Skip to main content

View Diary: Surrender Dems (442 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  agree 100% (none)
    I just dont understand what Armandos end goal is.  No matter what, Bush will be picking the nominee and, frankly, with the number of Senators we have, this is probably about as good as we can hope to get.  I honestly think Armando would like to block nominees until 2008.  Im sorry, it just isnt going to happen.  

    Also, I am really getting tired of baseless alarmist accusations that we are going back to 1937, especially on the Commerce Clause.  Plenty of liberals actually think the federal government shouldnt be able to arrest people from growing marijuana for medicinal use in their own home.  The only Justice who arguably wants to go back to pre-1937 CC jurisprudence is Thomas.  Rhenquist, OConner and, from what Ive read on his position, Roberts, has a pretty sensible CC position.  And, even if it is one you disagree with, it surely will not "take us back to 1937."  It would only place very minor limits on federal power.  Ive posted about this once or twice before in response to Armando.  Honestly, if he were to say some of the things he says to even the most liberal law prof, he would not be taken seriously.  I agree that there is much to be worried about in Roberts, but I think that allegations with no basis in fact do a disservice to our cause.

    •  Thoughts on the Commerce Clause (none)
      Is it really so unreasonable to consider the idea that Congress has surpassed its powers under the Commerce Clause on occasion? I mean, I think that the Wickard v. Filburn decision is absurd and we are still living with its idiocy today. Why should taxpayers pay farmers NOT to grow crops? And does every crime have to be federalized? I think that one of the lessons of Hurricane Katrina is that a more effective federal government is one that is more focused on the fewer things that it can and should do.

      Now I am a very strong proponent of environmental regulations and natural resource conservation laws. So I do not want to see the Clean Water Act or the Endangered Species Act ruled unconstitutional. But I think Congress has become somewhat arrogant. When it should regulate, and has the power to do it, it often refuses to do so. When it really should avoid wasting taxpayer dollars and treat states and counties and cities with respect by letting them take the lead, it often doesn't.

      And let me add, too, that this Commerce Clause thing goes both ways. I think the "negative" or "dormant" Commerce Clause doctrine needs to be enforced more vigorously. We have all of these cities and towns trying to stop big-box retailers from locating in their communities. They do it with various zoning law technicalities. But the goal in enacting these pernicious provisions is to protect "local" businesses and prevent competition. If that doesn't violate the dormant Commerce Clause, what does? And besides, I don't like to see governments trying to tell me where I should shop, what I should buy, and how I should spend my money. Most of us are smart enough to figure that out on our own and, if we aren't, then we should learn instead of relying on the deadening hand of bureaucrats.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site