School's In Session

In reply to a local unhappy public school teacher who voted for Obama but is now upset that he is merely continuing the Bush education policies and spending I say,
Public education in this country is a shameful mess. But the problem is not improperly allocated federal resources; but rather the federal government meddling in education in the first place. Education is uniquely a state and local endeavor. The U.S. Constitution grants no positive authority or power to the federal government in the area of education. Thus, under the 10 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.), the feds should not be involved in education in any way, especially financially. Get rid of the Dept. of Education and all federal money and meddling in education and let those resources stay in the states and local communities to begin with. Then work with local school boards to fix the problems.

Read more: http://www.gazette.com/opinion/letters-102450-late-bashing.html?cb=1280931233#ixzz0ve9vb0Ww

I Brought You Into This World...

This question of who is responsible for enforcing the Constitution upon the federal government and how to do it continues to be a vexing one. At this point the federal government basically polices itself and decides if it is obeying the Supreme Law. The Supreme Court essentially provides cover for the Congress and President to do whatever they darn well please. Let's admit it, Supreme Court appointments are political appointments. Period. So we have the fox guarding the hen house, the inmates running the asylum. Eighty percent of the time (my conservative guess) federal legislation or regulation is in direct violation of the Constitution and they tell us that the three branches have checked and are in agreement that everything is kosher. Now butt out, leave us alone. The commerce clause has become one big joke that they use to justify doing whatever in tarnation they please. (speaking of tar...and feathers) If the commerce clause is all that is necessary to justify the federal government doing anything at all, then why the very specific enumerated powers in Article 1, Section 8? And why the Tenth Amendment? Does anyone, or everyone else smell a rat? In fact, the commerce clause really should only empower the federal government to regulate tariffs placed by one state on goods passing through it from one adjoining state to another so as to prevent outrageous tariffs that would be prohibitive to commerce between the various states. That's it. It does not authorize the federal government to enact such things as a federal minimum wage, Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, complete regulation of our energy industry or a socialized health care system. The answer is right there in the Tenth Amendment. The people acting through their states must stand up to the federal government and yell 'Whoa!' Governors must inform the federal government that such idiocies as nationalized federal health care will not happen in their states. Period. And governors must be prepared to use their National Guard and any other resources at their disposal to enforce their decisions, if necessary. The states may need to get together and pass further constitutional amendments to clarify the role of and reign in the federal government. Hopefully we will never need to call a constitutional convention, but that is ultimately up to the states, not the feds. The states giveth the Constitution and only the states can taketh away or replace it. The fight to save our Constitution and nation is not in Washington, D.C., but in the state capitals. Now get crackin' governors!

Health (S)care

I have a simple request regarding the concept of federal mandates or provision of health- care and/or health insurance. Would someone kindly cite the empowering language in the U.S. Constitution (as amended) which gives the Federal Government authority and power to provide or mandate healthcare and/or health insurance and furthermore to use any federal tax money for such activity. I have read through the Constitution and amendments and can find no such positive authority, short of a new amendment. Finding none, it seems that the Tenth Amendment is the controlling legal authority in this instance and only the States would have such power. Any light that shed on this murky conundrum would be greatly appreciated. And by the way, don’t throw up the infamous Interstate Commerce Clause. Sorry, no cigar. It would seem that this question applies equally to Medicare and Social Security as well.