Congress: Subverting the Constitution One Bill at a Time

Chad MacInnes* | September 30, 2008

Filed Under Conservative Musings, Economy / Economics, Our Government, Unconstitutional Acts, Unconstitutional Spending

By Chad MacINNES While Washington DC is certainly no stranger to political dirty tricks and mountains of lies used to bamboozle the American people into thinking that these criminals are actually “working hard” for us and our families, the ramifications of the current smoke and mirrors games being played by House Democrats under the dubious leadership (if it could be termed as such) of Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank regarding HR 3997 is unprecedented. It is not so much unprecedented because the methods employed, but because of the seriousness of the blatant unconstitutionality of the issue. Thankfully the measure was defeated. Disturbingly, it came to the floor for a vote in the first place.

True, Congress has been passing overtly unconstitutional legislation for a long, long time now, however the consequences of passing this piece of legislation in terms of what it means for the future of our economy, our political system, our government and out individual lives is not simply your everyday run-of-the-mill unconstitutional piece of legislation. It is treason. And now the traitors, Pelosi, Frank, Rangel and the rest of the Capital Hill Gang are patting themselves on the back, lauding their actions in getting this bill to the floor of the House as heroic. Frank, Rangel and Barbara Lee all made similar comments to the effect that because the American people simply cannot begin to understand the true gravity of the current economic situation and thus are mostly opposed to passage of this bill, we the people will never be able appreciate the actions they are currently taking to save us, our economy, our jobs, and indeed, the world. What a heavy, lonely and thankless burden that must be to bear.

Stunningly, while urging their colleagues to support this unconstitutional monstrosity many of these representatives loudly proclaimed their unwavering support for this bill while literally waving their pocket Constitutions in the air. These were indeed rather puzzling moments. It would have been nice if these bastions of the democratic process had actually read the Constitution at some point in their political careers, because if they had done so perhaps we might not be in quite the dire predicament we are. Perhaps then they would have realized that at least half of the legislation that moves through the House is unconstitutional for many reasons, not the least of which is the tendency of the Congress to enact legislation that reaches beyond its Constitutionally imposed constraints, like chartering government sponsored entities such as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae or even appropriating $700 billion to bail out the financial sector of the economy.

And, as if the treasonous activity of this Congress were not in and of itself enough, consider the ineptitude of action and leadership that allowed for this situation to arise. As far as accepting the fair share of blame for the current financial crisis, both parties are at the very least complicit, and certain individuals in both parties ought to be investigated and tried for criminal negligence. Consider the fact that repeated warnings from economists, treasury, Fed officials and mortgage industry insiders were consistently ignored by those on committees that should have seen this coming and whose members were raking in PAC and lobbyist money from the very institutions they were charged with overseeing.

Consider the outright corruption and the implied threats of enforcement action against lenders who weren’t as enthusiastic over providing “affordable housing” as the progressives in Congress and the Clinton White House. Consider the outright fraud employed at Freddie and Fannie to boost numbers and activate executive bonuses. Consider the fact that Congress ignored all these things and that a certain Senator from Illinois hired two of these former executives, Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson, as advisors on his Presidential campaign.

Consider the outright lies told to the American People by the Democrat Leadership late last week and throughout the weekend. How many times did that call a press conference to inform America that they had a deal when nothing could have been farther from the truth? How many times did they appear on national television blaming the House GOP for holding out and obstructing progress? The very idea that such was the case is one big obscene in-your-face lie told to the people, because the Democrats needed the GOP to be on board with the bill so that they could save face. And what, exactly, did the House Republicans reject en-masse? For starters, how about 20% of that $700 billion being appropriated to ACORN? Remember that group? They’re the ones facing legal action throughout the country for engaging in voter fraud on a massive scale.

Consider also the voluminous amount of information gleaned by one committee in one hearing by two witnesses, Paulson and Bernanke, who basically told them all that they had better appropriate $700 billion to the exclusive authority and oversight of the Secretary of the Treasury or the entire economy would collapse. One would think that given the enormity of the issue and the amount of the request that more hearings would be warranted and sought. Perhaps they may want to interview one of the 200 economists and three Nobel Laureates who adamantly opposed such draconian government intervention advocating instead the position that such measures may be attractive as a false and temporary fix, but will do far more harm than good in the end. In part, these economists argue the following:

1) Its fairness. The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayers’ expense. Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses. Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise.

2) Its ambiguity. Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear. If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards.

3) Its long-term effects. If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, America’s dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.

Incredibly, wholly omitted from the debate of this proposed monstrosity is the fact that this bill itself wholly, incontrovertibly and undeniably unconstitutional. There is little mention of the fact that it would be green light for a de facto implementation of socialism by a legislature that has no such authority to give to a Treasury that is likewise restricted from so engaging in the private market.

The only sensible solution to this problem to do what the government has been trying to avoid for the last several years though use of Fed over-manipulation of interests rates and printing too much money to inject into the national monetary system. That sensible solution is to simply let the market heal itself. It will be painful, but not nearly as painful as taking such deliberate steps toward socialism and pretending that the government is going to make money on the deal and be able to privatize those companies again. Seizing banks and financial institutions and then brokering off their assets to the stronger banks is a temporary quick-fix that will have to be dealt with at some point, and the best way to deal with what is fast becoming the new landscape on Wall Street is to break up some of these banks. If having seven or eight big banks holding trillions in bad debt, how is it better when the number of banks is artificially reduced to three, J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, and Citigroup, with the Fed promising to print billions of more dollars to flood the system with liquid cash and further hurt the dollar?

Liquidation hurts and people and institutions will suffer, but the alternative is far more dangerous in both the short and long term. For the White House and leaders on Capitol Hill to continue to panic the people and the market with alarmist rhetoric that, unless they act quickly, a global economic catastrophe is imminent when they do not know that this is truly the case is inherently dishonest. But what is worse, for them to have the audacity to wave the Constitution in their hands and proclaim that they are defending both it and our liberty by subverting the founding document of this nation and illegally usurping what of right belongs to the people is more than dishonest, it is treason.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Chad MacINNES is an independent conservative author who originally hails from Massachusetts and is now living in Orlando Florida with his wife and children. He is a former pilot for a large US carrier, a former police officer and a veteran of the US Army where, incidentally, he was cured of his disordered liberalism. He has studied politics and government, international relations, philosophy and theology. His blog may be found at http://freebornman.blogtownhall.com/. Chad is a frequent contributor to landofthefree.net and may be contacted via email at c_macinnes@yahoo.com.

Contributor's website: http://freebornman.blogtownhall.com/

*Content posted by a user may not be completely written by that user. Content from another source is cited in either block quotes, with quotes or with a link to the original material. Content from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use. Each user is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or it's owner.