|
|
|
|
The Leavenworth Times - Leavenworth, KS
  • Letter: Obamacare and the Constitution

  • I was heartened to read that Mr. Harrison is not sold on Obamacare (Leavenworth Times, Nov. 7).
    • email print
  • To the editor:
    I was heartened to read that Mr. Harrison is not sold on Obamacare (Leavenworth Times, Nov. 7). My joy was short-lived, however, as I perused the caricatured views of the U.S.A. on which he is sold.
    Characterizing the U.S. Constitution as a "Rulebook" is faint praise for the body of work which is the blueprint for the U.S. Republic, as well as the supreme law thereof.
    Defining the "spirit" of the Constitution as governing in the best interest is mere feel-good propaganda. "Best interest" is in the eye of the beholder. What person A views as best interest is abhorred by person B. Obamacare is a case in point.
    The notion of "hostage" taking is nonsense. Who was taken hostage, by whom, where held and for what ransom?
    Anyone who thinks the Obamacare legislation to have been "processed by the rulebook" should be able to tell us all which clause of Art. I, Sect. 8 allows such tripe.
    "They would not let the vote occur." I can't be sure but I assume this refers to the failure of the Senate to take up and vote on House-passed bills. If so, let us recall that each body is constitutionally empowered to adopt its own rules. Moreover, none of us is the Senate Majority Leader.
    "Majority rules" is the philosophy of a democracy. We live in a constitutional republic, which is a different animal, praise be.
    The tale of two foxes and a chicken voting comes to mind. Fox B moves chicken for dinner, Fox A seconds. In a democracy the motion carries 2-1 (think tyranny of the majority). In the U.S. Republic it is ruled out of order on constitutional grounds. You can put it in human terms easily enough. Think Obamacare.
      • calendar