The Interstate Commerce Clause, located in Article I Section 8 of the United States Constitution, states that Congress shall have power to “Regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.”
At its conception, the main purpose of this clause was to prevent states from imposing tariffs on other states, thus harming the American economy. Yet in the past 80 years, Congress, with the approval of the court system, has steadily increased its abuse of this power to the point that there seems to be no limit on what is justifiable under its authority.
The recent health care bill is an example of this abuse that threatens to weaken and ultimately destroy a core constitutional principle of limited powers of government.
In 1938, Congress enacted the Agricultural Adjustment Act, which regulated the sale and production of agricultural products across the country. This was an attempt to help the economy during the Great Depression. They justified this new extension of power by claiming it fell under the Commerce Clause.
In Wickard v. Filburn, the Supreme Court upheld this use stating that the planting of more than what was allotted by the federal government, even if the excess was used for personal consumption, could still affect interstate commerce and the economy. This ruling essentially gave Congress a blank check to step into any area of our lives, for that interpretation places almost no limits what constitutes interstate commerce, nor how far its effects can reach.
However, Madison stated in Federalist 45 that “The powers of the Federal Government are few and defined” while “ the powers reserved to the states will extend to all objects which concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the state.”
As the Father of the Constitution, Madison’s interpretation of our federal system of government can be seen as the predominant view of the founding fathers. It is clear by these statements that not only was the federal government to have very limited powers, but that the controversial and important issues affecting our lives were to be determined by our state governments.
Now, in 2010, we have enacted a federal health care bill that requires personal consumption of good health care. Once again Congress has justified this legislation under the Commerce Clause. However, there is absolutely no place in the constitution that gives Congress the power to force people to buy anything.
Congress simply does not have the authority to pass such legislation. At least that is what 14 state attorneys general stated when they filed suit in federal court to overturn the health care bill. Just as with the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the health care reform bill is meant to help people, but it does so by overstepping the limits prescribed in the Constitution.
As citizens, we must remember that rules set forth in our Constitution were established for a reason, and that breaking or bending those rules for any purpose catapults us down a dangerous and slippery course. One day the bending of the rules might be used for a noble cause, but the next day it might be used for an underhanded or outright tyrannous purpose.
Regardless of one’s views about the substance within the healthcare bill, the fact remains that it is unconstitutional.
As a country we cannot sacrifice our respect for the rule of law under any circumstances, for once this respect breaks down, our law fails to retain its credibility and authority. In the end it is the American people who uphold the law of the land, not Congress, not the Courts, and not the President. If we continue to allow such degradation of our legal foundations, then health care reform will be the least of our worries.
