Replies

"Justice Roberts, in his now infamous Obamacare decision for which he is generally (and wrongly) reviled by conservatives, remarked:
No, we don't. We have two "governments," in fact. Two completely separate "governments," under one Constitution."

Thanks for posting Talisker. Good things in your post. But please allow me to indicate some issues that I had with with just a couple of your statements. Starting with your two governments remark, please consider the following.

We have two types of government under the Constitution, state and federal governments. In fact, it is the state governments who established the federal government, not vice versa as you may be thinking.

And not only did the original states establish the federal government, but they also drafted the federal Constitution to deliberately limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers. In other words, what the people have forgotten over the generations is that the original states drafted the Constitution to reserve the lion’s share of government power to serve the people to themselves, not to the federal government.

And the reason that the federal government is unconstitutionally big today is this. As a consequence of generations of parents not making sure that their children were taught about the federal government’s constitutionally limited powers, the federal government has been able to steal state government powers to regulate, tax and spend for many things that the states have actually never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific powers to do. In fact, Thomas Jefferson had predicted that the people would become apathetic towards government affairs.

“Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors, shall all become wolves. It seems to be the law of our general nature.” - Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Carrington January 16, 1787)

Next, since you evidently think that activist Justice Roberts was correct to argue the constitutionally of Obamacare, please consider the excerpts from historical Supreme Court case decisions below. Unlike Roberts, these excerpts indicate that previous generations of state power-respecting justices have historically clarified, on several occasions, that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for intrastate healthcare purposes.

Please note in particular that the current controversy about the Obamacare insurance mandate is actually not controversial at all imo. This is evidenced by the fourth entry in the list from Paul v. Virginia (Paul). The Paul excerpt indicates that the Supreme Court had previously clarified that insurance policies are contracts, not commerce, Congress therefore having no Commerce Clause power to regulate insurance policies, regardless if such policies are negotiated across state borders.

”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass.” —Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
”4. The issuing of a policy of insurance is not a transaction of commerce [emphasis added] within the meaning of the latter of the two clauses, even though the parties be domiciled in different States, but is a simple contract of indemnity against loss.” — Paul v. Virginia, 1869. (The corrupt feds have no Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to regulate insurance.)
“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress.” –Linder v. United States, 1925.

In fact, note that regardless that federal Democrats, RINOs, corrupt justices and indoctrinated attorneys will argue that if the Constitution doesn’t say that the feds can’t do something then they can do it, the Supreme Court has addressed that foolish idea too. Politically correct interpretations of the Constitution's Supremacy Clause (5.2) aside, the Court has clarified in broad terms that powers not delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate healthcare in this case, are prohibited to the feds.

”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.

Note that when the Founding States had established the federal Senate, they had given control of the Senate uniquely to state lawmakers. This basically so that the Senate could defend their states by killing bills made by the House which not only wrongly stole 10th Amendment-protected states powers, but arguably steal state revenues associated with those powers.

The reason that general voters now elect federal senators is this. State lawmakers caved into pressure from misguided citizens who evidently did not understand why they couldn’t vote for federal senators. State lawmakers subsequently turned the control of the federal Senate over to the popular vote by ratifying the ill-conceived 17th Amendment (17A), foolishly giving up the voices of state lawmakers in Congress by doing so.

One very bad consequence of 17A is this. The Senate wrongly passed constitutionally indefensible Obamacare, for example, regardless that the states have never delegated to Congress, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for intrastate healthcare purposes as previously mentioned.

The 17th Amendment needs to disappear.