No member of Congress apparently takes the time to ask the question: Is it constitutional? I would imagine that only a handful members of Congress have read The Federalist Papers and I also am adamant that they do not have a copy of the constitution handy to refresh their memories.
I am concerned, like all Americans, about the future of the United State of America. We spend too much; make too many promises that we cannot afford and assume that we should just raise taxes whenever we have a deficit.
America has fought wars in Europe, North America, South America, Africa, China, Philippines, Southeast Asia, Central America, and Puerto Rico. We have fought a Revolutionary War, a Civil War, two World Wars, and 27 (circa) non-declared wars from Mexico, Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Grenada, to Panama. We have spent billions $ (trillions) and lost hundreds (thousands) of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. Why have we fought in these wars? What does it all mean to us today? Did we spend all this money and waste all these lives to defend our culture, our political system, to give citizens and non-citizens $ entitlements, or was it to defend liberty AND/or the constitution? Are we grateful to the sacrifices of our veterans? How many of these wars were fought with Congressional approval as proscribed by the Constitution?
We have enacted laws that provide $ entitlements for generations to come (e.g. Social Security, Medicaid, Obama-care, and Medicare) which are destined to cost us as much or more than we have spent on all the wars. Are we rasining taxes just so we can fight another war or are we seeing the end of the United States of America as we know it. Why do we keep enacting new legislation that promises $ millions to current and future generations without taking the time to figure out how much it will $ cost and make sure it is sound $ financially?
We are so proud of our constitution but we abuse and discredit this document almost daily by Congress, by the Supreme Court, or by the Executive Branch (President). The President can issue "Executive Order" that has the standing as LAW without the consent of Congress. The President can attach a "signature statement" to legislation passed by Congress to deletes parts that he does not like. Why am I frightened of Obama, a constitutional scholar, that he will abuse our Constitution even worse than did FDR, Woodrow Wilson, George Bush, or Lyndon Johnson, etc?
All the while, Congress uses filthy lucre $ to bribe States to do their bidding on entitlements, immigration, education, etc. They dangle the opportunity to obtain free money ( with strings attached) to the States that shrink the amount of influence States have with their own citizens. The Federal Government seems to be in a battle to win the hearts and minds of the citizens of every State of the Union with juicy entitlements like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid that enhances the ability of the federal government to wean away the loyalty of citizens from their respective State. Citizens are now more dependent upon the Federal Government than they are on State Government. This in and of itself is an abuse of power.
Congress uses bribery to win converts
Congress has granted the Executive Branch the authority to control private property through the Environmental Protection Agency. Congress created the private Federal Reserve System (FED) to handle all monetary policy of the United States without any oversight by Congress, the Executive Branch, or the Supreme Court. Congress created the US Department of Education to allows the Executive branch to use filthy lucre $ to persuade States to hand-over their responsibility. Since the creation of the Department of Edcuation our international ranking of scholarship has fallen each and every year while spending $ billions.
The Supreme Court has found new loop-holes in rights. Abortion being the most notable and long-lasting of these new rights. When was the last time you heard the Supreme Court declare a provision passed by Congress is unconstitutional? Until ObamaCare came along, I do not remember such a ground swell about the constitutionality of any legistialtion. Why wasn't Socail Secuirty added as a constitutional amendment rather than as a piece of legislation?
