- The Washington Times - Monday, January 11, 2010


I was shocked and sickened to read The Washington Times editorial pertaining to the constitutionality of Obamacare (“Constitutionally unhealthy ‘reform,’” Editorial, Thursday). As the loudest conservative voice in Washington, you hung your hat on the weakest arguments. Those points potentially can be repaired before final passage, although history shows that Congress probably won’t bother making such corrections.

While you rightly mention the Article I, Sec. 8 limitations, you rest your case on the notion that the “general welfare” clause must be “uniform” rather than the fact that health care is not listed within the enumerated powers at all. You have adopted the definition of the liberals, that the general welfare clause empowers the government to do pretty much anything it wants as long as it can attach the general welfare label to it.

This liberal interpretation is an insult to the intelligence and sacrifice of both the Founders and the average citizen. Who in their right mind would sign a contractgiving another party authority to do whatever it wanted as long as it made the claim that it was in the other’s best interest, especially if the other party has police power? What the federal government can do to provide for the general welfare is clearly listed in that same article of the Constitution. It is far different from the “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” idea of Karl Marx.

The essential nature of the Constitution was and is to put limits onthe power of the federal government so that the peopleare left free to run their own affairs and shoulder their own responsibilities. The loudest conservative voice in Washington should be repeating that every day.





Click to Read More

Click to Hide