When "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (you know, the law that is currently reducing patient care and driving up prices) passed the U.S. Congress, I was as angry and as disgusted with government as I've ever been. My blog posting on that evening was entitled, "Tyranny", and I referred to the bill as "unconstitutional, immoral and fiscally unsustainable". Those who disagreed took issue both with my use of the word "tyranny" - apparently imprecise and inflammatory - and my assertion of unconstitutionality. Interestingly, no one contested "immoral" or "fiscally unsustainable", but I'm sure critics have more important things to do, like polishing their jack boots and competing for spots on Death Panels.I'm doubling down.
The key provisions of the "health care" "reform" act are unconstitutional. Ever since soon-to-be-ex-Speaker Pelosi deemed the very question of constitutionality un-serious, sober people have come to understand that, in fact, relying upon the Commerce Clause to justify the bill's primary mechanisms is shameless, utter nonsense. Lawsuits claiming that the bill is invalid on constitutional grounds are piling up, while judges and scholars are falling over themselves to confirm the validity (and, yes, seriousness) of that argument.
The American belief is that man is born into this world completely free, and that all subsequent joys, rewards, benefits, and consequences - both pleasurable and painful - are primarily determined by what man does with that freedom. The U.S. Constitution acknowledges this, and establishes government not to grant individual liberties, but to protect man from encroachment upon those liberties (including encroachments by the government itself). The U.S. constitution then grants very specific powers - "enumerated powers" - that give the government the right and ability to perform certain functions toward this end. Those powers not given to the government by the Constitution are very simply unconstitutional. Period.
Over the last 100 years (another direct result of the 17th Amendment), the U.S. Supreme Court has colluded with the U.S. Congress (the USSC is confirmed and funded by Congress) to expand the accepted understanding of one of these powers: the ability "to regulate [...] commerce among the several States". The interstate commerce clause was originally and rightfully seen as a firm restriction of Congress's ability to enact legislation. However, we have come to the point where some believe that the Commerce Clause gives Congress the ability to do anything, including forcing a private individual to transact business with private companies to obtain a service against the will of the individual - as in the health care reform law.
If government can confiscate your property, your income, and your freedom to make your own economic and medical choices, what can't it do, exactly? And if the answer is "nothing", then that's tyranny.
(And Mr. Obama, would you please clarify if this really is a tax, or if - as you said in 2009 - you still "absolutely reject that notion"? It actually does matter to those of us who have to pay it...)
December 13 UPDATE: Health Care Law Ruled Unconstitutional:
No kidding.In a 42-page opinion issued in Richmond, Virginia, Judge Hudson wrote that
the law's central requirement that most Americans obtain health insurance
exceeds the regulatory authority granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
