GOP Candidates Falter on Constitution

By Douglas V. Gibbs



During the GOP Debate in Ames, Iowa the other night the constitutionality of Romneycare became a point of discussion. Mitt defended his state-funded medical system by invoking the 10th Amendment, saying that the big difference between his government health care in Massachusetts, and Obamacare at the federal level, is that at the State level the State has a right to chase such a policy. States Rights as per the 10th Amendment allows States to do things the federal government cannot. The U.S. Constitution, according to Romney, does not authorize the federal government to possess a policy of federally funded health care.



Ron Paul echoed Romney's claim, saying that the Constitution allows the States to do stupid things. That is what creates innovation. If a State does something stupid, the other States know not to follow suit. If a State does something that works, the other States consider doing the same. But, the federal government has no authority to pursue a health care policy.



These were the only two on the stage that got it right.



The other candidates, when faced with the question of the 10th Amendment, and health care, were all over the place.



Pawlenty and Santorum, two of the better voices in the debate on other issues, crashed and burned on the health care question when they decided that the federal government should not allow States to chase such stupid policies.



These men apparently do not understand State Sovereignty. Do they really want to give the federal government that kind of power? Do they really wish to allow the federal government to force States to not pursue policies that, though not in the best interest of the State, it is the State's right to test those kinds of waters?



In the end, as much as I have learned to dislike former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, he gave the right answer, and exposed the other candidates' lack of understanding of the U.S. Constitution.



Whether it is good policy, or not, the States have the authority to launch a state-funded health care program. Meanwhile, the federal government is NOT authorized by the Constitution to chase such policies. Therefore, Obamacare is a severe breach of the U.S. Constitution.



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.



There are no authorities granted regarding health care to the federal government, and there are no constitutional provisions prohibiting such an allowance to the States. Regardless of how good or bad you think the programs are, according to The Law Of The Land, Romneycare is constitutional, and Obamacare is not.



-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary