Tea party proponent claims constitutional questions with health care reform
ABINGDON, Va. – If health care reform is passed by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, the law will likely face an immediate Constitutional challenge.
Local attorney Strother Smith, who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court, is among a group of Constitutional lawyers from several states who are promising to take the reform law before the high court.
Smith said the legislation violates six Constitutional amendments – including free speech guarantees and protections against illegal search and seizure.
“If the court finds it is unconstitutional, anything the government has done to carry it out would have to be undone,” Smith said. “Hopefully that would cause the federal government to not do anything about the law until all the constitutional questions have been answered.”
Smith’s organization, the 10th Amendment Foundation Inc., was born out of the tea party movement, which opposes government growth beyond the powers outlined in the U.S. Constitution.
Proponents of the proposed health care legislation contend the sweeping reforms are necessary to make health care more affordable – especially here in Southwest Virginia.
“This bill has gotten lots and lots of debate from all sides,” said Brian Johns, a Southwest Virginia organizer for the Virginia Organizing project, which has been drumming up support for health care reform. “It’s something that has to get done,” Johns said.
Scott Ambrose, a business professor at Emory & Henry College who has studied health care issues, said the cost of care is shockingly high in Southwest Virginia because of poor health statistics – and despite his concerns about the potential for increasing costs and rationing of care, he supports the reform effort because the current system needs a major overhaul.
Ambrose also said he doesn’t think the reform legislation is unconstitutional.
“I think some solution needs to happen,” he said. “I think they’d have to look at it again if it’s ruled as unconstitutional.”
Smith said several amendments to the U.S. Constitution would be violated by the legislation. Those amendments and his reasons include:
* The First Amendment: The legislation would compel senior citizens to discuss end-of-life matters, taking over an area long held to be the domain of religious leaders and infringing on free speech.
* The Fourth and Fifth Amendments: The legislation allows the seizure of money and records without due process.
* The Ninth and 10th Amendments: Congress does not have the power to impose mandatory health insurance; only individual states have that right, Smith said.
* The 14th Amendment: The legislation discriminates between residents of different states and against those who do not belong to labor unions.
* The 16th Amendment: Developing a national insurance plan is a form of social engineering – not the simple revenue-raising purpose of taxation.
“I just hope the mere fact that we’re doing this will cause some Congressmen to think twice about voting for it,” Smith said.
| (276) 791-0701
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
You know fdr, I am not sure why you are such an angry person, but blaming all of the world’s evils on tea baggers and claiming that they are all in the employ of the insurance comnpanies is ridiculous. With all of the people that are against the current prosposed health bill, the insurance companies don’t have enough money to pay them all off! I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again and a little stronger - people who want to rely on any type of insurance plan are plain lazy. They are too lazy or too undisciplined to think outside the box. People need to refuse to use insurance for every day medical expenses, shop for doctors who are willing to discount for paying cash and force the system to become competitive again. Otherwise you are playing into the hands of the hopspitals and health care providers who want to keep increasing the prices of health care. As it is, insurance almost always has a deductible that is higher than the cost of just paying for the services. Therefore who is getting your premium monies. If you think it will be better under government public financed health care you are not only naive but foolish. Besides I disagree to the belief that health care is a right. You’re not entitled to anything but the freedom to make something of your life with your own two hands instead of relying on the public trough to take care of you!
Ah,yes,traditional American values.Values like lying,cheating,stealing and murdering Native Americans so we could steal their land and all its natural resources.Values like enslaving African-Americans and treating them like second class citizens and sub-human beings thereafter.Values like the rich owners starting wars and sending the poor off to fight and die in that war,and ad nauseum.Values like Walmarts,where workers are paid minimum wage and where fulltime jobs are being eliminatedin favor of all part-time jobs so the company won’t have to provide full-time benefits?
Who’s asking for universal welfare?Are you talking about health care for 46 million Americans who can’t afford it?An affordable public option,instead of enriching the teabaggers health insurance masters who control Americans access to health care with their denials of benefits and death panels?When you pay for something it’s not welfare.
Where is the racism,the ignorance,the evil of the Drugrush Lamebrain lovers?
Wake up man and open your eyes.Watch a few videos of their parties or rallys.You got a computer, or access to one.Look and see.
One of the ironies of a society where traditional values become eroded is that values slide and what was traditionally considered good becomes connoted as evil. This country was founded on a value of self-sufficiency where people worked and made their own way rather than depending on government to supply all of their needs. That also is what the Constitution gave us the right to pursue - not a system of universal welfare. The “teabaggers” want a return to that set of values, and for that, FDR, you call them evil ignorant, racists? You are the one who is demagoging with emotionally laden namecalling. Where is the racism? Where is the ignorance? hwere is the evil? Look in the mirror.
It is indeed an occurrence of dire portent that the the only group of people the media is paying attention to is the Teabaggers.These people are without a doubt and bar none,the greatest threat to the people and well being of the U.S.than any other group in memory.They are the largest racist,hypocrital,ignorant bunch of dupes and pawns of the rich and powerful ever assembled on U.S. soil.Their leader collects $400,000,000 for bouncing his fat a—up and down on a chair in a radio studio,high on oxycontin and god knows what else,spouting off more B.S. than all the cattle ranches in Texas combined,feeding it to his loyal minions and worshippers who eat his sh—like it was gourmet food.
Chester, You wote, “Why does Mr. Strothers, (a laywer by the way) have so much passion for defeating a measure which will offer regular citizens the same choice in health care as congress gets?“ Whatever faults Mr. Strother Smith has, naivete is not one of them as it sure seems to be of you. You have got to be kidding to think that the elite in Congress would ever give us, the great, unwashed masses, the same health care plan that they have voted to themselves for life! You really need to get in touch with reality, my friend.
FDR says: “ As far as Tnandy’s comment on the interstate commerce clause, my previous post answers that plainly….he’s wrong.Period.“
Hmmmm….so you think the Supremes were correct in ruling a farmer who wanted to grow more wheat than the govt wanted him to grow TO USE ONLY ON HIS OWN FARM, and not even sell is a correct use of the interstate commerce provision of the Constitution ?
As I said, THEN why bother listing the powers of Congress in Art1Sec8 AT ALL…..why didn’t the founders simply say “everything that happens in this country affects interstate commerce, therefore Congress can do anything they want”......because that IS what the Supremes said in that stupid ruling….a ruling by a court packed by your hero….FDR.
Posted by commonsense: “FDR-
I’ve not seen anyone lying on the side of the road dying or bleeding…
Shame on you for not helping them…
‘bit over the top, aren’t you?“
Commonsense you have just proved my point with your own words.
Also, Mr.Smith does sound suspicious, doesn’t he?
commonsense—-NO, fdr is not over the top!!! There are people laying at home every minute dying because they do not have the money to go to the hospital. Don’t expect people of this area to run to hospitals regularly without the means to pay. Older people of this region are very proud people. They want some kind of protection, but only if they can pay something. Sound like what this debate is over? They all want insurance, but most cannot afford the premiums.
FDR-
I’ve not seen anyone lying on the side of the road dying or bleeding…
Shame on you for not helping them…
‘bit over the top, aren’t you ?
Advertisement