RepealThe16thA

RepealThe16thA

49p

33 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0

120 weeks ago @ Coach is Right - Senator Leahy attacks ... · 0 replies · +2 points

Oops! Senator Leahy "forgot" to mention the following concerning the constitutionality of Obamacare. Congress "forgot" to petition the states for an amendment to the Constitution as required by Article V of the Constitution, which, if the states had chosen to ratify such an amendment, would have granted Congress the specific power that it needed to establish Obamacare. So Obamacare was established with constitutionally nonexistent federal government powers, a "minor" oversight on Congress's part.

121 weeks ago @ Coach is Right - Hawaii won’t send of... · 1 reply · +3 points

Beware of PC concern for where Obama was born. Even if Obama was born in Hawaii, given that Obama's father was not a US citizen when Obama was born then Obama is not a natural born US citizen, and is therefore not constitutonally qualified to be president.

Also, given that I have to be able to present a valid driver's license from my state when driving in another state, I think that anybody who runs for president should likewise be able to present a valid BC in all states to substantiate citizenship qualification to run for president.

123 weeks ago @ The Heritage Foundry - The Human Consequences... · 0 replies · +4 points

Please consider the following relating to Congress's Section 8-limited powers. The Founding States made Sections 1-3 of Article I of the Constitution to clarifiy that all federal government legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress. In other words, Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not.

Also consider that the states have never delegated to Congress via the Constitution the specific power to address environmental issues. So not only has Congress wrongly protected federal legislative powers from the wrath of the voters by establishing so-called "independent federal regulatory agencies" like the EPA in defiance of Sections 1-3 of Article I, but Congress has delegated to the EPA regulatory powers that Congress itself doesn't have.

What a mess! :^(

The bottom line concerning constitutionally undefined federal agencies like the EPA is this imo. Corrupt Congress wrongly establishes smoke-and-mirrors agencies like the EPA to bypass its Article V requirement to petition the states for grants of specific new powers via constitutional amendments. And Congress gets away with this, imo, because of widespread ignorance of the Constitution and its history.

126 weeks ago @ Coach is Right - If you think the feder... · 0 replies · +1 points

Coach, also consider the following about Congress's limited power to lay taxes. More specifically, not only did the Founding States make the Constitution in part to divide federal and state government powers, evidenced by Section 8 of Article I, Article V and the 10th Amendment, but consider this. Justice John Marshall had taken the idea of divided powers a step further by clarifying that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues, taxes which Congress cannot justify under Section 8.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824. http://supreme.justia.com/us/22/1/case.html

So based on Justice Marshall's precedent, let's make a rough estimate as to how much it should cost taxpayer annually to enable Congress to perform its Section 8 duties. Given that the plurality of clauses in Section 8 are defense related, and given that the Department of Defense (DoD) budget for '11 was $600+ billion dollars, and given waste and fraud which are synonymous with the federal system, I will generously round the DoD's $600+ billion annual figure up to $1 trillion for a rough estimate as to how much Section 8 should be costing taxpayers per year.

In other words, we shouldn't be hearing about multi-trillion annual federal budgets that the Progressive media, including Fox News, is reporting without bringing Congress’s Section 8-limited powers into public policy discussions.

127 weeks ago @ Coach is Right - Spanish company will c... · 0 replies · +5 points

Given that Clause 3 of Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution precisely describes how electoral votes are to be counted, I foresee that this vote counting issue may be challeged in court.

128 weeks ago @ The Heritage Foundry - Morning Bell: Obama Sl... · 0 replies · +4 points

You're probably never going to hear anti-Constitution Obama mention that the states have never granted Congress the specific power via the Constitution to address public healthcare issues. In fact, you're likely also never going to hear Obama mention that Congress wrongly ignored Article V of the Constitution which requires Congress to first successfully petition the states to ratify a constitutional amendment which would have granted Congress the specific power to address healthcare issues before establishing Obamacare.

And if there is any question that the states have never granted Congress the specific power to tax and spend for healthcare purposes, note that regardless that Obama is harrassing the USSC to find Obamcare constitutional, previous generations of justices have already clarified that federal healthcare programs are unconstitutional. This is evidenced by the terms "health laws" and "medical practice" in the following excerpts from case opinions.

"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
 
Note that Justice Barbour referenced the above excerpt in New York v. Miln, expanding it as follows.
 
"Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass." --Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln, 1837.
 
And before Constitution-ignoring socialist FDR nuked the Supreme Court with activist justices, Constitution-respecting justices had reflected on the excerpts above by clarifying in Linder v. United States that the states have never granted Congress the constitutional authority to stick its big nose into intrastate medical practice.
 
“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925. (But evidenly not obvious to Obama, Reid and Pelosi.)

128 weeks ago @ The Heritage Foundry - Justices Take Next Ste... · 0 replies · +4 points

Surprise! The USSC has previously decided the constitutionality of federal healthcare.

More specifically, what the mainstream media isn’t telling people about Obamacare is the following. Previous generations of justices have already clarified that public healthcare is a state power issue. This is evidenced by the terms "health laws" and "medical practice" in the following excerpts from case opinions. Note that some of the excerpts address healthcare laws and reflect the limits of Congress's Commerce Clause powers in a single sentence.

"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
 
Note that Justice Barbour referenced the above excerpt in New York v. Miln, expanding it as follows.
 
"Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description, as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass." --Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln, 1837.
 
And before Constitution-ignoring socialist FDR nuked the Supreme Court with activist justices, Constitution-respecting justices had reflected on the excerpts above by clarifying in Linder v. United States that the states have never granted Congress the constitutional authority to stick its big nose into intrastate medical practice.
 
“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925.

And for the icing on the cake concerning not only unconstitutional federal Obamacare, but also constitutionally unauthorized federal spending beyond healthcare issues, Justice John Marshall had clarified in general that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

Finally, given that the Court has already clarified that healthcare is a state power issue, individual states free to experiment with their own healthcare programs, the real reason that the constitutionality of Obamacare is now being challenged is the following. The 111th Congress wrongly ignored Article V of the Constitution which requires Congress to first successfully petition the states to ratify a proposed amendment to the Constitution which would have granted Congress specific new power, the power to regulate public healthcare in this case, before establishing Obamacare.  And Congress has been wrongly ignoring its constitutionally limited powers and Article V since FDR was president; Article V is arguably the best kept secret of the unconstitutionally big federal government.

128 weeks ago @ The Heritage Foundry - Is the Supreme Court t... · 0 replies · +1 points

Here is another example indicating that the USSC is not the final arbiter on Obamacare. When state lawmakers actually understood the Constitution that they swear to to defend, they knew that they could effectively overturn USSC case decisions by appropriately amending the Constitution. In fact, the 11th and 16th Amendments are examples of the states doing so.

132 weeks ago @ Coach is Right - Regime in panic over p... · 0 replies · +3 points

The Supreme Court has already decided that federal healthcare is unconstitutional as evidenced by the following excerpts from case opinions. First, Justice John Marshall had established the case precedent that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues, taxes which Congress cannot justify under Section 8 of Article I of the Constitution.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

And despite Nancy Pelosi being able to read healthcare in the Commerce Clause with her "magic glasses," if there remains any question that Congress does not have the explicit Section 8 authority to address healthcare issues then consider the following statement also from Gibbons v. Ogden.

"State inspection laws, HEALTH LAWS, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. ARE NOT WITHIN THE POWER GRANTED TO CONGRESS (emphases added)." http://supreme.justia.com/us/22/1/case.html

In fact, before FDR "nuked" the Supreme Court with activist justices, the Court had reflected on Justice Marshall's words that Congress has no power to regulate healthcare-related intrastate issues as evidenced by the following statement.

“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925. http://supreme.justia.com/us/268/5/case.html

The bottom line is that Congress has been wrongly ignoring its Article V requirement to petition the states for specific new powers via constitutional amendments, Section 8-indefensible Obamacare being such an example.

223 weeks ago @ Tenth Amendment Center - Insidious Usurpation · 0 replies · +1 points

The federal government is going to continue to use the 10th Amendment as a floor mat until citizens start understanding the problems associated with the 17th A., IMO.