Is Congress Even Familiar With The Constitution?

January 21, 2011
By

As prominent conservatives and tea parties highlight potential constitutional issues for many of the Obama administration’s agenda items, liberals in Congress have been dusting off their copies of the US Constitution to defend the new laws they have passed or are pushing on the American people.  However, while attempting to defend the assault on our freedoms, congressional liberals demonstrate again and again their lack of familiarity and basic understanding of our nations founding document.

Recently Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) proclaimed that the House Repealing ObamaCare is unconstitutional.  She claimed that repealing Obamacare would violate the 5th and 14th amendments to the Constitution.

The 5th amendment to the constitution says that “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice but in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation”.

Rep. Lee claims that repealing Obamacare would deprive someone of their life or liberty.  Lee proclaims that “I rise in opposition because it is important that we preserve lives and we recognize that 40 million-plus are uninsured.”  Lee seems to believe that because the Constitution prevents the government from depriving somebody of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, repealing Obamacare  is in violation of the Constitution.

Rep. Lee seems to lack the basic understanding that the Constitution doesn’t provide for our rights, but prohibits the government from taking our rights away.  In Rep. Lee’s view, the government provides and sustains our rights and any attempt to stop the government from providing or facilitating a service would be unconstitutional.

Another hilarious example of Congress’ lack of understanding of the Constitution comes from Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) attempt to justifiy Obamacare by  saying “Well, when you start off with the Preamble of the Constitution, you talk about the pursuit of happiness,”.  Rep. Lewis seems to be ignorant of the fact that the “pursuit of happiness” phrase comes from the Declaration of Independence and not the Constitution.

Americans should be alarmed at the lack of basic understanding of our founding documents demonstrated by members of Congress.  All members of Congress swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same.   How can they take this oath without understanding the document or in some cases, not even know the contents of it?

Perhaps we should at least make are representatives memorize the 1oth ammendment which states “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.”  At least then, we could expect them to at least do nothing as they would be unsure what powers the government is granted.

Tags: , , , , , ,

5 Responses to Is Congress Even Familiar With The Constitution?

  1. SKylar Park on February 9, 2011 at 5:50 pm

    Better yet, how about requiring candidates for political office to take a test on the constitution–then post their grades online for all to see.

    It’s sad. It’s embarrassing. We should all require more of our representatives. But it starts by requiring more of ourselves.

  2. [...] Is Congress Even Familiar With The Constitution? [...]

  3. Harold Hill on February 24, 2011 at 1:03 am

    Re: the Constitution. Where in the Constitution does it state that corporations should have the same rights and pri8vileges of individuals? In fact, it doesn’t and they shouldn’t.
    IMO corporations should not be allowed to contribute any more to a political candidate than individuals.
    What we have going now is a government controlled and for the benefits of the giant corporations that buy the elections thru nonstop and often deceitful advertising that

  4. Steve Mustanski on February 24, 2011 at 10:13 am

    It doesn’t, but we have laws that treat them as such. We also have unions and PACs that contrubute hundreds of millons of dollars to political candidates.

  5. [...] Dick Durbin Remains Ignorant About Constitution June 30, 2011 By Steve Mustanski The Constitution of the United States was established to define the roll of government and establish the law of the land.  Every President and Congressman swears an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.  However, many leaders in the Federal Government remain ignorant about the Constituion.  In fact, many in Congress do not even seem to be familiar with the Constitution. [...]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsor Links

Follow Us on Twitter