Month: July 2009

Constitutional Amendment 16

Post author By David
Post date July 31, 2009
4 Comments on Constitutional Amendment 16

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

The longer I live and the more I study, the more convinced I become that the sixteenth amendment is the greatest assault on liberty in our Constitution.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

The amendment was passed as a benign revision to the Constitution, amending Article I Section 9 which had specifically prohibited Congress from laying any direct tax. Without this amendment the government could never have sufficient funds to substantially exceed their constitutional authority.

This amendment was passed in order to make it possible to levy income taxes – the most sinister aspect of income taxes being that government now holds first claim on the income of its citizens. If I don’t wish to support what the government is doing my only legal way to not support it is to have no income (or at least, less income than they are interested in taxing). While it will never happen in my lifetime (and probably will never happen period) the fact that the government has first claim on my income means that Congress could claim everything I produce and take it as income tax. So much for the right to property because my property (and yours) is now a gift or loan from the government.

Tags amendments, Constitution, documents, history, liberty, taxes

culture National

Government Can’t Do Charity

Post author By David
Post date July 30, 2009
12 Comments on Government Can’t Do Charity

Those pushing the need for health care reform spend a lot of time talking about the uninsured and the many unfortunate people who cannot or will not afford to pay for health care. (Mostly they talk about the “cannot pay” people except when they are proposing to have individual mandates, then they start talking about “freeloaders” who don’t get insurance even though they can afford it.) These people claim that health care is a right and (although they don’t use the word) they are proposing that the government can and should provide charity care for those in the “cannot pay” camp. The only problem is that government has been trying to do that for a long time through medicaid and medicare. The fact is that government cannot provide charity care – government can only take from those it chooses to burden and give to those it chooses to help. This warps the system even when it is meant to level the playing field.

Tags Elevated, government, health care, ideal, liberty, money, religion, thoughts

culture

All Things to All People

In a classic case of Federal-sightedness, President Obama is stepping in to mediate an altercation between a black professor and a white police officer. Normally I would be disappointed that the President had nothing better to do but lately I have had more of a mindset where this makes me happy – in fact, I almost wish that we would have more incidents like this to keep Obama too busy to keep prodding Congress to rush through an ill-conceived health care boondoggle (or “blob of legislative goo” if you prefer).

For the sake of variety we might throw in cases of black police officers having altercations with white professors, or inserting other “oppressed” minority groups into the formula so that the President can meet with people from a wide variety of backgrounds – especially those who don’t live in Washington D.C.

Tags discourse, government, media, sarcasm

General

The Pledge of Allegiance

The Pledge of Allegiance may well be the most widely memorized bit of prose in the United States. In fact it is so widely known that I wonder how many people have ever stopped to consider where it came from or what it means (few I suspect). It was first written in 1892 but it’s final form did not come until 1954. Those who object to the reference to God are following in the footsteps of the daughter of the man who wrote the original version.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

I think it is instructive that we do not pledge allegiance to the United States or its government, but to the flag and the government ideal that it represents. We are pledging allegiance to the republic that the founders established in order to protect the freedoms of all the citizens of the nation. A nation which is meant to be under God and indivisible and which should be devoted without exception to protecting liberty and promoting justice for all.

That is the kind of nation that I can cheerfully and wholeheartedly support. We must ask ourselves how close that image aligns with the realities of our nation today. Those who truly pledge their allegiance to the flag and the national ideal of good government that it represents are pledging themselves to pursue those policies in government and society which will bring us closer to the ideal represented by the flag, the one where there are 50 sovereign states which, together with the sovereign citizens of the nation, work together to promote liberty and justice for all.

Tags documents, history, liberty

General

Facts From Honduras

One month after Manuel Zalaya was sent into exile we are hearing very little news on the situation. The crisis in Honduras is still not resolved however and now Roberto Micheletti, the interim President, is expressing his views in the Wall Streett Journal. The views that he shares sound like he is very much on the same page as Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga, whose position I covered a couple of weeks ago.

I’m not sure if the story withered from lack of interest or if the facts being cited by the current leadership of Honduras make it hard to continue pushing the version of events that the media seemed to prefer.

Tags Honduras, international, media, Wall Street Journal

National

Honest Democrats in Congress

Post author By David
Post date July 24, 2009
1 Comment on Honest Democrats in Congress

If we are ever to achieve any health care reform that will actually have a positive impact on our society it will require that we have honest Democrats in Congress. Not just any honest Democrats, but enough of them and in the right places that they can use their honesty to guide the debate. The way that you will be able to recognize a Democrat with the honesty to help the process is that he will reject the assertion of President Obama that Republicans only want to maintain the status quo.

An honest Democrat would have to recognize and admit that Republicans have been publicly acknowledging for years that we need health care reform. An honest Democrat would work from a position that understands that believing that the proposals they currently don’t have time to read are actually worse than the status quo (as Republicans generally do) is not the same as believing that the status quo is acceptable (as Republicans generally don’t). Using the scare tactic that doing nothing will make the cost of health care double within ten years without acknowledging that a poor solution could be crafted in a way that makes the cost triple within nine years is not honest. Such honest Democrats would be willing and able to actually have a dialog with Republicans and see if they have anything of value to offer on this issue.

Tags Democrat, discourse, Elevated, health care, insights, issues, parties, questions, Republican

General

Constitutional Amendment 15

Post author By David
Post date July 23, 2009
No Comments on Constitutional Amendment 15

The 15th Amendment appears to be the first attempt to curb the efforts of those who were trying to deny blacks the right to vote as explicitly established in the 14th amendment.

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

As history has shown, those people who still held their prejudices found more creative ways to deny that right. This is just further proof that there is no way to legislate what people will or should think – regardless of how well the social engineers concoct their plans.

Tags amendments, Constitution, documents, history, liberty

National

The Cost Issue is MIA

Matthew Piccolo has a good summary of some of the major issues that are attached to the current health care proposal. That seemed like a good complementary article to what I wanted to point out about the Health Care Reform Freight Train™ speeding through the halls of Congress – there is a major issue that has failed to be attached to the current discussion – cost reduction.

Back in ancient history (2007 through mid 2008), while the presidential election was in full swing but before the economy and the urgent need to bail out anyone with pockets deep enough to hold quantities of money starting with “$” and ending in “Billion”, health care was seen as the most important domestic issue on the campaign trail – does anyone remember that time? If you do you should remember that one of the few points of consensus on the issue between all parties was that health care was too expensive and that any attempt at a solution would have to include measures to cut the overall amount that we spend on health care. Here is a clip from Obama’s campaign website on the issue of healthcare:

we want to make health insurance work for people and businesses, not just insurance and drug companies.

Reform the health care system:
We will take steps to reform our system by expanding coverage, improving quality, lowering costs, honoring patient choice and holding insurance companies accountable.

Improve preventative care:
In order to keep our people healthy and provide more efficient treatment we need to promote smart preventative care, like cancer screenings and better nutrition, and make critical investments in electronic health records, technology that can reduce errors while ensuring privacy and saving lives.

(emphasis added)

Tags change congress, Elevated, health care, issues, liberty, money, Obama

National

Constitutional Amendment 14

Post author By David
Post date July 21, 2009
2 Comments on Constitutional Amendment 14

I have written previously about the Fourteenth Amendment as an example of a law that declares a legal principle of equality but does not extend to defining a quantitative measure of the level of equality that is expected. This amendment is applicable to current political debates for two reasons. First, that we are grappling with the proper way to construct laws to protect the liberty and equality of all citizens. Second, this amendment is referenced in some debates about how to deal with the issue of illegal immigration.

Section 1 of the amendment declares the principle – and it is a debate about what it means to be “born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” that is applicable to some proposed legislation related to illegal immigration.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 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.

Section 2 specifies the consequences of abridging the equality specified in the first section.

Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Some people have argued that the non-outcome-based approach to the problem of abridging voting rights is what lead to widespread discrimination against blacks in the south for a century after this amendment was adopted. I think that it would be more accurate to say that failure to impose the declared penalty was more at fault for this practice. People cannot have their inner thoughts and desires regulated by written laws, but they generally will mold their actions to their own best interest. If the penalty of reduced representation were applied to the states that were using intimidation and Jim Crow laws to prevent blacks from exercising their civic rights I have little doubt that those states would rather quickly have found the motivation necessary to end such practices in order to have a full voice in the actions of the federal government without needing the creation of some of the civil rights legislation of the 1960’s that focused on equality of outcomes rather than universal principles of equal protection.

Tags amendments, Constitution, documents, history, voting

General

Constitutional Amendment 13

Post author By David
Post date July 20, 2009
No Comments on Constitutional Amendment 13

The Thirteenth Amendment is about as straightforward as any of the first ten amendments (I find it interesting to notice that the most obvious and natural amendments tend to be the shortest).

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

While there is nothing that I would dare add to that amendment and I doubt that anyone needs a lesson in the context behind its adoption I do wonder how our nation might be different if the issue of slavery had been resolved by the process of adopting this amendment rather than fighting a war before then adopting this amendment.

I would not suggest that the issue would have been “resolved” by 1865 even to the degree that it was with the Civil War, but I would not be surprised if the outcome would have been to more completely lay to rest the prejudices that were so openly accepted 100 years later and which we still feel among our society today. (No, electing a black president does not prove that we have no racism or bigotry remaining in our society – in case there was anyone who entertains such a notion.)

Tags amendments, Constitution, documents, history, questions