Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Signature Legislation Smeared?

In case you haven't noticed, Mr. Van Winkle...and good morning to you, sir...this is an election year. That means one party is trying to regain power and they will do that through proposals for doing things better while simultaneously pointing to failures of the incumbent.

The incumbent administration will make promises for an even better future while pointing with pride at what they have achieved in their first term in office.

OK, it won't be as exciting as end-of-season episodes of Real Housewives of Wichita Falls, but there is still potential for drama.

We already know how proud the Bamster is for shepherding the Affordable Health Care Act through Congress. That's is the one which we have been funding for two years now and which promises to start doing some healthcare stuff in another two years. Along the way it has taken college loans out of the hands of private banks which doesn't seem to have a whole lot to do with cancers, heart attacks or contraceptives for Ms Fluke. That is already working out well as interest rates bump up against non-payment, bad-investment reality in a few months. It's sort of Fannie Mae meets transgender central African studies major with debts.

That pride-and-joy seems destined for a collision with the Constitution over the individual mandate. The power of our vaunted "limited" government to compel us to buy products we don't want from third parties, who may or may not be supporters of the incumbent party looks as though it will be flushed from the body politic.

Now, we've got this pending decision:

Enforcing Federal Law May Be Within Authority of Federalism

Wouldn't that be amazing if the Supreme Court found that when a federal law exists and the federal government blatantly refuses to enforce it, that a state suffering damage through that malfeasance may act to protect itself?

Do you suppose the American people are foolish enough to re-elect a President who despite asserted but undemonstrated credentials as a Constitutional scholar touts policies regularly demonstrated as beyond the authority of our core document?

No comments: