tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4912713243046142041.post7686396857404523771..comments2024-03-28T23:22:41.774-05:00Comments on TYWKIWDBI ("Tai-Wiki-Widbee"): Health care mandates and the Founding FathersMinnesotastanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01382888179579245181noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4912713243046142041.post-61016328470755889472012-04-27T20:00:36.212-05:002012-04-27T20:00:36.212-05:00This sums up the precedent for me:
The 1942 rulin...This sums up the precedent for me:<br /><br />The 1942 ruling in Wickard v. Filburn held that the federal government could determine how much wheat Filburn grew, and make him pay a penalty for bushels over that amount, even though the wheat was for his personal use. His wheat production could be regulated “if it exerts a substantial economic effect on interstate commerce,” Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote. The court found that it did.<br /><br />http://go.bloomberg.com/health-care-supreme-court/2012-03-20/the-1942-case-on-which-the-health-care-cases-may-turn/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4912713243046142041.post-46190759490022459252012-04-27T14:56:33.848-05:002012-04-27T14:56:33.848-05:00I don't understand the obsession with what the...I don't understand the obsession with what the 'Founding Fathers' thought. What they thought is interesting for historical reasons, but shouldn't necessarily govern how our country works now. If strict constitutional preservationists had been in charge the last couple hundred years, there'd have been no amendments. And without those amendments, we wouldn't have the Bill of Rights, women couldn't vote, and we'd still have legal slavery. Is that really what people want? Then again, we also wouldn't have federal taxes...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4912713243046142041.post-91829749902080995112012-04-27T13:23:14.966-05:002012-04-27T13:23:14.966-05:00I did some research on this a couple weeks ago and...I did some research on this a couple weeks ago and found the actual laws passed.<br /><br />1790: Section 8 at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=257<br />1792's Militia act: http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=394<br />1798 (at the bottom of the page): http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=728crshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00002365742222680084noreply@blogger.com