Ron Paul: Founders Would Be Horrified by Pro-Obamacare Legislators

by Ron Paul

Last week President Obama made some rather shocking comments at a press conference regarding the Supreme Court’s deliberation on the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. His comments belie a grasp of constitutional concepts so lacking that perhaps the University of Chicago Law School should offer a refund to any students “taught” constitutional law by then-Professor Obama!

He said, “Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress.” It almost sounds as if he believes the test of constitutionally is whether a majority approves of the bill, as opposed to whether the legislation lies within one of the express powers of the federal government. In fact, the very design of the Constitution, with power split amongst two branches of the legislature which write the laws, an executive who administers the laws, and an independent judiciary which resolves disputes regarding meaning of the laws, was designed to thwart popular will and preserve liberty.

President Obama continued in his comments, “For years, what we’ve heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint, that an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, there’s a good example, and I’m pretty confident that this court will recognize that and not take that step.”

President Obama seems to misunderstand that the criticism of an activist judiciary is not that it is overturning unconstitutional federal laws, but instead that it is usurping the authority to intervene in areas, such as abortion, where the Constitution reserves authority to the states. In fact, upholding clearly unconstitutional laws such as Obamacare because the justices bowed to the “will of the people” or believed the individual mandate was good social policy could be considered an example of judicial activism.

The founders never intended the judiciary to have the last word on whether or not a law is constitutional. The judiciary is equal to the Congress and the President, not superior. Representatives, senators, presidents, and judges all have an independent duty to determine a law’s constitutionality. The founders would be horrified by the attitude of many lawmakers that they can pass whatever laws they want and federal judges will then determine whether or not the law is constitutional.

Additionally, state governments have the authority to protect their citizens from federal laws that threaten liberty. If the Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional, I hope state legislators will exercise their powers to pass legislation allowing their citizens to opt-out of the national health care plan.

Unfortunately, even many of my colleagues who correctly argue Obamacare’s unconstitutionality support the President when he asserts the power to send troops into battle without a declaration of war, or have citizens indefinitely detained and even assassinated on little more than his own authority. Other of my colleagues not only cheer the unconstitutional monstrosity of Obamacare, but support the President’s actions to defy the Senate’s appointment powers, and legislate by executive order.

Even worse, some members will only challenge a President’s unconstitutional actions if the President is from a different political party. The defeat of Obamacare in the courts would provide a stark reminder that the limits of government are set by the Constitution, not the will of the President, Congress, or even the Supreme Court. However, the victory would be short lived as long as the legislative branch refuses to do its duty to abide by the Constitutional limits and exercises its powers to ensure the other two branches do likewise.


  • Yes, agreed. I was looking more at the macro level and gave too stern a response.The monopolies will always rebuild again by their stealth winning ways only to make the situation worse by government intervention…yet again. The two of them always jump into bed together, leaving the likes of you and me out in the cold. It is a cycle isn’t it, that repeats and repeats, of great empires that rise and fall ,not realising that the seeds of their own defeat ,were planted at their inception.

  • i would rather fight for what this country really stands for then say fuck the usa. if you say fuck it, then leave and see how much better you are off in another country. yes dr paul could save this country, but i dont think we should just look to one man to save it. im just waiting for the war and it is coming, one way or another. most will lay down and let them do what they want with them. yes, i know we are the terrorists or should i say they are, not us.

  • ok ok , i get it! what do you want me to do. kiss your but?? you had me at ”whoa, hang on” saying ”For God’s sake… learn!!!” w/ 3 exclaimation points was not necessary. RON PAUL 2012

  • Love the constitution, respect it, fight for it,& die for it the 14th amendment &

    our civil rights OTHERWISE GET THE FUCK OUT THE USA THIS IS OUR CONSTITUTION OF THE USA DONT BE A HYPOCRITE LIKE MoRon Paul who claim to defend the constitution yet behind our backs he tries to change it to benefit a 1 world currency = 1 world order and to
    get rid of the civil rights that protect us from slavery WHY, because they plan to

    legally rule the world as monarchs and enslave us by destroying our rights

  • I’m not saying the government has the right to control the market; it simply doesn’t. I’m just saying the only thing that stands between the consumer and a business with a monopoly with aggressive tactics is competition (which is still threatened by business) and government, which forbids private monopolies and aggressive tactics like extortion. I have a feeling we’re agreeing, but it’s being lost in communication.

  • Thank you but no ! The free market will always win as is being displayed right now as it adjusts the economy to ‘real’ prices. Nothing the government can do will change it, except to make it worse. Obama will fail. Furthermore, of all the misery in the country right now, it is because of tinkering with the market by vested interests (which includes the government.) This must be undone. Chaos does not result. Order does. I feel your analysis is upside down.

  • … yeah i need some fresh air

  • Look …read my initial comment again could you? . It was in reply to a Romney supporter, not to you. . Then please read it again. You have misconstrued everything I have written because of your defence of Ron Paul supporters. Reading it a third time would also show my having being respectful of a Romney supporter’s choice. For god’s sake….learn !!!

  • Sometimes in ones whole life one can be the greatest man on Earth and save a dying country, for just being a clean soul. Ron Paul has rejected increasing spending and has not been bought off by the mega banks. For the last hundred years we tried the bankers way and it has failed, I am willing to risk my life for a man like Ron Paul to save my country. I can not say that my whole life since JFK and I was 3 when he died and we are ready for a good man to take over. I am writing Ron Paul in to WIN.

  • I’m talking about a free market in an anarchy where it is just that, free and anything goes, even if it is bad for the consumer. In the context of the US government and economy, that is not true. The government protects the consumer from business who may not have the best interests at heart, whereas in a anarchy that protection is not there.

  • ….

    “thomoas jefferson proposed STATE funding of education and health in VIRGINIA whilist GOVERNOR”

    Now, tell me where he proposed NATIONAL funding of health care and education as PRESIDENT?

    Many ron paul supporters aren’t necessarly against state ran, or mandated health insurance. Just FEDERAL, ran insurance.

  • yes…. If I’m such a waste of time, why would you respond to me? yeah, answer that, jackass.

    and no, it’s not that I can’t take criticism, and neither would that matter because your comment wasn’t about me, It’s that your comment made no fucking sense and I’m not dealing with gibberish.

  • ok, thanks for clearing that up but i was defending all RP supporters, not taking your comment personally. so don’t worry, you haven’t ”won” this. & I’m not playing any game anyway so I don’t win either.

  • When you talk to the average person, and they either..
    1) With very good intentions, mention the hardships of the mid easterner, and hwo we should be their helping them.
    or 2) Flat out state that they don’t care what needs to keep oil affordable!

    Then when talking about 9/11 they act as though we wre sitting there minding our own business when all of a sudden they hit is for being free…

    It is kind’ve hard not to blame the people, the people that VOTE.

  • Largest Ron Paul rally and march this Sunday at Philly Phreedom rally! Spread word!

  • If you are American I wish you would have hope for our nation. America is full of wonderful human beings that have made big positive differences in the world. Just because our political system is fucked doesn’t mean we should speak ill of our whole “Republic”.

  • Wooh ! Hang on ! I’m onside with you. My statement re: personal is that your individual right to choose is both personally and dearly held and that you will not just go with the team. You want your choice and that’s that..
    Am I not correct on this?
    By the way, your comment clearly displays that you took my comment ‘personally’ thus proving my point entirely. But I don’t want to have to win on this…it is personal for Ron Paul supporters and they should be proud of the fact. I am too

  • ha what is your definition of sqwat? more gov. intrusions? no he hasn’t accomplished that . you’re right. & re; obamacare, you do not know what you’re talking about. obviously repeating something your heard somewhere. .

  • I note that you have totally ignored the free market within your analysis, suggesting that man alone always set the price on all commodities and services. This is simply not true, albeit for the moment it is. A Ron Paul environment would allow the economy to be determined by the market alone, not by a president or by priveleged groups. Unfortunately we need the economy to fall to its right level by liquidating the debt so that we can have something of ‘worth;’ again, however small that may be

  • Noooooooo im not a real person. read jeffersons bio especially of his govenorship in virginia. you forced to buy lots of things, social security for example. in health care no one is forcing you to buy….. you are ALREADY buying healthcare. obama care just regulates the point of payment. plus ron paul is not end all be all. seriously 11 term congressman who hasn’t accomplished squat in his term.

    i respect your view though