I remember working on a history project at a local library in high school. In the midst of photocopying, my best friend and I overheard a woman passionately whispering to a friend about the dangers of government overreach. When she noticed us staring, she smiled and said, “You’ll see. If we don’t get this under control, one day the government will be forcing you to buy this or that.”
My friend and I nodded, rolled our eyes in that obnoxious way that teenagers often do, then finished up and headed to lunch. But not before assessing that the lady who had just spoken to us was a bit of a loon who had a flair for hyperbole.
It’s amazing what 15 years can teach you, especially when you discover that what once sounded hyperbolic is happening right before your eyes.
On Jan, 31, Senior U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled that ObamaCare is unconstitutional, stating, “It would be a radical departure from existing case law to hold that Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause. … It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place.”
If Congress can mandate us to buy health insurance, what’s next? I know, everything you think of sounds awfully hyperbolic. But will it sound that way to you in 15 years? Depends on what our country looks like.
According to ArgusLeader.com, “Five South Dakota lawmakers have introduced legislation that would require any adult 21 or older to buy a firearm. … Rep. Hal Wick (R.-Sioux Falls) is sponsoring the bill and knows it will be killed. But he said he is introducing it to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year is unconstitutional.” Wick stated, “Do I or the other co-sponsors believe that the State of South Dakota can require citizens to buy firearms? Of course not. But at the same time, we do not believe the federal government can order every citizen to buy health insurance.”
Sure, it’s outrageous to mandate individuals to buy firearms. But isn’t it equally outrageous to mandate us to buy health insurance? Or anything else, for that matter?
The federal government is completely out of control—not only when it comes to the unconstitutional Obamacare mandate, but also with respect to bank bailouts, industry-stifling EPA overregulation, burgeoning bureaucracy in departments stuffed with clutter and inefficiency, and the act of continuously spending money we don’t have in the name of “stimulus.”
The truth is that we’re not on a slippery slope toward massive federal overreach. We’re right smack in the middle of a big-government avalanche that has no regard for constitutional integrity and has already begun to bury our 10th amendment.
The Obamacare mandate is part of a much bigger calamity: the belief on the part of this administration that it is entitled to tell us what to do. That’s why Nancy Pelosi replied with, “Are you serious?” when asked by CNSNews.com in October of 2009, “Where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
To Pelosi, the notion of a bloated federal government with powers far beyond those outlined in our Constitution is perfectly reasonable. It’s nothing she can’t justify with a little warping of the Commerce Clause.
What will life look like in America for future generations if government overreach isn’t brought to a halt?
In her speech at the 2010 Southern Republican Leadership Conference, Sarah Palin said, “Government overreach did not begin with the Obama administration, but it will end with the Obama administration.” It absolutely must. Or one day, the federal government is going to be mandating us to do a lot more than purchase health insurance.
And your liberty—well, that will be a thing of the past.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter