Norm Semanko doesn't seem to understand the tough economic times facing Idahoans. The fact is regular Idahoans have been hit hard by the economic downtown. They need solutions not partisan gamesmanship.
Yesterday I along with the 17 other House Democrats voted against the ill-named Health Freedom Act (HB 391). Unfortunately for Idahoans, this legislation is yet another distraction for lawmakers from our real work of getting Idahoans back to work. And for what end? So that Norm Semanko and others could try to score a political point.
Well, here is a news alert, Norm: I care more about fixing the problems for Idaho families than scoring political points (see exhibit A , exhibit B,and exhibit C). It's your insistence on playing partisan games instead of finding solutions that has degraded the public's confidence in our government. You keep playing games, I'll try to get some real work done and help my constituents back on the road to economic security.
Never mind that the legislation itself was foolish, and that is putting it politely. The legislation ignores Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution (aka the Supremacy Clause). It states, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." But Mr. Semanko isn't interested in upholding the Constitution, that is only important when he and his party are trying to pacify the Tea Party folks.
Oh and on the final point, the bill has a $100,000 fiscal note. So rather than employing teachers we will be employing attorneys. Great idea. I suppose if legal community needs a stimulus package, Norm has the bill for them. That is not the vision I have for Idaho. I'd rather spend the taxpayer dollars someplace more valuable than in a partisan treasure hunt. Norm can keep scoring political points and I'll keep working for Idahoans. I trust that when Election Day comes the regular Idahoans that Norm is neglecting will let him know they would have rather the legislature spend more trying address their needs rather than serve his own partisan agenda.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Branden,
I respect your position and am pleased you’re standing up for your convictions. But please realize your vote and representation is not a platform for you or anyone else’s, it’s the peoples’ -- your constituents.
I am not privy to your decision-making processes; you may have polled your district and have determined your position based on that data. This I don't know. I would like you to know that I am one your constituents that strongly opposes the Federal Government mandating any product or service on citizen consumers-most specifically on healthcare treatment options.
Your citing of the Supremacy Clause is a powerful tool. And yes, a case can be made for state submission of “Healthcare Reform” in the case of its eventual passage. But it being passed as law does not make it right. Plessy v. Ferguson was the law of the land and was eventually struck down as being unconstitutional. I believe we are repeating this with “Healthcare Reform”. A nationwide mandate for citizens to purchase anything is unconstitutional and it is one of the main reasons for the founding of this country and it break from Britain. i.e. The Stamp Act. We have a significant (I say a majority) number of citizens, in Idaho and across the nation who continue to embrace the principles of Free Markets -where consumers are free to choose.
Please recall, the U.S. Constitution was passed because it included a The Bill of Rights - (an incomplete list of stuff the Federal Government is prohibited from doing). Not having a Bill of Rights meant not having a constitution. In lieu of that and reverting to a confederation we decided to adopt the document. One of the implied principles in the document is the supremacy of individual rights. The individual in the eyes of the Federal Government are the 50 states and its territories. (states like Idaho).
The” ill-named Health Freedom Act” (HB 391), as you called it is the product of elected representatives of the sovereign people of Idaho - like yourself. These representatives, you opposed, are attempting to reassert the implied principle that the Federal Government works for Idaho and not vice-a-versa. We are one of many states asserting the reestablishment of this principle in national government.
I ask you to reconsider your position on future decisions when faced with legislation that protects liberty rather than abridging it.
"Anyone who trades liberty for security deserves neither liberty nor security" (Benjamin Franklin)
Post a Comment