"If the Republicans really had guts..."

If they had guts, they'd have more than 177 House seats. There's a conservative majority in this country if only Republicans would get some constitutional spines.

When was the Constitution amended so that healthcare became an issue for the federal government? Tell me again the difference between the republican leadership (still an oxymoron) and the democraps.

The U.S. Government (big G) should only get involved in our lives when there is systemic risk to the nation involved. Providing for a national defense is obviously protects from potential systemic risk. Health care, a system where the majority are satisfied with the privately funded care that they are receiving, is not a sytemic risk to the nation, so a massive Federal intervention is not warranted.

CEO pay. Does it pose a "systemic" risk to the nation. No.

Corporate governance, does it provide a "Systemic" risk to the U.S. Yes.

Terrorism, Yes.

Immigration, Yes.

Globalization, Yes.

Energy Policy, Yes.

Environment, Yes.

Use the lens of "systemic risk" to our nation to debate whether government involvement is necessary and then implement REASONABLE controls and we will be more than okay.

Very Simple.

To Kevin,

"Corporate governance, does it provide a "Systemic" risk to the U.S. Yes."

Could you be more specific?

How does corporate governance pose this threat?

And what is your remedy?

There are already laws that punish wrong and criminal behavior.

Are you proposing other penalties and government interference?

To Keith,

I would echo Victors question regarding how "Corporate governance" provides systemic risk.

Aside from that, I have checked the Constitution and I don't find the words "systemic risk" in that document. We have to be careful in our interpretation of the Constitution and reading into it things that are not there. I believe it is just that tendency of our government over the last 100 years, in using extremely broad interpretations of phrases such as "promote the general welfare" and "regulate commerce" that have expanded this government into the present bloated behemoth it is. And of a size and scope well beyond anything the founders imagined or intended.

I agree with the author of the subject article. Republicans need to make the Constitution, and it's clear limitations on the Federal Government, their central platform focus by reaffirming 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." ~

Everybody is saying, this is unconstitutional, that is unconstitutional, but NOBODY is challenging it in the Supreme Court. Is that not their job to decide the consitutionality of the laws enacted by Congress? Why is the Supreme Court silent? Why is nobody enforcing the law anymore? Why is everything that is good all of a sudden bad, and everything bad and corrupt is praised and rewarded?

How come an entire country is deathly afraid to take on the administration? Are we no longer the United States of America? Have people not lost enough already? What are they waiting for? Loss of all property, freedom, guns, and life?

I asked a Judge in a case on "Property Rights", Why "Urban Growth Plan Legislation" from the State couldn't be ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL, I was in court, trying to extricate my private property from the clutches of this obviously UNCONSTITUTIONAL law and the Judge just look at me in a stymied way and the subject was dropped!!!!!!

This is why Thomas Jefferson made his comment about the "baneful Judiciary beholden to no man".

When was the last time any level of the Judiciary ruled a piece of legislation UNCONSTITUTIONAL??? The answer will be found in the "sad silence" that was given to me when I asked an attorney if he had ever read the Constitution or are we a Nation that is now governed by CAPRICE???? He wouldn't answer my question.

Lawyers are schooled in "Precedent cases" in the present situations at law schools. The Constitution and the Foundations of this Beloved Country have been usurped in law schools.

This has been my observation to my GREAT disappointment.

I will stand corrected on this, but as just a "commoner and God-fearing citizen" I can not tell you the grief that hit me to think, I couldn't make my righteous case in Court and have a "Judge" rule according to the Foundations of this Beloved Country.

For God & Country

Ruth Ann Wilson

Ileana and Ruth Ann you both pose excellent questions and make some important points. I'm no lawyer, but my understanding is that the legislation can't be challenged in the Supreme Court until the legislation has been passed and signed into law first. In short, the court can't hear a challenge on something that might be, only on something that is or has been done.

And there is the trap... especially if the nation is saddled with a weak spined or activist court at the time an unconstitutional bill is passed. Given the history of the court in grossly failing to uphold the Constitution on key issues in the past, we now see the urgency and passion in those citizens who actually understand the Constitution, to try to stop or head these things off before they are signed into law.

Jefferson feared an activist court and prophetically wrote to Judge Spencer Roane in 1819 -"The Constitution...is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please."

His fears were born out during the Great Depression when the Supreme Court ruled against the constitutionality of his New Deal (socialist) policies. Roosevelt simply rolled out a "court-packing" plan to change and/or intimidate the Supreme Court into a body willing to follow his dictates. He eventually replaced enough retiring justices with those who would obey his decrees and Americas long march into Socialism and a methodical erosion of respect for the principles of Americanism and the Constitution was begun in earnest.

I emphathize with you Ruth Ann. I too have met similar responses from my local legislators and attorneys when I've questioned the constitutionality of certain acts, laws, or simply their understanding of that document. It's almost a universal carbon copy of Nancy Pelosi's recent response: "Are you serious?!"

Yes maam... WE ARE!!!