The Freedom Bulletin

The recent court decisions about S.B. 1070, Arizona’s immigration law, and Proposition 8, the ballot initiative banning gay marriage in California, have something in common. They both involve people calling certain laws unconstitutional.

Last Wednesday, Federal Judge Susan Bolton ordered an injunction against some parts of Arizona’s immigration law in response to a lawsuit by the U.S. Department of Justice, which claims the law is unconstitutional because the federal government, not the states, should have the power to regulate immigration. This Wednesday, Federal Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Proposition 8, calling it unconstitutional.

I have a question for judges, lawyers, the Department of Justice, and America as a whole: if you’re going to be calling laws unconstitutional, aren’t there better laws to call unconstitutional than these?

I am opposed to one part of the Arizona law – the part that makes illegal “the failure to apply for or carry alien registration papers.” Simply existing, legally, in this country but without registration papers does not hurt anyone or violate anyone’s rights. But the rest of the law isn’t bad. Illegal immigration is a serious problem, and I applaud Arizona’s attempt to deal with it.

I don’t think that Proposition 8 violates anyone’s rights at all, because I don’t think that marriage is a right, per se. If the government cared about equality, they would stop granting government recognition to marriages entirely and leave this to individuals and private organizations. Rewarding people for committing to a relationship, whether gay or straight, sends the unfair, false message that couples are superior to single people.

Now for some laws that are really unconstitutional and severely violate people’s rights:

• The Durham-Humphrey Amendment: Nowhere in the Constitution is the government given the power to ban people from taking medications without a doctor’s permission. Has this law ever been challenged in court? Not to my knowledge.
• The TSA’s use of full-body scanners as a primary method of airport security screening: To perform highly invasive searches on millions of people who aren’t even suspected of any crimes blatantly violates the Fourth Amendment.
• The individual health insurance mandate: The power to regulate interstate commerce does not mean the power to force people to engage in commerce.

I understand that obviously, the particular judges who made the rulings in Arizona and California have never, to my knowledge, had the opportunity to address these other laws…so the individual judges are not being hypocritical. But it says something about America as a whole that the government calls two mostly good laws unconstitutional while at least three horribly anti-liberty laws are currently considered perfectly constitutional. Hopefully liberty’s brave friends at EPIC and in Virginia will change this.

Further reading:

Court Order about Arizona law (PDF)

Photo credits: Prop 8 rally by 1FlatWorld (CC ASA 2.0); immigration law protest by Fibonacci Blue (CC ASA 2.0)

Good news for anyone who is opposed to the individual mandate requiring all Americans to purchase health insurance. Virginia’s lawsuit against the mandate has taken a step forward, as a judge gave it the okay to proceed today. From Fox News:

“U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson said he is allowing the suit against the U.S. government to proceed, saying no court has ever ruled on whether it’s constitutional to require Americans to purchase a product.

‘While this case raises a host of complex constitutional issues, all seem to distill to the single question of whether or not Congress has the power to regulate — and tax — a citizen’s decision not to participate in interstate commerce,’ Hudson wrote in a 32-page decision.”

I sure hope the lawsuit succeeds. If judges still care about the Constitution, it will. Although the Commerce Clause gives the federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce, it does not allow the government to force people to engage in commerce.

On Tuesday, Missourians will vote on a ballot measure to outlaw the individual mandate, the part of health insurance reform that requires all Americans, except those who are unable to afford it, to have health insurance. From Missourians for Health Care Freedom, the organization that supports the initiative…

“Patients should have the right to pay directly for medical services with their own money. That’s because when consumers control the dollars, the patient makes the medical treatment decisions… Preserving the rights of patients to pay directly for medical care ensures that patients – not government bureaucrats – decide which doctor to see or what medical treatment to choose.”

Support Proposition C!

President Obama recently gave a speech praising the recently passed version of health insurance reform and warning insurance companies not to use the new law as an excuse to raise prices. But unless strong measures are taken to prevent this, “Obamacare” will actually cause the price of health insurance to rise.

I oppose Obamacare, primarily because it requires all Americans to have health insurance. In my opinion, this violates everyone’s rights because people have the right to decide how they want to spend their own money, as long as they don’t do anything that violates the rights of anyone else. But according to economic theory, the individual mandate has a bad side effect as well – it makes the cost of health insurance go up.

If you haven’t studied economics before, here are the basics:

Usually, the higher the price of a good, the less the demand. Makes sense, right? Also, the higher the price of a good, the higher the supply, because producers are more willing to make a product if they can sell it for a high price. The supply and demand curves (or lines) can be shown on a graph. The point where the two lines intersect is called the equilibrium. This represents the quantity and price that will be produced in a free market.

However, by requiring everyone to purchase a product (in this case health insurance), the government stops demand from responding naturally to price. The degree to which demand for a good responds to price is called price elasticity of demand. People will buy necessities such as food, water, or insulin for diabetics regardless of their price. In economics-speak, the demand for these goods is inelastic. The demand for things such as lattes, CDs, and stuffed animals is elastic, because people can live without them and therefore tend to buy less of them if the price goes up. When demand is perfectly inelastic, the demand curve looks like a vertical line.

By forcing everyone to buy health insurance, the government makes the demand artificially inelastic. The problem with this is that when demand is perfectly inelastic, price basically approaches infinity. If consumers are going to buy something no matter what it costs, you can bet that producers are going to charge a lot.

Bottom line: according to traditional economics, the individual mandate will make the cost of health insurance go up.

Yesterday the House of Representatives passed the Senate’s health “reform” bill, which will soon be signed by President Obama and become law.

This is a dark day for freedom. The medical system in America (and in much of the world) is terrible. All this legislation does is makes it even more terrible. Almost none of the things that make our medical system terrible (the Durham-Humphrey Amendment, the culture of dependence and paternalism between doctors and their customers, ridiculous prices, insurance companies covering things that are discretionary, et cetera) are even addressed by this legislation. Instead, the legislation leaves this terrible medical system as it is and forces everyone to take part in it.

But people who believe in freedom will not give up. The majority of the American people oppose this bill. I was inspired by the protests by people all across the country and by the brave Republicans who spoke out against the legislation in Congress. I also admire the 34 courageous Democrats who broke with their party to vote against the bill. There will certainly be reprisals at the ballot box against the legislators who assaulted our freedom by voting for this bill. Additionally, Idaho and Virginia have passed laws against the individual mandate to purchase insurance, and there is a good chance other states will, too. At least two state Attorneys General will file lawsuits against the mandate, which will likely make their way to the Supreme Court. Considering that the individual mandate is blatantly unconstitutional, I’d say the Attorneys General have a good chance of winning.

The battle for freedom will never be over, and I will not stop fighting until this legislation is repealed.

Photo credits: McMaster, Lynch, McCollum (top L-R), Otter (bottom left) - public domain, McDonnell (bottom right) – Gage Skidmore, CC ASA 3.0

In the battle leading up to tomorrow’s vote on “health care reform” legislation, I have noticed a few brave people standing up for what they believe in. Despite several Democratic congressmen, including Dennis Kucinich, capitulating to President Obama, the following people have taken a stand for individual liberty in some way or another, and I salute them for it:

• Henry McMaster and Bill McCollum, Attorneys General of South Carolina and Florida – They are planning to file a lawsuit, if the bill passes, challenging the constitutionality of both the “cornhusker kickback” exempting Nebraska from paying Medicare costs and the individual mandate requiring all Americans to buy health insurance. McMaster calls the bill “the most egregious, unconstitutional legislation that we can remember.” While I think the Durham-Humphrey Amendment is worse, “ObamaCare” is certainly right up there in terms of egregiousness and unconstitutionality.
• Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA) – He plans to vote “no” over concerns about the un-democratic process being used to force the bill through Congress. Although he does not oppose the bill for the reason I do (the individual mandate), I admire him for being brave enough to do the right thing, even though it will certainly make him unpopular with a lot of people and perhaps even cost him his seat.
• The Idaho state legislature and Governor Butch Otter – Idaho became the first state to pass a law outlawing the individual mandate. Gov. Otter signed the Idaho Health Freedom Act into law on March 17. It blocks any attempt by the federal government to force people to buy health insurance and gives Idaho the power to sue to fight the mandate. Similar efforts are underway in 36 states. Utah has passed on such law which is just awaiting the governor’s signature, and Arizona’s legislature has also approved one, but it must be approved by voters this November before it becomes law. Which brings us to…
• The Virginia state legislature and Governor Bob McDonnell – Virginia’s legislature became the first to pass a bill banning the mandate, and Gov. McDonnell plans to sign it. As far as I know the bill hasn’t officially become law yet, which is why Idaho gets that honor.

Props to all these people and everyone who opposes “ObamaCare” and its unconstitutional individual mandate!

President Obama and the Democrats are kicking it into high gear in their attempt to buy/coerce/bribe their way into getting the votes they need to force their “health care reform” bill on America. Among other things this bill would force everyone to buy health insurance. If you believe in liberty and free markets, please help stop this bill! Check out Code Red, a site put out by the National Republican Congressional Committee to keep up to date with the latest goings on and opportunities to take action.

Also please, please contact your Congressman and tell him or her to vote no on this bill! If everyone does this, then Congressmen will realize they won’t get re-elected if they insist on taking away even more of our liberty, and they might just chance their minds (or decide to vote no if they’re undecided, or be even more certain if they already plan to vote no).

Right now 22 Democrats plan to vote no on the bill. We need 38! Please make a difference in the fight against statism and paternalism. All it takes is one call or email to your Congressman!