“[Rep. Timothy J. Campbell, D-NY 8] is reported to have said to President Grover Cleveland, upon Cleveland’s saying he would not support a bill on the grounds that the bill was unconstitutional, “What’s the Constitution between friends?” (Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, 16th ed.)”
Edit: Timothy J. Campbell (1840-1904) was in the House from 1885-1889 and 1891-1895.
Hey Lefties, there’s an Amendment process. If you really want ObamaCare that badly, the solution is known. All you have to do is convince 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4trs of the States it’s a good idea!
All you have to do is convince 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4trs of the States it’s a good idea!
That’s too much work. They’d just prefer to get some judges to rule in their favor. Got election results you don’t like? Get some judge to throw them out. Got a law that’s blatantly unconstitutional and unpopular? Get 5 people of the Supreme Court to vote your way and it’s done.
I think one thing that’s missing from essays like this is some reflection on why limiting the power of the Federal government is in general a good thing — even a good thing in this case. Some Hayekian rumination on the deadly danger of shorting the high voltage of huge power to the ordinary human ground potential for making mistake. Big sparks, flames, the house burns down.
One could, for example, point to the disasters that we saw in the financial industry recently, where when financial power is concentrated in too few hands — and those hands make relatively ordinary human mistakes, the consequences are far worse than if the power were distributed, so that any one agency’s mistakes needn’t bring the house down.
Health care spending in government’s hands is the ultimate “too big to fail” folly. If government makes a mistake — and it will — it must, since it is composed of mere mortal humans, not omniscient beings from Krypton — then everybody’s health, everbody’s wallet, the entire health business sector takes the hit.
It always amuses me that lefties appreciate the importance of diversity in their food and ecosystems, but love monoculture when it comes to government and economics. And yet the very same arguments — that spreading the risk around many different subsystems reduces the risk of catastrophe, that diversity in your solution mechanisms for environmental problems increases the robustness of the system — apply as well in commerce and the nature of daily living as they do in the ecology of the rainforest.
It always amuses me that lefties appreciate the importance of diversity in their food and ecosystems, but love monoculture when it comes to government and economics.
That’s because lefties believe they’re uniquely qualified to run the government and control economics. Remember, they think the only reason why communism continues to fail is because “the right people weren’t in charge,” meaning them, of course.
I know where you are coming from on those talking points Carl. Even if all 50 states implemented a universal health care system you would still have the federal gov’t to rely upon to correct any major disruptions to the welfare of individuals and the stability of the economy. But when the federal gov’t itself institutes sweeping reforms who do you turn to when the system begins to crumble and neglected yet essential cogs seize up? Usually as a result of some over arching axiom of “truth” that dictates how things should be but don’t quite conform to the reality of the needs of diverse populations, regional variability of resources, and differing social values.
The lefty’s don’t listen to these consternations however because anytime one brings up the, “well what about this?” or, “are you really considering that?” their response is generally….”shut up!” For them adverse results and abnormal side effects are placated in the glow good intentions. And well, shut up! “‘Cause there was this time this person had a really good experience, and it was great, and they were happy and stuff and everybody could have that if they stopped being a buger picker and just shut up already.”
And if all 50 states did have health-care programs, some corksoaking icehole would file suit because Mississippi isn’t paying as much as Massachusetts, or some such nonsense.
“[Rep. Timothy J. Campbell, D-NY 8] is reported to have said to President Grover Cleveland, upon Cleveland’s saying he would not support a bill on the grounds that the bill was unconstitutional, “What’s the Constitution between friends?” (Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, 16th ed.)”
— http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_J._Campbell
Edit: Timothy J. Campbell (1840-1904) was in the House from 1885-1889 and 1891-1895.
Hey Lefties, there’s an Amendment process. If you really want ObamaCare that badly, the solution is known. All you have to do is convince 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4trs of the States it’s a good idea!
All you have to do is convince 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4trs of the States it’s a good idea!
That’s too much work. They’d just prefer to get some judges to rule in their favor. Got election results you don’t like? Get some judge to throw them out. Got a law that’s blatantly unconstitutional and unpopular? Get 5 people of the Supreme Court to vote your way and it’s done.
I think one thing that’s missing from essays like this is some reflection on why limiting the power of the Federal government is in general a good thing — even a good thing in this case. Some Hayekian rumination on the deadly danger of shorting the high voltage of huge power to the ordinary human ground potential for making mistake. Big sparks, flames, the house burns down.
One could, for example, point to the disasters that we saw in the financial industry recently, where when financial power is concentrated in too few hands — and those hands make relatively ordinary human mistakes, the consequences are far worse than if the power were distributed, so that any one agency’s mistakes needn’t bring the house down.
Health care spending in government’s hands is the ultimate “too big to fail” folly. If government makes a mistake — and it will — it must, since it is composed of mere mortal humans, not omniscient beings from Krypton — then everybody’s health, everbody’s wallet, the entire health business sector takes the hit.
It always amuses me that lefties appreciate the importance of diversity in their food and ecosystems, but love monoculture when it comes to government and economics. And yet the very same arguments — that spreading the risk around many different subsystems reduces the risk of catastrophe, that diversity in your solution mechanisms for environmental problems increases the robustness of the system — apply as well in commerce and the nature of daily living as they do in the ecology of the rainforest.
It always amuses me that lefties appreciate the importance of diversity in their food and ecosystems, but love monoculture when it comes to government and economics.
That’s because lefties believe they’re uniquely qualified to run the government and control economics. Remember, they think the only reason why communism continues to fail is because “the right people weren’t in charge,” meaning them, of course.
I know where you are coming from on those talking points Carl. Even if all 50 states implemented a universal health care system you would still have the federal gov’t to rely upon to correct any major disruptions to the welfare of individuals and the stability of the economy. But when the federal gov’t itself institutes sweeping reforms who do you turn to when the system begins to crumble and neglected yet essential cogs seize up? Usually as a result of some over arching axiom of “truth” that dictates how things should be but don’t quite conform to the reality of the needs of diverse populations, regional variability of resources, and differing social values.
The lefty’s don’t listen to these consternations however because anytime one brings up the, “well what about this?” or, “are you really considering that?” their response is generally….”shut up!” For them adverse results and abnormal side effects are placated in the glow good intentions. And well, shut up! “‘Cause there was this time this person had a really good experience, and it was great, and they were happy and stuff and everybody could have that if they stopped being a buger picker and just shut up already.”
And if all 50 states did have health-care programs, some corksoaking icehole would file suit because Mississippi isn’t paying as much as Massachusetts, or some such nonsense.
This is a lose/lose proposition all around.