Bob Goodlatte and the Constitution

So Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) believes that Medicare, Social Security & Medicaid are Unconstitutional.  What a shock. Another Republican who hates any program for those that aren’t rich or a corporation.

Also, apparently Mr. Goodlatte has no comprehension of the Constitution. Another quality he seems to share with many prominent Tea Partiers. There’s this little bit in there called Article I, Section 8:

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”

This section is commonly referred to as the General Welfare Clause. Almost any Conservative (Regressive?) will try and convince you that this little bit doesn’t authorize social safety net programs like Medicare, Medicaid & Social Security.

What these same Conservatives will tell you is that this same clause is perfectly okay in it’s vague wording to authorize the US Air Force, a defense program not specifically mentioned in the Constitution, but it’s completely unacceptable to them for authorizing any program whose purpose is to help those that at some point in their lives may not be able to help themselves.  That, to them is unconscionable.

Of course, by focusing to argue only on the opening sentence of Article I, Section 8 a key item is being ignored. The last section of Article I, Section 8 known as the “Necessary and Proper Clause”. Here’s how that one goes:

“The Congress shall have Power […] To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

This section is intentionally broad and states that Congress is given the power to pass any laws that are deemed relevant to ensure that the items outlined in Article I, Section 8 are carried out, including providing for the general welfare of US citizens

Let’s not forget that the Supreme Court has upheld multiple times that these programs fit within the General Welfare Clause. So, why is it that protecting the basic welfare of it’s citizens is not acceptable as one of the primary and most important jobs of a government?

– “Left of Center”

Shame On You, Rick Santorum

Image via Wikipedia

Well, isn’t this surprising. Yet another Republican that not only fails to understand the Constitution, but also puts his foot squarely in his mouth.  The casual observer would think they would have learned by now.

However, I’m thoroughly convinced many of these Republicans have no doubt that what they are saying is complete nonsense.  The remainder, a select few such as Palin, Bachmann and Rand Paul may actually have that poor of an understanding of the Constitution.

Today’s shameful statement comes from Rick Santorum (R – PA, retired) who claims that by supporting a clear and unflinching separation of church & state, John F. Kennedy was a radical.

Kennedy said, “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute.”  Santorum believes that this was “..a radical statement..” that did “great damage.”, though he does not specify what damage.

Santorum went on to add the euphemism that Kennedy’s comment had Thomas Jefferson spinning in his grave.  Mr. Santorum you are a pompous ass.  Your view on this matter indicates that you either do not value the Constitution or you do not understand it.  There is no other conclusion to be drawn here.

How dare you, Sir? How dare you, Rick Santorum, your time in Congress was at best unremarkable. How dare you show such disregard for the accomplishments of the founding fathers and Jefferson in particular? How dare you compare yourself to two respected American icons such as Thomas Jefferson and John F. Kennedy?

How dare you, Sir?  How dare you impugn the intelligence of far greater man than yourself?  How dare you disrespect the American people with your Theocratic aspirations?  Advocating for “intelligent design”, which is code-speak for teaching Creationism in public schools which directly contravenes the Constitution.

From the 1^st Amendment of the Constitution – “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

For those among us like Rick Santorum that can’t or won’t comprehend this, it means that Congress cannot, in any way, put one religion ahead of another in practice or in law.  Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers understood this.

They saw the corruption that resulted from the close ties to English monarchy had to the Church of England (the Holy Roman Church) and sought to prevent this type of action from occurring in the new country they were founding.

From Thomas Jefferson’s letter in reply to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 – “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”

I cannot see how this can be stated with any more clarity.  There is no place for theocracy in the United States of America.  It is illegal and a clear violation of the Constitution.  That Mr. Santorum refuses to see this means he has no respect for the supreme law of this land.

Mr. Santorum is considering a run for President in 2012.  Every American, considering your recent statements and your previous actions, should be asking you:

How dare you, Sir?

– “Left of Center”

More Details On the Republican's Destructive Budget Plan

Image via Wikipedia

The House Republicans unveiled a budget plan to slash countless dollars of Federal spending, a topic I covered last week in the two part “Defundapalooza” posts (here and here).  Unfortunately there’s more to say on the issue.  Several other very detrimental effects have been found in this proposed budget.

• Moody Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi says that these cuts could potentially lower GDP by half a percent and result in 700,000 less jobs being added to the economy.
  Source: Washington Post
• End Federal funding for NPR and PBS.  The only news outlet remaining in the US that is not rife with editorialized content and punditry (factual content level aside) would be no more.  Worse yet, educational programs like Sesame Street and Nova would no longer be produced.
  Source: Washington Independent
  
• Pell grants for low income college students would be cut by up to 15%
• Loss of $1 billion in funding to the Head Start program, resulting in loss of the jobs of over 50,000 teachers and 200,000 children losing access to pre-school.  This would put an extra unnecessary financial and emotional burden on families where both parents have to work to make ends meet.
• Raise the risk of food-borne illness by eliminating $100 million in funding to the United States Department of Agriculture, which would result in fewer inspectors.  In a time when we hear more and more reports of e-coli and salmonella contamination in packaged food products, this is especially concerning.
  Source: The New Republic
• $27 million less in funding for the Poison Control Center, which would potentially cause the most harm to children as most incidents of accidental poisoning occurs with young children.  No longer would parents have the Poison Control hotline to call for assistance in these situations
  Source: Think Progress
• Huge cuts to Planned Parenthood, to which I have commented previously on here.
  Source: The Wall Street Journal
  
• Potentially put thousands of veterans on the street by ending low-cost housing assistance.  These men and women have fought for our freedom and in many cases suffered mental or physical damage as a result.
  Source: Think Progress

Let your voice be heard that these cuts are unacceptable.  These cuts do not represent the direction that we should be moving in and that making the poor and under-priviledged pay for the entitlement of the wealthy is not what America is about.

– “Left of Center”

— Sign the Petition —

The Conservative "Icon" on Collective Bargaining Rights

Image via Wikipedia

“They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are fobidden, freedom is lost. They remind us that freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. You and I must protect and preserve freedom here or it will not be passed on to our children and it would disappear everywhere in the world… “ – Ronald Reagan

Can someone please let Scott Walker and all the other Conservatives know that their demi-god would have been to the left of them on this issue?

– “Left of Center”

Catching Up, Part VIII – The War on Women's Rights, Part I

Image by ge'shmally via Flickr

In the 2+ months since Republicans took control of the House, they have accomplished absolutely nothing of substance. Instead they have passed several bills that directly attack the rights, welfare and private lives of women.

The first is HR3 or the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act”.  Current law states that Federal funds can only be used to pay for an abortion in the case of rape or incest.  This bill would seek to drastically limit those exemptions.

The language is, as is common with these types things, overly vague. Under the new law a woman would not be able to get an exemption unless the rape was “forcible” in nature. Though there is no attempt to clearly and specifically define what this means.

Instead, what Republicans really intend with this law is to strip away any chance of an exemption and leave any woman who is on Medicare, Medicaid or any other Federal medical assistance program forced to pay for an abortion out of pocket.

Sadly, the people that this would affect are at lower middle class or impoverished income levels meaning they would not be able to afford an abortion and would have to try to borrow the money from friends or a family  member.  The chances of someone at that income level being able to qualify for any kind of loan is low.

Leaving women who are raped by a stranger or a family member in the cold and forced to go into debt to pay for an abortion is both an attack on women’s rights and the mental welfare of both the mother and the child.

What are the chances the child will have a loving home if raised by a woman who sees her rapist and re-lives their attack every time they look at their child?  What long-term emotional scarring would that give to both the child and the mother?

Certainly, this is a worst case scenario but the fact that it even has a chance of becoming a possibility in the United States turns my stomach and it should cause the same reaction for any clear thinking rational individual.

Thankfully at this time, this and any other bills that Republicans try to pass have no chance of making it past the still Democratic Senate or the President’s veto pen.  However, doesn’t it at least concern you that sometime in the future when Republicans inevitable regain control of the Presidency or both houses of Congress that they could actually pass this abominable idea?

– “Left of Center”

Catching Up, Part VII – The Arizona Tragedy

Image by Steve Rhodes via Flickr

I’d like to start by being another of many who wish Gabrielle Giffords and all others that were injured the speediest possible recovery.  Those that are no longer with us, may their families heal as best they can.  I hope also that many can and should learn a lesson in civility from this sad situation.

Unfortunately it was only a matter of time before something like this happened.  As divisive, heated, hateful and ignorant as the political rhetoric has been during and since the 2008 election, sadly it’s surprising to me that something like this didn’t happen sooner.

The hateful words spoken by crowds at McCain / Palin rallies in 2008.  The absolute nonsense fear mongering over “death panels” during the 2009 health care debate.  The oft-repeated false canard of the country becoming Socialist.  The murder of George Tiller after hours upon hours of news coverage on FOX labeling him a child killer.  The shooter at the Holocaust Museum.  Several other instances in the past 2 years of gun & violence themed euphemisms from some very prominent Conservatives.  People arrogantly, ignorantly and irresponsibly bringing loaded weapons to political rallies.

The media, those that are supposed to be journalists, many of them did nothing to defuse or dispel the lies and the nonsense or call out those that were (and still are) telling these lies and spreading this message of hate, this goal of trying to split Americans across political lines.  Rather than encouraging people to sit and talk about their differences, these individuals would rather incite violence and sit back and rake in the money from the ratings they get from their lies.

While it’s true that it’s almost impossible to prove that any of these things directly caused Jared Loughner to snap and carry out this shameful act of violence, the fact remains that these items I’ve mentioned are none-the-less reckless and irresponsible.  Whether they cause people like that who are on the brink of mental health at best to trip over that edge does not matter.’

What matters is that we have a responsibility to each other to avoid saying things that are false, and contain violent rhetoric that could potentially push someone past the edge of reason. Bringing a gun to a political rally may be your legal right but that doesn’t mean you should.  Using gun-themed statements or targets in your political speeches or materials reeks of ignorance and hate.  Neither of these things are illegal, but they are reprehensible and irresponsible.

– “Left of Center”

Catching Up, Part IV – Jobs, Jobs, Jobs? LIES!

Image by DonkeyHotey via Flickr

Dateline January 19th, 2011

Remember that statement? Remember how often it was being repeated? It wasn’t that long ago. It was only in October of last year. Republicans could seemingly only talk about jobs, jobs, jobs. That is, of course, until they actually took office.  After that they instead resorted to a surprising new low point in their regressive class warfare.

The first order of business was for the new Republican House of Representatives to ignore all of their new rules and vote on a repeal of the health care reform law known as the Affordable Care Act. Despite the fact that they were aware this had no chance of passing the Senate or avoiding the veto pen on the President’s desk.

Regardless of the fact that many economists as well as the Congressional Budget Office said doing so would actually add to the deficit not reduce it.  Blind or ignorant ( willfully so? ) to the reality that passing legislation that would go no further is wasting money (their salaries which come from tax dollars) that they were constantly saying we don’t have.

No rather than do what they promised to attempt to address unemployment as they promised, the Republicans want to undo everything that President Obama and the Democrats have accomplished in the last 4 years (2007-2010) regardless of how much it costs taxpayers or how many jobs it eliminates.

In the words of a former (and soon to be) TV news personality — “Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?”

– “Left of Center”

Related Articles

• Sorry Boehner, you don’t get to overrule CBO (americablog.com)
• The GOP’s 5 Most Absurd Lies About Health-Care Reform, Debunked (alternet.org)
• Ignorance of the Law Is No Excuse (But It Can Be Pretty Damn Good Politics) (slog.thestranger.com)

Catching Up, Part III – Congress (sort of) Repeals "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

Dateline December 18th, 2010

After 17 years it’s finally happened.  Congress has repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, the law that allowed for gay & lesbian Americans to be forced out of the armed services regardless of their record has been stricken down.  Well, sort of.  Repeal, though passed by both the House and the Senate, still hinges on the top brass of all branches of the US Armed Forces to actually move forward on the matter.

Certainly this is a step in the correct direction but it could be months or years before this is actually carried out.  Until then, LGBT Americans are still subject to dismissal even if they are heroes simply because of what they do in their private lives that should be nobody’s damn business.

American society has always been behind the curve on societal changes regarding those whom we deem different that “make people uncomfortable”.  Slowly, but surely, we do eventually come around.  It took over 100 years to properly implement equality and civil rights into law for African Americans and other minorities.  LGBT rights are the new legal civil rights battle for the 21st century and I know we’ll get there in time.  Unfortunately while we drag our feet we look ridiculous and backwards to the rest of the world.

– “Left of Center”

Catching Up, Part I – Wikileaks & Conservative Hypocrisy

Dateline December 12th, 2010

This issue is simple.  Julian Assange is not a terrorist.  He is also not guilty of traitor and cannot be legally convicted of treason against the United States because he’s not a US citizen! The Conservative reaction in the USA was filled with some very anti-American and clearly Unconstitutional ideas.  Rather than repeat what has already been said, here’s a video clip from Cenk Ungyar of The Young Turks that lays it down simply and logically.

Decision 2010 Post-Mortem, Part V – It's the Constitution, Stupid

Image via Wikipedia

Update 11-11-10 — A judge in Colorado has issued an injunction barring this law from taking effect

Colorado voters passed a State Constitutional measure banning judges in the state from considering foreign laws in their courts. This law was drafted as a reaction to the court case in Dearborn, MI where a judge factored Muslim Sharia Law into a single decision.

Having read the available information on this case, it’s clear the judge was wrong in her decision. However, enacting a new law to prevent this over a single case decision smacks as a gross overreaction.

Of course, another reason given was to prevent “activist judges” legislating from the bench. This supposed reason shows a clear misunderstanding of the Constitution and how our Federal Government is structured. The only time the label “activist judge” gets trotted out is when Conservatives don’t agree with a judge’s opinion regardless of it’s legal accuracy.

The only thing we need in this country to prevent the admittedly extreme interpretations and aspects of Sharia Law from being considered in US courts is something we already have. The Constitution. If this is followed properly as it is in 99.9% of court cases in this country, there simply is no problem.

This law is just another example of Conservatives stoking fear in their communities to score political points with their base.