by Laurence Vance, LewRockwell.com
The “Pledge to America” recently unveiled by House Republicans is more Republican gobbledygook. Republican promises to cut waste, fraud, abuse, and earmarks, and institute reform, change, privatization, and accountability are always so vague, misleading, and exception-ridden that they are – without exception – absolutely worthless.
Republicans are such hypocrites that even while they preach smaller and less intrusive government they pass legislation to increase the size and scope of government.
On the very day (September 23) that the House Republicans issued their worthless “Pledge to America,” they also voted in overwhelming numbers along with Democrats to pass four pieces of legislation that violate the very Pledge that Republicans maintain they will adhere to as a majority in the House.
Plan 4 in the Republican Pledge is the promise to “to reform Congress and restore trust.” Under the paragraph titled “Adhere To the Constitution,” there appears this statement:
For too long, Congress has ignored the proper limits imposed by the Constitution on the federal government. Further, it has too often drafted unclear and muddled laws, leaving to an unelected judiciary the power to interpret what the law means and by what authority the law stands. This lack of respect for the clear Constitutional limits and authorities has allowed Congress to create ineffective and costly programs that add to the massive deficit year after year. We will require each bill moving through Congress to include a clause citing the specific constitutional authority upon which the bill is justified.
This is absolutely correct. However, what the Republicans forget to mention is that it is Republicans who controlled the U.S. House of Representatives during the last six years of Clinton’s presidency and the first six years of Bush’s presidency. Republicans are the ones who have ignored the proper limits imposed by the Constitution on the federal government. Republicans are the ones who have drafted unclear and muddled laws. Republicans are the ones who have shown a lack of respect for clear Constitutional limits and authorities. Republicans are the ones who have allowed Congress to create ineffective and costly programs that add to the massive deficit year after year.
Here are the four pieces of legislation that an overwhelming majority of House Republicans voted to pass on the same day they published their Pledge:
- The Family Health Care Accessibility Act
- The Emergency Medic Transition Act
- The National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Reauthorization Act
- The Training and Research for Autism Improvements Nationwide Act
I wonder what clauses would be included with these bills citing the specific constitutional authority upon which they are justified?
The Family Health Care Accessibility Act of 2010 (H.R. 1745) amends the Public Health Service Act “to deem volunteer practitioners at health centers as employees of the Public Health Service for purposes of any civil action that may arise due to providing services to patients at such health centers.” This bill was introduced in the House by a Republican, Timothy Murphy of Pennsylvania. It passed by a vote of 417 to 1. The lone no vote was the heroic Ron Paul (R-TX). One hundred and seventy Republicans voted for the bill. But since the Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to have anything to do with health care, this bill lacks specific constitutional authority and would have to be rejected under the Republican Pledge.
The Emergency Medic Transition Act of 2010 (H.R. 3199) amends the Public Health Service Act “to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to award grants to state entities with jurisdiction over emergency medical personnel to provide for the expedited training and licensing, as emergency medical technicians, of veterans who received training as such a technician while serving in the Armed Forces.” Only five Republicans voted against this bill. But since the Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to have anything to do with health care, this bill lacks specific constitutional authority and would have to be rejected under the Republican Pledge.
The National All Schedules Prescription Electronic Reporting Reauthorization Act of 2010 (H.R. 5710) amends and reauthorizes the controlled substance monitoring program of the Public Health Service Act to “foster the establishment of State-administered controlled substance monitoring systems.” This bill comes with a price tag of $15 million for fiscal year 2011 and $10 million each year for fiscal years 2012 and 2013. It requires the states receiving a federal grant under this Act to submit “aggregate data and other information” to the Secretary of Health and Human Services and to “facilitate prescriber use of the State’s controlled substance monitoring system” and “educate prescribers on the benefits of the system both to them and society.” This bill was introduced in the House by a Republican, Ed Whitfield of Kentucky. It passed by a vote of 384–32. The Republican vote was 140–31. But since the Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to even designate a controlled substance, this bill lacks specific constitutional authority and would have to be rejected under the Republican Pledge.
The Training and Research for Autism Improvements Nationwide Act of 2010 (H.R. 5756), also known as the TRAIN ACT of 2010, has an official title that concisely sums up its purpose:
To amend subtitle D of title I of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 to provide grants and technical assistance to University Centers for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities Education, Research, and Service to improve services rendered to children and adults on the autism spectrum, and their families, and for other purposes.
In awarding grants under this legislation, the Secretary of Health and Human Services must give priority to applicants that are “(1) minority institutions that have demonstrated capacity to meet the requirements of this Act and provide services to individuals with autism and their families; or (2) located in a state with one or more underserved populations.” The vote on this bill was 393–24. The Republican vote was 167–24. But since the Constitution doesn’t authorize the federal government to do anything about autism or any other medical condition, this bill lacks specific constitutional authority and would have to be rejected under the Republican Pledge.
The only reason Republicans ever look good is when they are out of power and oppose the Democrats on major pieces of legislation like Obamacare, extending unemployment benefits, increasing HUD appropriations, etc. When all of their actions – not their just plans, promises, and pledges – are compared to even an imperfect standard like the Constitution it is apparent that there is not a dime’s worth of difference between the two major parties.
Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from Pensacola, FL. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State and The Revolution that Wasn’t. His newest book is Rethinking the Good War. Visit his website.
Copyright © 2010 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Herder of Yaks, Todd Hollon and Stephanie Geffeller, Ron Paul. Ron Paul said: More Republican Pledge Hypocrisy http://bit.ly/clL1pG #tlot #tcot #RonPaul [...]
Great article. Thanks.
A little deception here in your RANT against Republicans…I see. ….and that those republicans who voted had even seen the Pledge.
what is most deceptive is a republican promise of limited government – or for that matter, constitutional government. If it does not bother you that it is a fact that on the very day the republicans promised constitutional government that they voted in a vast majority to violate the constitution – then where do your loyalties lie? That is the challenge to you – republican, or constitution?
Should there even need to be such a pledge? So, if we pretend or assume they didn't know about this pledge, would that smooth over the underlying problem?
But since they don't read the bills they pass, I guess it's not too much of a leap to think they probably don't read their pledges, either.
There is only one political party in this country, and that is the Big Government Party. There may be two branches, but ultimately they share the same goal – expansion of their power over the American people. We can't trust either party. This Pledge to America is simply an attempt by the Republican establishment to lure the us into a false sense of security and co-opt the liberty movement that has been sweeping this country.
That's right, Lesley. And if you realize that they want to do this because it allows them to control the flow of tax dollars and consumer obligations, you will see where, inevitably, this flow of tax and consumer money is going.
This is not about power, as much as it is about money and how much they can get from us and funnel to their favorite campaign donors and friends. If it wasn't about absconding with our money, then, they wouldn't need the power they seek.
I am still surprised at the reluctance of conservative Americans to realize that there is a real and VALID class war going on. It has nothing to do with partisan politics, EXCEPT AT THE TOP. Politics has become basically a turf war between competing BIG BUSINESS interests. The rest of us are left out, except for the single purpose of financial exploitation through the various law-making mechanisms.
Thus, we have two, non-exclusive choices which emanate from above: (1) get nickeled-and-dimed more and more, or (2) acquiesce to deficit spending and let your kids get nickeled-and-dimed.
[...] More Republican Pledge Hypocrisy [...]
Will things ever change?
One thing that jumped out at me while compiling the 2010 congressional election data was that in the 87 seats where a Republican won, the best a third party candidate got in this cycle was a little over 10 percent, and that was only in one race. On average, I'd say most got around 1~2%. In some races, I saw up to 5 independents and third party candidates running. The average Republican "win" was around 54% of the vote. Several had less than 50% while some had more than 60%. A house divided against itself cannot stand.
My point in writing this, is that we as knowledgeable people and constitutionalists GET IT. We send email links and stories about atrocities against our rights and our Constitution, and people standing up for what they believe in. We document what the Constitution says and what the bills say. We are the ones that read the bills, dot the i, cross the t. We're also like 1~2 percent of the voting population… and in our own little world as far as I can tell.
Much ado has been made this past year and a half or so about the non-partisan Tea Party (if you look up a "Tea Party" election winner, they are a Republican), independents, etc. None was borne out by the election. I'm not expecting results in one cycle. But on the other hand, 1~2 percent is not going to materialize in a couple of years into the 49+ percent needed to win an election.
Take a look at the USA Today election site here, pick any state and you'll see pretty much the same result: http://projects.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010/e…
I also write the above as one that truly believed it was the message, not the party, not the money, that would draw people to a candidate. I was proven wrong when my friend and independent candidate Paul McKain got under 3% of the vote. The political party mindset was exposed to me several times in this campaign when voters would tell me, he's the better candidate, but he can't win. Now we have a "Tea Party" Republican going into office here that has already told a local liberal Mayor not to worry about federal funds. This was the day after the election.
One discussion before the election was how to "fix" the Republican party. One group said from within, another from without (independent or third party). After over a year of the latter, count me in the former group now.
The only light I see in this election is that about half of the incoming representatives have never held elected office beyond that of a Mayor or local city/county council (although the lawyer rate is still over 30% as it is with the current Congress). Let's pray they stand up long enough for the masses to see how the Congress should work.
It's interesting that you would would actually point out, as an example of excess, that the house vote on HR 1745 would have only one opposing member. Politics is the art of intelligent compromise. It is certainly not the art of petulant tantrums, as was demonstrated by the outcome of the last elections. It's also interesting that you would deride the Republicans for their willingness to acknowledge the very things you point out, to publish a manifesto that requires those things be changed, and effectively expose the party to ridicule if the changes are not instituted.
I suppose I would ask; What do you want?
have you looked up the definition of hypocrite? well, if it walks like a duck…
now you may think it best to ignore some constitutional violations by republicans. we do not…for any politician or party. but to deny the hypocrisy of their pledge the very same day they overwhelmingly voted to expand government in multiple bills is not just ignorance…it IS the problem this country faces.
what might that be? "stick to the constitution except when my party wins."
The Bigs! Big Business, Big Pharma, Big Oil, Big Banking, Big Government will do whatever it takes to maintain their power and control. The foundation of tyranny lies in the vast networks of corrupted people with an interest in maintaining the tyranny. Campaign contributions are no more than bribes and payoffs for future service. This runs deeply in both parties. Follow the money and you will find the answers you seek and who the politicians are truly working for. Hint: It is not, 'We the People!'
I wonder how many politicions earn less than 250 thousand — and how many would admit that they and their staff and a lot of federal employees don't pay into sociol security —and have a tax payer funded health care plan –and why the news media dosn't talk about it ?????????
[...] Party supporters can test whether or not the Republican Party is really serious about anything and everything regarding individual liberty, limited government and the [...]
On Republicans as “HYPOCRITES” so true