Obamacare Unconstitutional!
According to James Madison in Federalist Papers 10
by Donald Mellon - April 19, 2011
Obamacare Unconstitutional! |
James Madison |
Federalist Number 10, by James Madison, written in 1787 explains how our Republican form of government is designed to protect the liberty of the citizens from the will of factions, defined as a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or minority, united and actuated by some common interest adverse to the rights of other citizens or to the interests of the community. If this characterizes a function of our Republican Government then how did we get Obamacare? Is our constitution incomplete, incorrect, or out of date? Are legislators acting unconstitutionally? How can citizens protect themselves from future usurpations of their liberty?
Federalist 10 is today recognized as one of the more important documents in American history. It has been cited by recent Supreme Court Judges as a source for defining the intent of the founders when creating that part of our Constitution concerning the structure of our Government. It was one of eighty five papers written by Madison, Hamilton and Jay that make up the Federalist Papers, which were published in newspapers in an attempt to persuade readers that the form of government defined in our Constitution was correct for the Union of the thirteen States. The principle argument in the paper is; a Republican form of government encompassing the entire Union where representatives are elected by the people would protect the liberty of the citizens and preserve the public good. Representatives would be chosen in sufficient numbers to guard against the few who may unite to usurp the will of the many but not so large a number that confusion of the many would occur. Each representative would be elected by a large number of citizens to protect against the unworthy by selecting based on merit and character.
A simple example of how our Republic was designed to protect the citizens against a faction is as follows. Suppose tobacco farmers in North Carolina through thought or corruption or whatever gained sufficient support in their state to pass a law requiring all individuals over 13 years of age to smoke tobacco. They then brought this desire to our Federal Republican Government. But here their interests would have minimal or no support from representatives from Maine, Texas, and everywhere else other than N.C. because the representatives from all other states considering the liberty of their constituents and the good of the rest of the country would never approve such a law at the national level. Therefore a large Republic will defeat the will of a faction if it is detrimental to the whole or part because of the character and merit of the representatives, the founders believed.
So what happened, if we have this form of government how did we get Obamacare? It clearly diminishes the liberty of citizens of this country which unquestionably violates the intent of the authors of our Constitution. One example will make this case. There is a penalty if a citizen does not buy a state approved product whether desired or not and failure to buy could result in incarceration. Further there should not be serious debate about whether it is detrimental to the country to abandon the best health care system on Earth in favor of a Government run system.
Obamacare, and the associated loss of liberty, resulted from Party Unity at the Congressional level. If representatives are allowed to vote with the party interests when such a vote fails in the protection of the liberty of the people, then our representative form of government will also fail. If our representatives, House and Senate, are of the people, meaning one of us, by the people, meaning elected by us, and for the Party instead of for the people, then our country may indeed perish from this earth. There is nothing in the constitution preventing a Party Line vote nor should there be. It is this form of Party Politics where unity of vote is demanded on a proposition adverse to the rights of citizens and the representatives that participate in this rout of the constitution that are wrong, not the constitution. When liberty is taken the courts must act or our form of government will add to the list of failed attempts to protect the governed from their Government.
Similar behavior where a political party is united by force not merit on a position detrimental, but not unconstitutional, to all or a portion of the population, I believe, is the major cause of our dysfunctional government. This common activity is occurring today with one Party apparently united on upcoming legislation that will bind our youth to debt they cannot possibly pay. This latest act of Party Politics should be identified for what it is, the greed and attainment of political power in the present at the expense of the future welfare of the people. Every politician succumbing to the pressure to vote in unity against acceptable standards of ethics and morality should be shamed and ridiculed and voted out of office. We know, of course, some of the reasons why they vote as directed, a bribe to help with future elections, personal gain, a chairmanship or membership on a particular committee, fear of reprisals from the leader and/or to enhance the power of their party over the people, but that does not relieve them of the burden of character and merit expected by the framers of our Constitution.
We have indications that there are indeed some people of merit and character in our government because we are beginning to see some representatives recently elected to uphold Tea Party principles turning against their political leaders when necessary to vote for the interests of the people. Of course the political class considers this an outrage and demands that the leader rein in these extremists so as to restore Party Unity.
Please comment on our Tea Party 911 blog and let us know what you think.
