Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Back To "These" United States

I am neither an attorney nor a "constitutional scholar"; But, an avid student of history.. As such I wish to bring some "history" to apply to the recent "health care" legislation passed by the Congress and to like issues as to this nation's status as a Republic (And NOT a, more-or-less, pure or unified democracy).

Until, at the least, the War Between The States (Fought more over States' Rights than slavery), this nation was generally known as "These United States". Beginning after that most bloody war, the pendulum began to swing (Kicked more into motion by the two World Wars and, since 1945, by more and more "creative" judicial activism) towards having the USA known as "The United States".

Much of that expansion of Federal power appears to have been based on the use or misuse of the "Interstate Commerce Clause" of the Constitution---As written BEFORE the "Bill Of Rights" and, most specially its Tenth Amendment. All of those first ten amendments were required before the final acceptance of the Constitution to protect the rights of the People and, to some extent, the Several States.

Now, I am unable to mutate and mutilate the Constitution to the fine level of convoluted reasoning demonstrated by the Congress and, most specially, by those "High Priests Of The Religion Of The Law", more commonly called Federal Judges. But, I do understand that the noted clause was to prevent States from discriminating against the exports of other states and, incidentally to set the legal framework for tariff laws (The primary income source of the Federal Government for many years) and the then existing status of the "Indian" tribes as independent nations.

But, I am able to understand the logic that modifiers (The Tenth Amendment) limit or more finely define what came before OR towards what such are designed or intended to do. I also understand that the Fourteenth Amendment was to extend rights-and-powers to individual citizens under the (Full) jurisdiction of the Nation and NOT to extend Federal powers. I also know that the Constitution, itself, contains the amendment-means to add or delete "rights" through its amendment-clause. There is noting in that key and basic document which allows such changes in rights (eg Possession/manufacture of alcoholic beverages, votes for women) by some judicial "discovery of rights" and without the People's approval. (nb The "right to keep and bear arms" is in the Constitution, without any "reasonable conditions clause" and pre-dates that document in our legal traditions. It was recently confirmed, NOT discovered, by the Supreme Court.)

I suggest that the pendulum towards centralized, Federal, power has swung too much towards tyranny and needs to find a better balance-point. I suggest that the People's reaction to Chicago-style politics, in the Obama administration, may be the beginning of such a rational and democracy-supporting force---Unless we are again betrayed by some Judges and the Congress.

(1) U.S. Constitution: Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


(2-B) To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

No comments: