Michigan Radio News

NPR News

« Essay: Our Listeners - 3.24.10 | Main | Essay: Unamerican Activities - 3.26.10 »

March 25, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Kudos for making a clear point! Attorneys General of many states appear to be grandstanding, just ahead of upcoming elections. Is it fair for our tax dollars to be wasted on these clearly lost causes?

I hope that the cost of this lawsuit is going to be billed to Mike Cox's campaign fund.

I have two comments, in two parts. The first is in regard to Professor Robert Sedler's remarks.

What a nauseating bit of arrogance it is for Mr. Sedler to pout about how Attorney General Cox is just "running for governor."
Robert Sedler might not be running for anything, but he's sure helping a lot of other people run -- all Democrats:


Rather than sneer at all of the people who they think are too dumb to properly understand the U.S. Constitution, it might have been nice if Mr. Lessenberry and Mr. Sedler had taken the time to seriously address the considered arguments that a national mandate for the purchase of health insurance might not be one of the powers enumerated to Congress in Article I of the Constitution. Arguments like those advanced by former Justice Department lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey in a Washington Post Op-Ed:


Now, granted; I don't expect that Prof. Sedler will agree with his political opponenents' arguments. But I would expect better reporting from Jack Lessenberry, and I'd expect that a serious and honest legal scholar would not laugh and say, in essence, that, 'Oh the other side is just crazy.'

Because if Prof. Sedler really wants "crazy," he might want to start with our own Congressman John Conyers, who, last I checked, was sitting in his home-district Congressional office that is lodged within the Levin Federal Courhouse Building in downtown Detroit. Conyers was sitting in that office while, downstairs in the courtroom of Judge Avern Cohn, his wife was being sentenced to a term of years in a federal penitentiary. That same Rep. Conyers, when asked what part of the Constitution empowered the Congress to pass an individual mandate, said, "the good and welfare clause, and a couple of others." Yeeeipes. Anybody know where to find a "good and welfare clause" in the Constitution? Maybe Prof. Sedler knows.

And oh by the way; John Conyers, the "good and welfare" legal scholar who just now happens to be the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee should be well-known to Prof. Sedler. After all, Sedler has made donations to Conyers campaigns in several election cycles. (See link above.)

My second comment is in regard to Jack Lessenberry's own characterizations of Constitutional law.

Jack; you seem to think that any Constitutional inquiry ends with the Supremacy Clause. And it is true; within its enumerated powers under Article I, Section 8, laws enacted by Congress are "supreme." But of course Congress' powers are very much limited to begin with, inasmuch as all other unenumerated powers are reserved to the states. So Congress has the power to tax, and the power to regulate interstate commerce. (And to raise and support armies, establish post offices and roads, coin money, etc.) All other powers are reserved to the states.

So Jack Lessenberry ought to quit sneering about the Supremacy Clause, and start thinking about the Commerce Clause. Or the taxing power. Rest assured, that many millions of Americans will be thinking about the health care bill in terms of the taxing power as well, to the extent that Obacare will be relying on the IRS as the enforcement agency for a national healthcare mandate. That ought to be fun for Democrats to defend in November.

And again, with respect to the Commerce Clause, the argument isn't nearly so clear as Lessenberry and Sedler might like us to-dumb-to-understand-Republicans to think. Here is a Heritage Foundation memo, published in the Wall Street Journal last December:


Now, after considering all of this, does any fair-minded person still think that any of this is as simple as indicated by the bogus, phony questions posed by Jack Lessenberry? Or the simplistic sneering of our own dear Prof. Sedler?

FYI - the audio link for this is broken.

Here is what leaves me scratching my head...why can Native Americans Opt out of the Health Care plan but the rest of us can't? ...and it's all constitutional...When are we all going to be treated equally? Where do I go for my "special deal"?

Here's the correct audio link:

I didn't see any more being donated for the 2010 elections from your first link

Pretty early for 2010 elections, don't you think, Nathan?
And besides, campaign finance reports usually filter in, and go through routine reporting channels, for the better part of a year after elections.

That is why Republican ideas on campaign finance reform make so much sense. Get rid of meaningless, unconstitutional limits; mandate simple, immediate, total disclosure of sources instead. Maybe that way we can avoid the plethora of meaningless 524's all with similar names like "Free-Thinking Americans for Good Choices." Anybody know whose side that group might be on? (I just made it up.)
Right now, on MSNBC (charming), Detroit-area Comcast subscribers are likely to see ads congratulating the vulnerable Michigan Congressman Gary Peters (D) for his progressive health care reform vote in support of Obamacare. The fine print is almost unreadable. The ads were produced and paid for by AFSCME and some other unions.

Just thought you might want to know that.

Sorry -- I just re-read and see that I called them "524" groups. They are 527 groups...

I'd be OK with people opting out of health care insurance so long as the ERs, hospitals and physicians could deny care to them. Let them die by the side of the road.

Well I was watching CBS for some March madness and all I saw was multiple adds from citizen united and all bashing Mark Schauer. I even post I am from Lansing but I guess you missed it. I saw only one add in favor of him and over a dozen degrading him so keep talking like it is all union, when it is really not in my area. I also did not want to bring it up but why not. $500 is mass cash for a campaign contribution. Heck I even spent $200 on a rep from Florida, yet I live in Michigan. Besides, at least I post a name for you to respond too. I would see how much you donate but anonymous is not in the records. If you want I'll post my last name but I feel I already disclosed my contribution, I think I gave you enough info to guess it.

The comments to this entry are closed.

A Production of

***UPDATE 9/2/09: Read the user agreement, effective immediately.***

The Podcast


April 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30