Opponents of Obamacare have welcomed Judge Roger Vinson’s decision that not only is the individual mandate unconstitutional, but that that renders the entire 2,000 plus page scheme unconstitutional. (The previous ruling that the individual mandate is unconstitutional by Judge Henry Hudson did not overturn the entire statute. UPDATE – in mostly upholding Judge Vinson’s decision, the Eleventh . . . → Read More: Obamacare in the Supreme Court
|
|||||
|
One of the distinctive features of the Tea Party is its focus on understanding the Constitution and pulling the federal leviathan back into its constitutional bounds. While conservatives certainly have always been cognizant of the Constitution, previous conservative resurgences were never as Constitution-conscious as the contemporary Tea Party. The question is, what do we do with . . . → Read More: The Problem of Pork and Precedent, or Why We Need Amendment as a Third Front to Restore Constitutional Government There has been considerable brouhaha over whether the Republican-controlled House of Representatives in the 112th Congress will really reduce runaway federal spending. One day the leadership designates a chairman of the Appropriations Committee with a major earmark portfolio of his own and the next day there are fears that even Tea Party stalwarts might get wobbly . . . → Read More: Earmarks and Obamacare — Count on the Constitution, not Congress or the courts Just as the Left tried unsuccessfully to tar the Tea Party as racist, it is now using distortion and ridicule to attack the Tea Party’s contention that Congress should follow the Constitution. One of the most recent efforts is radical activist Lincoln Caplan’s op-ed in the “All the News That Fits” Times, entitled “Exploring the . . . → Read More: The Real Constitutional Conservatism Many thanks to the Washington Times for publishing my op-ed commentary presenting a preliminary argument for the “amendment amendment.” In particular they came up with a headline more informative and to the point than the one I proposed, although I would still like to use Carpe Apertio (seize the opening) as a slogan for something! A fuller discussion of the “amendment . . . → Read More: Carpe Apertio: Return the Constitution to the People – Kill the Constitutional Convention Requirement In an October 20 piece in Time, attorney Adam Cohen discusses the contention by senatorial candidates John Raese of West Virginia and Joe Miller of Alaska that the federal minimum wage law is unconstitutional. Although it does not appear that either candidate will be joining the Senate, it is important to clarify the confusion manifested by Mr. . . . → Read More: Of Minimum Wages, Lochner and Darby; or Understanding How to Read the Constitution Originally There has been a flurry of notice in the media about an exchange in a recent debate between Delaware senatorial candidates Christine O’Donnell and Chris Coons over the concept of the “separation of church and state” and the actual wording of the first amendment which provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of . . . → Read More: Christine O’Donnell and the Separation of Church and State This is the expanded text of a letter to the editor of the New York Times which I wrote in response to an op-ed by historical writer Ron Chernow. Of course, the “All the News That Fits” Times did not publish the letter. In his op-ed article published September 23 entitled “The Founding Fathers versus the Tea Party”, . . . → Read More: Reply to Ron Chernow on the Founders vs. the Tea Party Many Americans are frustrated by the continuing ability of an unelected, unaccountable, elitist body, the Supreme Court, to freely change the meaning of the Constitution. For over seven decades the Court has abetted a massive centralization of governmental power at the national level, contrary to any reasonable understanding of the original allocation of powers by the . . . → Read More: How Do We Restore the Constitution? |
|
||||
|
Copyright © 2024 Timely Renewed - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
Comments are closed 
Bernie Sanders and the Progressive Case for a More Jeffersonian Government
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders’ nine-hour rant on the Senate floor against maintaining the current tax rates for upper income Americans attracted considerable notice. The essence of his argument was that more successful individuals and small businesses should be taxed more because of government favoritism toward major corporate interests in the Bush/Obama bailouts. Of course, under a true free market such . . . → Read More: Bernie Sanders and the Progressive Case for a More Jeffersonian Government