Last week I commented on the Republican Presidential candidates’ knowledge of the Constitution. In that message I made the statement that the Constitution prevents an Obamacare-style individual mandate regardless of whether it’s implemented by the Federal government or a State government. Many of you responded with the same question: “What part of the U.S. Constitution prevents a State government from imposing an individual mandate?” This message is my response to that question:
The U.S. Constitution imposes upon the Federal government a duty to protect certain rights of individual citizens against intrusion by State government. This duty arises from at least two places in the Constitution: Article IV section 2, and the 14th Amendment.
Article IV section 2 states: “The citizens of each State shall be entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States.”
The 14th Amendment section 1 states: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
These sections unquestionably do impose upon the Federal government a duty to protect individual citizens from State violations of certain rights. But, the question is: what rights are protected from State intrusion? That question has been debated since the Constitution was ratified. We fought a war over it, and the question is still being hotly debated. When it’s answered poorly States lose sovereignty, millions of babies are murdered, private property is stolen by States, and many other rights are violated. When it’s answered properly States are prevented from denying free speech, prevented from imprisoning individuals without a jury trial, prevented from disarming their citizens, and prevented from stealing private property. Continue reading “Are we in a prison without bars?” »
CORALVILLE, Iowa — Police closed down a lemonade stand in Coralville, telling its 4-year-old operator and her dad that she didn’t have a permit.
Cedar Rapids television station KGAN reports that an officer told Abigail Krutsinger’s dad on Friday that she couldn’t run the stand as RAGBRAI bicyclers poured into Coralville. RAGBRAI is The Des Moines Register’s Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa, which ended Saturday.
The city ordinance says food vendors have to apply for a permit and get a health inspection.
Abigail’s dad, Dustin Krutsinger, says the ordinance and its enforcers are going too far if they force a 4-year-old to abandon her lemonade stand.
The city said it was enforcing the ordinance for health reasons, because people have gotten sick from food and drink they got during RAGBRAI.
Last week’s NPR interview on “Tell Me More” really should be called “Tell Me Less”. Their heavy editing of only The Radiance Foundation’s perspective, while preserving every word spoken by Reverend Carlton Veazey,revealed NPR’s typical liberal bias and uninformed defense of Planned Parenthood. The Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice CEO’s closing remarks (nearly two minutes versus mine which were cut down to 15 seconds) were just a continuation of pro-abortion histrionics by the historically challenged.
Veazey was unwilling to address the epidemic of abortion in the black community, even denying Planned Parenthood’s entire history rooted in the racist pseudoscience of eugenics. He played the role so clearly defined by Margaret Sanger’s original Negro Project back in 1939, using black pastors to propagandize on her behalf. Margaret Higgins Sanger Slee was a grand manipulator and strategist, with a veritable war chest from her second husband, Noah Slee, an oil tycoon.
Many of her aggressive and repulsive eugenics-based efforts were funded by organizations sympathetic with her Birth Control crusade. One of those population control entities was the Ford Foundation, which also funds the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC) and pro-abortion activist groups like SisterSong, both staunch defenders of Planned Parenthood. Money was never an obstacle for Sanger and her fellow eugenicists. However, ideological resistance, rooted in Christian faith, was.
Remember when Obama said he wanted a national security force? Not the national guard, but a civilian one that has not sworn to uphold the Constitution? On July 2, 2008 in a speech in Colorado Springs, Barack Obama called for a police state. Obama just got his private army And no one seems to have noticed. It is buried in the Senate revisions to the health care bill. Subtitle CIncreasing the Supply of the Health Care Workforce Sec. 5201. Federally supported student loan funds. Sec. 5202. Nursing student loan program. Sec. 5203. Health care workforce loan repayment programs. Sec. 5204. Public health workforce recruitment and retention programs. Sec. 5205. Allied health workforce recruitment and retention programs. Sec. 5206. Grants for State and local programs. Sec. 5207. Funding for National Health Service Corps. Sec. 5208. Nurse-managed health clinics. Sec. 5209. Elimination of cap on commissioned corps. Sec. 5210. Establishing a Ready Reserve Corps. Subtitle DEnhancing Health Care Workforce Education and Training See the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act, page 1312: SEC. 5210. ESTABLISHING A READY RESERVE CORPS. Section 203 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 204) is amended to read as follows: SEC. 203. COMMISSIONED CORPS AND READY RESERVE CORPS. (a) ESTABLISHMENT (1) IN GENERAL.here shall be in the Service a commissioned Regular Corps and a Ready Reserve Corps for service in time of national emergency. (2) REQUIREMENT.All commissioned officers shall be citizens of the United States and shall be appointed without regard to the civil-service laws and compensated without regard to the Classification Act 2 of 1923, as amended. (3) APPOINTMENT.Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall be appointed by the President and commissioned officers of the Regular Corps shall be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. (4) ACTIVE DUTY.Commissioned officers of the Ready Reserve Corps shall at all times be subject to call to active duty by the Surgeon General, including active duty for the purpose of training. (5) WARRANT OFFICERS.Warrant officers may be appointed to the Service for the purpose of providing support to the health and delivery systems maintained by the Service and any warrant officer appointed to the Service shall be considered for purposes of this Act and title 37, United States Code, to be a commissioned officer within the Commissioned Corps of the Service. (b) ASSIMILATING RESERVE CORP OFFICERS INTO THE REGULAR CORPS.—Effective on the date of enactment of the Affordable Health Choices Act, all individuals classified as officers in the Reserve Corps under this section (as such section existed on the day before the date of enactment of such Act) and serving on active duty shall be deemed to be commissioned officers of the Regular Corps. [Note here that those personally appointed by BO -- without advice and consent of the Senate -- automatically become a part of the Regular Corps. Ed.] (c) PURPOSE AND USE OF READY RESERVE. (1) PURPOSE.The purpose of the Ready Reserve Corps is to fulfill the need to have additional Commissioned Corps personnel available on short notice (similar to the uniformed services reserve program) to assist regular Commissioned Corps personnel to meet both routine public health and emergency response missions. (2) USES.The Ready Reserve Corps shall (A) participate in routine training to meet the general and specific needs of the Commissioned Corps; (B) be available and ready for involuntary calls to active duty during national emergencies and public health crises, similar to the uniformed service reserve personnel; (C) be available for backfilling critical positions left vacant during deployment of active duty Commissioned Corps members, as well as for deployment to respond to public health emergencies, both foreign and domestic; and (D) be available for service assignment in isolated, hardship, and medically underserved communities (as defined in section 399SS) to improve access to health services. (d) FUNDING.—For the purpose of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of the Commissioned Corps under this section, there are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Office of the Surgeon General for each of fiscal years 2010 through 2014. Funds appropriated under this subsection shall be used for recruitment and training of Commissioned Corps Officers. How many of you, dear readers, were aware of the fact that the health care bill created another army?
“I gave you no choice. That’s the whole, bright mystique of life, isn’t it? Choice. Maybe that’s what the soul is. Choice.”
“Can we live with the loss of it?”
“Perhaps. But I think it would be better to die trying to win it back.”
Outer Limits episode from the sixties. A Feasability Study is the story of a group of humans taken by aliens for the purpose of slavery. Interesting. Our “government” simply uses welfare, taking over the health care system and the PATRIOT act. They’ve already turned their Constitutional duty to coin money and regulate the value thereof to a cabal of private bankers.
You might remember the warning we gave about “hope and change” in June of 2010.
In an era when the Federal Reserve is purposely causing the collapse of the American economy—with the assistance of the White House—people are becoming more-and-more desperate and prone to scams of all kinds.
[This is in England, but one wonders if this will be covered by Obamacare?]
Children as young as 12 are to be allowed drugs to block puberty while they decide whether to have a sex change, it has been revealed.
The monthly injection suspends the onset of adulthood so that young people confused about their gender can be sure of any decision before they take on too many masculine or feminine features.
Supporters say that the “window” prevents a great deal of mental and physical anguish caused by the maturing of sex organs, facial hair growth and changes in the voice.
But critics argue it only prolongs the agony and can prevent people “growing out” of any feelings of confusion.
Sections 1501 and 1502 of HR 3590 — which contain the so-called “individual mandate” — require Americans to buy government-approved insurance and give the government carte blanche to require that these policies contain requirements like Barack Obama’s oft-stated goal of computerizing medical records in a national database. (Indeed, Fox News reported on March 26, 2010, that under the new federal health care law, our medical records will soon go online to be available to all doctors.)
This would make it impossible for Americans to keep private, medical information out of the government-controlled medical database that was created under Sec. 13001 of the stimulus bill. Once a person’s medical information has been put into the database, then the ATF and the FBI will be able to use it to deny law-abiding Americans their right to purchase firearms — just like the thousands of military veterans who have been denied their right to purchase firearms.
The problem with the veterans began in 1999, when under the direction of the Clinton administration, the Department of Veteran Affairs was obliged to share certain mental health records with the FBI for the purpose of adding names to the national instant check system (NICS). People whose names are added to NICS, of course, are not allowed to purchase or possess firearms.
The health records in question had to do with persons the VA had deemed “mental defectives.” Since 1968, persons so adjudicated have been prohibited from possessing firearms. For decades, the common understating of “metal defective” applied to people found not guilty of a crime by reason of insanity. In 1999, however, the Clinton Justice Department unilaterally decided to greatly expand the definition to include the VA’s very broad use of the term.
A judge’s ruling striking down health-care reform legislation requiring almost every American to obtain health insurance should be reversed, the Obama administration said in a court filing.
The administration asked the U.S. Court of Appeals in Atlanta to reverse a Jan. 31 ruling by District Judge C. Roger Vinson in Pensacola, Florida, that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandate, set to take effect in 2014, exceeded Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce. Concluding the legislation couldn’t function without that provision, he declared the entire law invalid.
The U.S. responded in its appellate brief, filed April 1, that “the minimum coverage provision is a valid exercise of Congress’s commerce power.”
A Republican-authored report on alleged financial irregularities within AARP has met with deep resistance among Democratic lawmakers and AARP senior executives.
The report, entitled “Behind the Veil: The AARP America Doesn’t Know,” alleges that the AARP violated its tax exempt status by, in effect, selling health insurance policies and by actively lobbying for the massive health care law passed by Congress and signed by President Obama last year.
While some people leave their hopes in the hands of unelected, unaccountable, politically-connected lawyers that make up the federal judiciary, lawmakers in eleven states have taken steps to bypass Washington D.C. completely and take matters into their own hands.
The latest? South Dakota. Introduced by Representatives Hubbel, Jensen, Liss, and Nelson (Stace) and Senators Begalka and Lederman is House Bill 1165 (HB1165), the National Health Care Nullification Act. (h/t Chris Stevens)
It states, in part:
The Legislature find that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590; Pub. L. No. 111-148) as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872; Pub. L. No. 111-152) is not authorized by the United States Constitution and violates the true meaning and intent of the United States Constitution, and further finds that such law is invalid in this state, may not be recognized by this state, is specifically rejected by this state, and is considered null and void and of no effect in this state
In recent months a fight against the famed bill that President Obama signed into law, which has become the staple of his presidency, has lost major footing. As some of you may be aware Florida has been fighting this law since it was signed, claiming that it is unconstitutional. Which it is, since when you look at it you can plainly see a stripping of rights by forcing people to either buy a government health care plan or pay the fine.
In ruling against President Obama‘s health care law, federal Judge Roger Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s own position from the 2008 campaign against him, arguing that there are other ways to tackle health care short of requiring every American to purchase insurance.
“I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.
Judge Vinson, a federal judge in the northern district of Florida, struck down the entire health care law as unconstitutional on Monday, though he is allowing the Obama administration to continue to implement and enforce it while the government appeals his ruling.
The footnote was attached to the most critical part of Judge Vinson‘s ruling, in which he said the “principal dispute” in the case was not whether Congress has the power to tackle health care, but whether it has the power to compel the purchase of insurance.
(Reuters) – A judge in Florida on Monday became the second judge to declare President Barack Obama’s healthcare reform law unconstitutional, in the biggest legal challenge yet to federal authority to enact the law.
U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson, appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, ruled that the reform law’s so-called “individual mandate” went too far in requiring that Americans start buying health insurance in 2014 or pay a penalty.
“Because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire act must be declared void. This has been a difficult decision to reach, and I am aware that it will have indeterminable implications,” Vinson wrote.
He was referring to a key provision in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and sided with governors and attorneys general from 26 U.S. states, almost all of whom are Republicans, in declaring it unconstitutional. The issue will likely end up at the Supreme Court.
The plaintiffs represent more than half the U.S. states, so the Pensacola case has more prominence than two dozen lawsuits filed in federal courts over the healthcare law.
Apparently, there is a new disease that health care does not cure. It causes it. Union Nonparticipitus.
Union’s PAC Spent $673,309 to Get Obama Elected
(CNSNews.com) – The Obama administration has granted one-year waivers to 28 separate local chapters of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW), exempting them from a requirement under the new health care law that bans annual limits on what insurance plans will pay for medical coverage.
The UFCW’s political action committee spent $673,309 in independent expenditures promoting the election of Barack Obama in 2008.
February 5, 2012 1906 John Carradine 1920 Frank Muir CBE 1946 Charlotte Rampling 1948 Barbara Hershey 1948 Lord Haden Guest 1948 Sven-Goran Eriksson 1952 Russell Grant 1962 Jennifer Jason Leigh 1966 Jose Maria Olazabal
Have a question concerning the Constitution and your rights? You can try our U.S. Succinct Court Office.. WE ARE NOT LAWYERS and we CANNOT GIVE ADVISE on any case that may be pending for or against you. We can, however, provide links to resources that might answer your questions. Feel free to use our Contact Form.
The Constitutional Republic Party web site is NOT a non-profit organization for tax purposes. We do not provide candidates for office, but we support candidates with Constitutional views. Our current purpose is to provide education about the true purpose of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and other historic documents. We do provide information and news which may have an impact on your Constitutional rights.
We will publish almost any, intelligent articles and opinions that do not contain cursing and do not advocate physical violence against an individual or group of individuals---even if they are belligerent. Those opinions expressed and comments in reply to such opinions are solely those of the authors.
Loading ...
