tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post3142233250620465282..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Mike Lee's "Our Lost Constitution"Brad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-84737070976345701322015-04-17T12:05:28.051-06:002015-04-17T12:05:28.051-06:00The rot in the intramural culture of the Democrati...The rot in the intramural culture of the Democratic Party is dismaying. What's interesting is that rank-and-file Democrats favor this course of action when their chiefs are generally the beneficiaries of judicial free-booting. In fora like this, you see the long-term running grudges when decisions of circumscribed or evanescent import go against them (Bush v. Gore, Citizens' United). <br /><br />The thing is, in our time, it would not necessarily be unreasonable to ignore a federal court decision. The arrogance of the judiciary is that bad. The time to do that might have been more than 25 years ago when federal judges were seizing control of local school districts and running them into the ground. Another might have been that 1985 case where a power-drunk judge jailed most of the Yonkers, N.Y. city council. Simply withdrawing the U.S. Marshall Service from the district and telling judge whatshisface that he'll have to hire bounty-hunters out of pocket if he wants the Mayor in the fedral lock up might have been enough. <br /><br />Then of course, you contemplate the behavior of Eric Holder and the IRS. We live at a time where the collapse of professionalism among the elite bar is right in front of our eyes and has no systemic solution. The bar cannot complain if, in the future, they are dealt with in a rough and ready way. Art Decohttp://wwrtc.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-13755999439586406642015-04-16T17:59:18.791-06:002015-04-16T17:59:18.791-06:00Of course the Constitution says, “all Bills for ra...<i>Of course the Constitution says, “all Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” But the Affordable Care Act was not a “raising Revenue Bill,” despite Justice Roberts’ after-the-fact ruling of the individual mandate penalty as a “tax.”</i><br /><br />Then Roberts is wrong and the bill is unconstitutional for all the other reasons, because the "tax" dodge was the only thing that saved it.<br /><br />Not that "Living Constitutionalists" {Democrats] give a damn for the Constitution when it stands in their way. <br /><br />Lee's book is way overdue, but perhaps too late to stop the lawlessness to which the left feels an entitlement.<br /><br /><b>A Feb. 2015 Rasmussen poll revealed that only 35% of Democrats disagreed when asked: “Should the president have the right to ignore federal court rulings if they are standing in the way of actions he feels are important for the country?” </b><br /><br />81% of Republicans and 67% of voters not affiliated with either major party disagreed– an astounding difference of 32 to 46 percentage points from the Democrat perspective.<br /><br /><br />http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/205210/<br /><br /><br /><br />Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-11271850727239556062015-04-16T16:31:52.310-06:002015-04-16T16:31:52.310-06:00Well, the silence is deafening on this one, so I&#...Well, the silence is deafening on this one, so I'll "bite."<br /><br />One does not have to be a legal scholar to recognize that there have always been (e.g., with Hamilton and Jefferson arguing about every issue in President Washington’s first-term cabinet meetings), and there will always be differing opinions on all manner of constitutional matters, particularly on Presidential actions, legislation from Congress and Supreme Court decisions. But it is beyond tiresome to hear the unending litany of self-proclaimed “real” Americans or constitutionalists who are always under attack and vow to save us all if we only ________________ (fill in the blank). There is no monolithic U.S. Constitution that has been “lost” or hijacked, or needs rescue and resurrection by any self-professed unadulterated political faction.<br /> <br />From the only substantive excerpt of Senator Lee’s book I could find on the Internet (other than the Introduction), I think Larry Wilmore would call Senator Lee’s “origination clause” legal analysis of Obamacare as unconstitutional as “weak tea, ” especially for someone affiliated with the Tea Party. Of course the Constitution says, “all Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” But the Affordable Care Act was not a “raising Revenue Bill,” despite Justice Roberts’ after-the-fact ruling of the individual mandate penalty as a “tax.”<br /><br />For the founders, the origination clause was written to place the taxing power closer to the people by investing the House with a special role in the development of revenue bills. But this original clause (Article I, Section 7) has a “hedge” in it by concluding, “but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”<br /><br />Most scholars agree that the origination clause is more or less defunct. Originally it made sense because House members were the only federal office-holders directly elected by the people, while senators were installed by state legislatures, and presidents via the Electoral College. Under that system, the House really was closer to the people. But, in 1912 the 17th Amendment largely eliminated that distinction by also providing for the direct election of senators. <br />http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/08/07/the-origination-clause-let-it-go/<br /><br />Until an anti-gerrymandering amendment is added to the Constitution (as proposed by former SC Justice JP Stevens), it’s absurd to argue or believe that House members are closer to their constituents in this day and age, especially when 2014 House election spending totaled over one billion dollars (23% of which came from “outside money”).<br />https://www.opensecrets.org/bigpicture/stats.php?cycle=2014&type=A&display=A<br /><br />I’ll conclude by strongly supporting Senator Lee’s efforts to invoke the 4th Amendment against the NSA and other federal agencies’ “search and seizure” surveillance of U.S. citizens email and phone calls without probable cause. But Bush and Obama both violated the 4th Amendment, and a majority of neither party’s Congressional delegation stood up against their president, so I suspect this is another bipartisan non-starter since 2001 and into the immediate future.<br />JMSnoreply@blogger.com