That’s how it’s being portrayed by the media, and the candidates. Standing up for the constitution, as I always say, every issue every time no exceptions no excuses – is extreme in the 2010 election climate. See this article in the Sun Chronicle about a candidate getting slammed for signing our 10th Amendment pledge:
The campaign of U.S. Rep. James McGovern is accusing Republican challenger Marty Lamb of signing a “radical” state’s rights pledge that holds that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional.
But Lamb said McGovern is misconstruing the meaning of the pledge, which, he said, merely promises to uphold the Constitution and protect state’s rights.
He said McGovern, D-Worcester, is trying to change the subject from his own weak record on illegal immigration and protecting Medicare.
At issue is a so-called 10th Amendment pledge. The 10th Amendment of the Constitution states that powers not expressly given to the federal government are reserved for the states and people.
In the pledge, candidates also promise to adopt a narrow interpretation of the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses in the Constitution. Programs such as Social Security, Medicare, child labor laws and anti-discrimination statues were passed under those clauses. The website for the 10th Amendment Center, sponsors of the pledge, has an article questioning the constitutionality of Social Security.
Good. I don’t have much to say about Lamb’s response at this point, but maybe I’ll address it later on. In the meantime, I’m glad to know that a sitting US congressman sees our positions as dangerous to the status quo. We’re obviously doing the right thing, then.
thanks, McGovern – we’ll be back with more!
Latest posts by Michael Boldin (see all)
- General Warrants: Unconstitutional Then and Now - November 17, 2017
- Another Example of Political Grandstanding: The Resolution Against Military Action in Yemen - November 14, 2017
- Strategy from James Madison: Four Steps to Stop Federal Programs - November 13, 2017