horizontally and vertically. Additionally, the Constitution requires the President to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Every Member of Congress takes a similar oath which has additional fealty to bear true faith and allegiance to the same (the Constitution).
Dangerously and immorally, today’s politicians arrogate that they can regulate and control every American unless they are prohibited by the pronouncement of the Supreme Court. This is reprehensible and extremely dangerous. Collectively, these public officials have immorally disregarded their oath and duty.
The prime example is Nancy Pelosi. When asked about the Constitution and ObamaCare, the then Speaker of the House contemptuously responded, “Are you serious: Are you serious?” [Read: http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/teda/madison-trumps-pelosi-%E2%80%93-so-far]
CNS News reported on Pelosi’s ignorance of the philosophy and limits of power imposed by the Constitution:
CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?"
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am."
Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Later, her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, said: …“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
Arrogance! Ignorance! Power! Corruption! Exactly, what the Constitution intended to restrict and eliminate.
Fortunately, there are a few Americans who appreciate the substance of the Constitution. In 2001, long before ObamaCare, Ed Crane and David Boaz of the Cato Institute recognized the importance of protecting everyone’s liberty from the abuse of government power.
We constrain our government precisely because we know that any of us might be the minority in some dispute and also because we know that—when we’re in the majority—we might be tempted to abuse our power.
A government close to the people best protects freedom:
We seek to keep governance close to the people, in the states and communities. Partly because local government is more responsive but even more because it gives individuals the chance to leave, to vote with their feet, and to find communities that better reflect their individual needs and preferences. …
Centralized power erodes personal freedom:
… centralizing the government of 270 million people in a distant capitol is a tragic reversal of our … Founding. This appeal to the Constitution reflects more than simply a commitment to the acts of the Founding generation, as important as that is. It also reflects an understanding of why the Founders were right to reserve most subjects to state, local, or private endeavor. The Founders feared the concentration of power. They believed that the best way to protect individual freedom and civil society was to limit and divide power.
Because of derelictions of duty by many Presidents and Congresses, our liberty is now in the hands of the Supreme Court. Because of major philosophical differences, it is likely one justice will decide the future of liberty in America.
Again, this enormous decision stripped of legal wrangling is: Will the federal government have virtually unlimited power to control the life of every American? Or will the Supreme Court proclaim this is a step too far?
And so... America awaits the verdict of the United States Supreme Court, which too has become very political. The corrupting influence of arrogant politicians and predatory interest-groups has strongly influenced the appointment process of the Court.
Unfortunately, all we can do is wait for the Court’s decision. In the future, We the People must preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. We the People must teach that liberty is preserved and protected by a smaller, well-defined and limited government. Local governance prevails over a centralized government. We must teach future generations and defend what Congresses and Presidents have violated – their oath.
May providence protect liberty in America!