Constitutional Questions are Serious Questions

Posted November 2nd, 2009 at 12.18pm in First Principles, Health Care.

When CNS News reporter asked Nancy Pelosi “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?,” her response was “Are you serious? Are you serious?”

Is Pelosi serious? Did the Speaker Pelosi really say that asking “is this Constitutional” is a trivial question? Could her statement be a gaffe?

Nope. It’s no gaffe. Pelosi’s press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, clarified for the record that asking the speaker of the House to articulate the Constitutional authority for the health care mandate “is not a serious question.”

Frequent readers of the Foundry will recall that we have asked is the Individual Mandate Constitutional and is National Health Insurance Constitutional? We argued in August that the healthcare legislation is unconstitutional: specifically, neither the necessary and proper clause, the general welfare clause, nor the commerce clause of the Constitution give Congress the authority to mandate a national health care.

But Heritage is not alone in defending the Constitution against a massive increase in government’s power. Nor are we alone in taking the Constitution seriously. Many intelligent legal scholars have grappled with constitutional questions that the health care legislation provokes. David Rivkin and Lee Casey have published several op-eds questioning the Constitutionality of health care. Reputable law professors from some of the best law schools in the country have had a robust conversation over at The Volokh Conspiracy not only about the Constitutionality of Obamacare but also about Constitutional interpretation and what it means for laws to be “Constitutional.”

Contrast this with Speaker Pelosi’s response to CNS News and her health care “mythbuster” (which feebly defends the individual mandate as constitutional without actually quoting the text of the Constitution). Speaker Pelosi’s comments once again demonstrate that progressive advocates of national health insurance are unconcerned whether the Constitution authorizes such legislation and are instead satisfied with pseudo-constitutional reasoning to reach their desired result.

For the record Madame Speaker, it is a “serious question” to ask whether pending legislation violates the Constitution, America’s highest law. In fact, it is serious people who ask the question “Is this Constitutional.”

Author: Julia Shaw
Interact: Sphere
Share This

8 Comments

November 2, 2009 bonnie writes:

And when will those in the Senate and House, especially Republicans who say they are against this bill, start asking and answering this important question? Enough of this. This is the first question that should have been asked, before this whole thing began. I hear a pin drop.

November 2, 2009 Freedom of Speech TX writes:

This is soooooo Pelosi and arrogant radical left-winger.

Afterall, we would not want to let a small thing such as the Constitution of the United States of America get in the way of a progressive agenda.

I sincerely, hope there are constitutional attorneys, governors, and anyone else that still has power, ready to immediately take this to the Supreme Court. Caution! Be very careful what circuit court this challenge will go through.

This is just not about Pelosi. There are many more far left liberals who feel exactly the same way and stand ready to pick up the torch.

Any liberal or “moderate” that still believes this is “just politics as usual” better do some serious soul-searching. If they care about America and the freedoms provided by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, they need to do what is in the best interests of ALL Americans and help stop this madness.

November 2, 2009 Richard, CA writes:

It surprises me how many Americans no longer find such a fundamental loss of freedom to be offensive. I can only hope the Supreme Court still believes in the freedom guaranteed to the United States of America more than the average citizen.

November 2, 2009 J.C. Hughes, Texas writes:

Thank you Julia!

November 2, 2009 Wildcat from Dallastown, PA writes:

Speaker Pelosi does not care what is or is not in our Constitution. As a progressive politician she only cares about amassing power regardless of the means by which that is accomplished. In this case it is by ignoring the Constitution and using not only current taxpayers money but those not yet paying taxes or even born. Pelosi is also apathetic about your individual rights and personal liberties and overall freedom. Her entire approach has been founded on the aforementioned apathies and the immature (childlike) concept o, “we won so we are going to do this way” and not even hear much less listen to anyone’s complaints. That is why the American public has seen virtually all of her idiotic bills voted on by party lines since Obama’s inauguration and why even the liberal democrats (as well as moderates) and “blue dogs” have since appeared to have thought it over and decided not to support her any longer. Her walleyed facial expression may work for Botox commercials but has lost its appeal with those who retain American ideals including a significant number of former supporters in her own party. The sooner those patriotic Americans can displace her (out of the Speaker’s role) and (hopefully) out of office the better off this country will be.

November 2, 2009 Bobbie Jay writes:

Easy to picture this disrespecting, elderly, child. THE CONSTITUTION WAS CREATED TO PROTECT US FROM PEOPLE LIKE PELOSI AND PRESIDENT AND ALL BEHIND THEM! the citizens deserve TESTING OF ALL GOVERNMENT MENTALITY, PERIOD!

AMERICAN CONSTITUTION??? “are you serious? are you serious?”

she would’ve answered a question she knew, like, what color shoes are you wearing, today? Or, what color eyes do you have, today? Of course she would have to look down or in the mirror to give an honest answer.

November 5, 2009 Killing Federalism in Health Care | Fix Health Care Policy writes:

[...] also goes against the same principles supported by the Constitution that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi flippantly dismissed at a recent press [...]

November 5, 2009 Roger S., Ma. writes:

Is SHE serious? — Yes, yes I think she is.
Makes me imagine hearing the back of her mind stating what she really thinks: ‘That question is of no practical importance to me’. — Now, where did we hear such answer(s) before, and from whom, and verbatim?! — Does send shivers up my spine!

Simply put, every legislator — each sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States — is required by this very act to make that the first question asked whenever legislation is proposed. We, the voting citizens, should exact from ourselves zero tolerance concerning this issue in every election. Anyone answering as she did needs to be sent home.

That answer was an insult to every voter!

The Heritage Foundation - Leadership for America

The Foundry