TPMDC

Bachmann: Democrats' Health Care Plan Is Unconstitutional

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) made an interesting argument last night on Sean Hannity's show on Fox News: Not only is President Obama's health care plan bad, it's unconstitutional.

"It's interesting, a lot of members of Congress may have forgotten what their Constitution says," said Bachmann. "But again, it is not within our power as members of Congress, it's not within the enumerated powers of the Constitution for us to design and create a national takeover of health care. Nor is it within our ability to be able to delegate that responsibility to the executive."

So if Bachmann thinks federal activity in health care is illegal under the constitution, should Medicare be abolished immediately?

If some sort of health care bill does pass, these issues could soon be resolved in the landmark Supreme Court case, Bachmann v. Reality.

Join the Conversation!

22 comments

Recommend Recommend (2)

August 19, 2009 12:51 PM   

Michele, you don't have the gray matter to comprehend what's in the Constitution. So, let's not make up a bunch of goofy shit about a document you've never even read.

Somewhere, Michele, under a big colorful tent, there's a clown car idling, just waiting for one more passenger. Don't leave them waiting.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

CN

user-pic

August 19, 2009 12:55 PM   

I am totally starting a Michelle Bachmann fan club.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:57 PM   

I love how she rolls with "It's interesting, a lot of members of Congress may have forgotten what their Constitution says..." and then totally neglects to follow it up with an explanation of how her claim is true. Oh yeah, because she has absolutely nothing. She just spits out buzz words -- "socialism" "government run health care" "fascist" "remember the Constitution", "blah blah blah"

I hope she gets defeated next time around.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:56 PM    in reply to LuxVeritas

"I hope she gets defeated next time around."

Perish the thought. In the wacko world of Republicans, she's a high priestess. She's waaaay to entertaining to be without.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:57 PM   

Should we also abolish Social Security along with Medicare?

Actually, nutty wingers like Bachmann would actually be down with that. And they'd like to abolish the IRS and the EPA and, well, just about everything tied to the federal government that doesn't involve invading countries and blowing stuff up. Problem is that things like SS and Medicare are very popular. And this healthcare reform with a public option would be popular as well and impossible to get rid of once implemented. And that, my friends, is what scares the GOP to death.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:58 PM   

Let me be the first to engage in the same smearing obnoxious name-calling Republicans excel at and say this:

MICHELLE BACHMANN WANTS TO ABOLISH MEDICARE!!!

You 65 and older people in Minnesota need to do something about this!!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 12:58 PM   

And like Lux, I'm still waiting for an explanation regarding how this is unconstitutional.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:03 PM   

Well, not in the secret Biblically conformed and compatible Constitution in Michelle's head, but, in the real one that she so insincerely swore an oath to her Old Testament Comics God to uphold, it says, in Article I, Section 8:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

* * *

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several Statesand with the Indian Tribes;,

and, of course,

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 1:22 PM    in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve

The "necessary and proper" clause was one of the big beefs of the anti-Federalists. But they lost that fight. Michele needs to brush up on her Constitutional history, along with her knowledge of just about everything outside of the subject of "crazy".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:30 PM    in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve

It is so unfair to fight hysteria with facts. Jerk.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:09 PM   

Based on her previous demands of officials at hearings to explain exactly where the Constitution gives them the right to do what they're doing, I get the impression that Bachmann doesn't grasp the whole concept that the Constitution authorizes Congress to pass laws, and doesn't put a lot of restrictions on what those laws can be. Instead, she seems to believe that the federal government is only allowed to do things that are specifically described in the Constitution.

Considering that passing laws is in the part of the Constitution that defines her job, one wonders exactly what she believes she was elected to do...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:17 PM   

The constitution doesn't say "there shall be national healthcare", so it must be unconstitutional. Nevermind that it never says there shall NOT be.

This is a view of constitutionality that works well for crazy right wingers who want the government to do nothing. Just claim that the constitution is the entirety of all our laws, and throw the rest away.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:18 PM   

Keep digging, Michele...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 2:27 PM   

I understood that she was a graduate of Regent University School of Law...her Wikipedia page has been screwed around with....I heard her give an interview and she was proud to have gone to Pat Robertson's Law School (which is rated dead last of all Law Schools in the country).

She's been in the clown car parade since she ran for state office, now she's the leader of the parade in DC...followed by Virginia Foxx, Steven King, Paul Broun, etc., etc., etc.

*She said she got her law degree while her husband also was a student at Regent getting a doctorate to "get rid of the gays".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:02 PM   

Bachmann v. Reality brings new meaning to "diversity jurisdiction."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

mcc

user-pic

August 19, 2009 3:08 PM   

Eric: Do you think it might somehow be possible for you or some other journalist to just outright ask Michelle Bachmann the question "is medicare constitutional?"

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 20, 2009 2:35 AM    in reply to mcc

pretty please.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:18 PM   

Actually, Michelle (you dolt), the Constitution says, right there at the beginning, that the federal government was established to, in part, "promote the general welfare...." What could be promoting the general welfare of the nation more than a government-backed health care system? What a freaking moron.

Oh, and apodaca, I LOVE the civil procedure humor!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 3:32 PM   

If Bachmann vs. Reality is class action, count me in.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 4:04 PM   

Wow. She did not read very far, did she?

Preamble:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, ...

Emphasis mine.

Ninth Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

That is, right to health care, if one is considered to exist.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 8:00 PM    in reply to Karl the Marxist

Facts mean nothing to these whackos.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

August 19, 2009 5:27 PM   

Oh, please please pretty please with sugar on top, please, let the GOP file a lawsuit to abolish Medicare, the VA, and military hospitals. PLEASE, Rep. Bachmann, you've got to make this happen. Step up and defend the Constitution. Please, with a big, scary headline, file the suit NOW.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!