# Constitutional Article?? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 27, 2009, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435 "2009-07-27T15:36:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Subterfuge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Subterfuge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterfuge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/1 "2009-07-27T15:36:44Z")
Just what article of the Constitution of The United States is the Obama administration relying on in the undertaking of “healthcare reform”? ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/2 "2009-07-27T15:39:29Z")
[Article I, Section 8](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxing_and_Spending_Clause) ---
**Author:** ![Subterfuge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Subterfuge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterfuge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/3 "2009-07-27T15:47:26Z")
“With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” James Madison ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/4 "2009-07-27T15:50:18Z")
Are you going to post Hamilton’s broader view for purposes of showing both sides of the debate, or do you have an axe to grind? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/5 "2009-07-27T15:55:35Z")
What constitutional clause justifies the invasion of Iraq by U.S. military? (Not the “common defense” clause – that one went out with the WMDs.) Also, health insurance is generally sold by companies doing business across state lines. If the Interstate Commerce Clause can regulate wheat grown for on premises consumption, it certainly can regulate an industry founded in conducting bets across state lines. ---
**Author:** ![Subterfuge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Subterfuge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterfuge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/6 "2009-07-27T16:00:21Z")
No, I’m not going to post Hamilton’s broader view. If that is what your viewpoint relys on, you post it. I’ll just rely on “the father of the Constistution”, as it is my viewpoint that the federal government is acting outside its purview in healthcare reform. ---
**Author:** ![Subterfuge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Subterfuge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterfuge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/7 "2009-07-27T16:01:49Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > What constitutional clause justifies the invasion of Iraq by U.S. military? Hmm… two wrongs do make a right? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/8 "2009-07-27T16:03:12Z")
> [@Subterfuge](#): > > Hmm… two wrongs do make a right? I think you’re positing more than two wrongs, though - wouldn’t your interpretation suggest that the federal government isn’t allow to do many of the things it does? It already provides health care through Medicare and Medicaid, for example. ---
**Author:** ![Subterfuge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Subterfuge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterfuge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/9 "2009-07-27T16:11:19Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I think you’re positing more than two wrongs, though - wouldn’t your interpretation suggest that the federal government isn’t allow to do many of the things it does? It already provides health care through Medicare and Medicaid, for example. Yeah, I guess we’ve, long ago, crossed the Rubicon. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/10 "2009-07-27T16:15:08Z")
> [@Subterfuge](#): > > Yeah, I guess we’ve, long ago, crossed the Rubicon. For better and for worse I’d say that’s the case, yes. ---
**Author:** ![Subterfuge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e8c25b/32.png) [@Subterfuge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Subterfuge)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/11 "2009-07-27T19:39:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I think you’re positing more than two wrongs, though - wouldn’t your interpretation suggest that the federal government isn’t allow to do many of the things it does? It already provides health care through Medicare and Medicaid, for example. And to continue on that path makes about as much sense as lamenting the deficeit spending of the previous administration, and then doubling the deficeit as a way to fix things. > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON, April 18 /U.S. Newswire/ – Medicaid has the potential to bankrupt every state in the union and must be reformed, says a report released today by a state legislator group > > [News Articles - FindArticles](http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5554/is_200204/ai_n21803926/) ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/12 "2009-07-27T19:48:32Z")
> [@Subterfuge](#): > > Just what article of the Constitution of The United States is the Obama administration relying on in the undertaking of “healthcare reform”? You mean there are limits to federal power? Who knew? [QUOTE=Article I, Section 8, Clause 3] “ [The Congress shall have power] To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes; [/QUOTE] Clearly this means that they can establish a national healthcare system. I don’t know how anyone could read it to be otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/13 "2009-07-27T19:53:44Z")
> [@Subterfuge](#): > > “With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.” > > James Madison Cool quote, bro. Where in the Constitution is it? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/14 "2009-07-27T19:54:37Z")
I’m wondering if the OP is implicitly saying that Medicare is unconstitutional? Does anyone think that Medicare is going to be eliminated by the Supreme Court? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/15 "2009-07-27T20:00:06Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > Cool quote, bro. Where in the Constitution is it? I see what you are doing, but surely Madison’s belief must be correct. Why would the General Welfare clause mean that Congress could do anything at all that it felt was in the general welfare and then go on to list other powers? If your interpretation was true, then the whole list of Congressional powers could be simply “Do what you think best”. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/16 "2009-07-27T20:01:57Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m wondering if the OP is implicitly saying that Medicare is unconstitutional? Does anyone think that Medicare is going to be eliminated by the Supreme Court? Are you saying that the Supreme Court is infalliable? ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/17 "2009-07-27T20:23:41Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > I see what you are doing, but surely Madison’s belief must be correct. Why would the General Welfare clause mean that Congress could do anything at all that it felt was in the general welfare and then go on to list other powers? > > If your interpretation was true, then the whole list of Congressional powers could be simply “Do what you think best”. As the Court observed in [_United States v. Butler_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Butler): > [@](#): > > [T]he [General Welfare] clause confers a power separate and distinct from those later enumerated, is not restricted in meaning by the grant of them, and Congress consequently has a substantive power to tax and to appropriate, limited only by the requirement that it shall be exercised to provide for the general welfare of the United States. … It results that the power of Congress to authorize expenditure of public moneys for public purposes is not limited by the direct grants of legislative power found in the Constitution. … But the adoption of the broader construction leaves the power to spend subject to limitations. … [T]he powers of taxation and appropriation extend only to matters of national, as distinguished from local, welfare. Thus this broad power allows Congress to fill a rôle that the states cannot fill, to provide a coördinated, concerted, _national_ organization to solve problems that transcend state borders and consequently state powers and abilities. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/18 "2009-07-27T21:32:59Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Are you saying that the Supreme Court is infalliable? Infallible, no; but consistent, yes. I’m not seeing how a constitutional argument against UHC would be persuasive if a constitutional argument against Medicare has no chance of success in the courts. And as frustrating as it may be at times, the Supreme Court’s fallibility does not change the fact that their opinions are authoritative. So, why is UHC constitutionally worse than Medicare? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2009, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/19 "2009-07-27T21:35:00Z")
> [@Subterfuge](#): > > I’ll just rely on “the father of the Constistution” . . . His interpretation is not dispositive. That of the SCOTUS is, and it has gone back and forth over the centuries regarding the breadth and scope of the “implied powers” clause. At the present stage of development of constitutional law, it appears UHC would be constitutional (after all, it is no bigger a deal than Social Security, the constitutionality of which has not been seriously challenged in living memory). You might have noticed that its opponents, in Congress and elsewhere, are for the most part raising political arguments against it, not constitutional arguments. In fact, yours is the very first I’ve encountered. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2009, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435/20 "2009-07-28T00:00:00Z")
You mean “the”? It’s the second word. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/constitutional-article/504435.md?page=2)