On 4-Sep-2009, "Lu Powell" wrote:

Congress still denying health care

Congress has no authority to grant "health care."

"Steve" wrote in message
...

On 4-Sep-2009, "Lu Powell" wrote:

Congress still denying health care

Congress has no authority to grant "health care."

Agreed, though that hasn't stopped it from doing a lot of crap.

Steve wrote:
On 4-Sep-2009, "Lu Powell" wrote:

Congress still denying health care

Congress has no authority to grant "health care."


Sure it does, ****-for-brains. The "tenthers" are just as crazy as the
birthers, teabaggers, and deathers.


As written by Henry Porter and recently reprinted in KOS:

The tenthers claim they are strict constitutional constructionists.
Based on their reading of the 10th Amendment, they contend this
administration in general, and health reform in particular, are
unconstitutional. Since strict constructionists approach the
constitution like fundamentalist Christians approach the Bible, I figure
the best way to bury this argument is to fight fire with fire. It's
time to get literal.

If you read the actual document handed down to us by the Framers, you
don't have to speculate about the original intent of the Founding
Fathers. All you have to focus on is the constitution's literal design.
When you do that the only conclusion you can draw is that universal
health insurance is an inevitable constitutional mandate.

Let me show you where it is written...


A lot of people at tea parties and town halls are busy screaming "We the
People!" They are like religious fundamentalists who scream "an eye for
an eye!" Neither is speaking in complete sentences, so they don't make
sense to anyone else but themselves. To make sense, you need to speak
in complete sentences. Fortunately for us, the framers of the
constitution knew that. Let's start at the beginning and review the
preamble to the constitution:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect
Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of
Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.

The preamble is more than pretty prose tacked on to a complex legal
tool. The preamble to the constitution explains who is doing what and
why they are doing it.

Who: We the people.
What: ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of
America.
Why: seven reasons are given

1. in Order to form a more perfect Union,
2. establish Justice,
3. insure domestic Tranquility,
4. provide for the common defence,
5. promote the general Welfare,
6. and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves
7. and our Posterity

To deal with the tenthers you only need to focus on reasons 4 and 5.

provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare,

The meaning of that section is clear if you look up the definitions of
the words "common","defense", and "welfare":

Common
adjective

1. belonging equally to, or shared alike by, two or more or all in
question.

2. pertaining or belonging equally to an entire community, nation,
or culture; public.

[Source: American Heritage Dictionary]

Defense
noun

1. resistance against attack; protection.

2. something that defends, as a fortification, physical or mental
quality, or medication.

[Source: Random House Dictionary]

Welfare
noun

1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being.

[Source: American Heritage Dictionary]



That explains who, what and why, but the preamble says nothing about
how. For that you have to read the enumerated powers of the various
branches of Government. These are, appropriately, enumerated in
Articles 1 (legislative), 2 (executive), 3 (judicial) and 4 (states).
Note the first branch of government to be granted power is the
legislature. Article 1, Section 8 enumerates the powers of the Congress.

Article 1, section 8 begins:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties,
Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence
and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and
Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

This section then proceeds to list several specific tasks Congress can
claim as its legitimate function. This section gives the Congress its
powers, but it is only at the end of this section that it explains how
Congress gets to exercise that authority:

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying
into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this
Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any
Department or Officer thereof.

Article 1, Section 8 is where it is written that congress has the
constitutional authority to make the laws our government needs to carry
out its obligations. While that power is necessary, it is not
sufficient for congress to carry out its obligations. That is why this
same section grants congress constitutional authority to raise and
collect taxes. Together, these powers are necessary and proper for
congress to meet its obligations and exercise its power. That is
sufficient justification for congress to exert these powers in the
course of executing its duties.

Given the clarity of this authorization it is hard to understand why the
tenthers even exist. Here's the 10th 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.

When you look at the 10th amendment, it is obvious that Article 1,
Section 8 renders the tenthers argument moot. Now that we know congress
has the constitutional authority as well as the necessary and proper
means to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare,
the question becomes historical. Has congress exercised this power before?

Of course it has.

It is no coincidence the United States Public Health Service is as old
as the United States Marine Corps. Both were created by Acts of
Congress in 1798 and signed into law within days of each other by
President John Adams, a Founding Father. This close connection between
public health and national defense was not something Adams cooked up by
himself. Both George Washington and Thomas Jefferson recognized the
importance of public health interventions as critical components of
national defense.

General George Washington protected his army from the scourge of
smallpox (a threat he perceived to be potentially greater "than...the
Sword of the Enemy") by requiring then-controversial smallpox
inoculations for new recruits of the Continental Army.

President Thomas Jefferson promoted vaccination throughout the country
and even instructed Meriwether Lewis to bring immunizations on his
pioneering westward journey to share with people in new settlements of
America.

Defending public health has been accepted as a central responsibility of
the nation's government on par with national defense since the dawn of
the republic.

It's ironic we have to look backwards through time to understand the
constitution because it was written for the future. Return to the
preamble and review all the reasons listed for why it was written. The
7th and last reason encompasses all of the previous six and secures them
for our Posterity.

Posterity
noun

1. succeeding or future generations collectively

2. all descendants of one person

[Source: American Heritage Dictionary]

Once you consider this seventh element, it becomes clear why this
instrument contains within its design the revolutionary concept of
amendment. The tenthers can cling to their notions and
misinterpretations as much as they like. It doesn't change the fact
that rights and protections granted to one group tend to expand over
time to include everyone else and their descendents. That's a logical
and inevitable consequence of the constitution's design. We saw that
for voting rights, property rights and civil rights. The right to basic
health care will be no different.

- - -


Now, Steve, you can head out to your next
birther-deather-tenther-teabagger meeting
and raise hell because you are really ****ed
a black guy is living in your white house.

H the K wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 4-Sep-2009, "Lu Powell" wrote:

Congress still denying health care

Congress has no authority to grant "health care."

[Source: American Heritage Dictionary]

Once you consider this seventh element, it becomes clear why this
instrument contains within its design the revolutionary concept of
amendment. The tenthers can cling to their notions and
misinterpretations as much as they like. It doesn't change the fact
that rights and protections granted to one group tend to expand over
time to include everyone else and their descendents. That's a logical
and inevitable consequence of the constitution's design. We saw that
for voting rights, property rights and civil rights. The right to basic
health care will be no different.


By the same argument, you could ask why is the government promoting the
muslim religion and stamping out the Christian religion.

Keith Nuttle wrote:
H the K wrote:
Steve wrote:
On 4-Sep-2009, "Lu Powell" wrote:

Congress still denying health care

Congress has no authority to grant "health care."

[Source: American Heritage Dictionary]

Once you consider this seventh element, it becomes clear why this
instrument contains within its design the revolutionary concept of
amendment. The tenthers can cling to their notions and
misinterpretations as much as they like. It doesn't change the fact
that rights and protections granted to one group tend to expand over
time to include everyone else and their descendents. That's a logical
and inevitable consequence of the constitution's design. We saw that
for voting rights, property rights and civil rights. The right to
basic health care will be no different.


By the same argument, you could ask why is the government promoting the
muslim religion and stamping out the Christian religion.



snerk

That's a funny one, keith.

On 4-Sep-2009, H the K wrote:

Congress has no authority to grant "health care."


Sure it does, ****-for-brains. The "tenthers" are just as crazy as the
birthers, teabaggers, and deathers.


As written by Henry Porter and recently reprinted in KOS:

Time to up the Thorazine dosage.

On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:05:22 +0000, Steve wrote:


Congress has no authority to grant "health care."

The hell it doesn't. It's in the Preamble, right after "provide for the
common defence". It's "promote the general Welfare".

thunder wrote:
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 15:05:22 +0000, Steve wrote:


Congress has no authority to grant "health care."

The hell it doesn't. It's in the Preamble, right after "provide for the
common defence". It's "promote the general Welfare".


Steve and others think that phrase means "...promote the general welfare
of the rich at the expense of the middle and lower income classes..."

On 4-Sep-2009, H the K wrote:

The hell it doesn't. It's in the Preamble, right after "provide for the

common defence". It's "promote the general Welfare".


Steve and others think that phrase means "...promote the general welfare
of the rich at the expense of the middle and lower income classes..."

Steve can read, unlike most "Amerikkkans." . promote the general welfare
means letting you do what it right for you as long as it doesn't screw with
others. It doesn't mean PROVIDE welfare for those to stupid or lazy to
provide for themselves.

Steve wrote:
On 4-Sep-2009, H the K wrote:

The hell it doesn't. It's in the Preamble, right after "provide for the

common defence". It's "promote the general Welfare".

Steve and others think that phrase means "...promote the general welfare
of the rich at the expense of the middle and lower income classes..."

Steve can read, unlike most "Amerikkkans." . promote the general welfare
means letting you do what it right for you as long as it doesn't screw with
others. It doesn't mean PROVIDE welfare for those to stupid or lazy to
provide for themselves.


Sorry, Steve-o, but your interpretation of that clause is entirely
wrong. You're just "to" stupid.