Skip to main content

In a move that shows just how extreme the Republican Party has become, Tom Coburn and Rand Paul have convinced 34 of their fellow GOP senators--a total of three-fourths of the Republican Senate caucus--to sign on to the "Enumerated Powers Act of 2013," which would require all proposed bills to include a clear explanation of the specific authority Congress has to act in that area.  Although the bill is not available online as of yet, Coburn himself put out a press release saying that one of its provisions would forbid the use of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution for any matter other than "the regulation of the buying and selling of goods or services, or the transporting for those purposes, across boundaries with foreign nations, across State lines, or with Indian tribes."

Ian Millhiser of ThinkProgress saw this release and concludes--rightly--that this bill would have the effect of gaggng any future federal efforts to protect the rights of workers.

To translate this language a bit, in the late 19th Century, the Supreme Court embraced an unusually narrow interpretation of the Constitution’s provision enabling Congress to “regulate commerce . . . among the several states.” Under this narrow reading, which lasted less than half a century, the justices said that they would only permit federal laws that regulated the transport of goods for sale or a sale itself. Manufacturing, mining, production and agriculture were all held to be beyond federal regulation. This theory was the basis for several decisions striking down basic labor protections, including a 1918 decision declaring a child labor law unconstitutional.

Coburn and Paul’s bill appears to be an attempt to restore the constitutional regime that prohibited child labor regulation and other such nationwide regulation of the American workplace. While the bill does not apply retroactively — so existing labor laws would continue to function — the bill does allow a procedural objection to be raised against any new legislation that does not comply with the limits imposed by the bill. Such an objection could be used to block any most attempts to enact new workplace laws — such as a bill increasing the national minimum wage or a bill prohibiting all employers from firing workers because they are gay. Similarly, Coburn and Paul’s bill could permanently entrench decisions by the conservative Roberts Court rolling back existing protections for workers — such as a recent decision shielding many employers whose senior employees engage in sexual harassment.

It should come as no shock that Coburn and Paul are driving the bus on this bill.  After all, they are among the closest things in the Senate to simon-pure teabaggers.  For instance, back in March Paul made a speech praising Lochner v. New York, a 1905 SCOTUS ruling that foreclosed any attempts to regulate worker-employer relations.  That decision was effectively overturned in 1937 by West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish.  It commonly appears on lists of the worst SCOTUS decisions ever.  Even Robert Bork called that decision an abomination.  Robert Bork, people.

I did some digging on Thomas, and it turns out a slightly less expansive version is pending in the House.  Phil Gingrey (R-GA11) is sponsoring the House version, with Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA3), Bill Posey (R-FL8), Rob Wittman (R-VA1), Jeff Duncan (R-SC3) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN7).  While the premise behind both these bills is loony, I never thought I'd see the day a House Republican bill would be less loony than a Senate Republican bill.

What comes as a shock, however, is the amount of support this monstrosity has attracted.  Some of the names on the cosponsor list come as no surprise--Mike Lee, Jim Inhofe, Deb Fischer, Ted Cruz, Jeff Flake, Tim Scott and Roger Wicker, among others.  But there are a good number of supposedly sane Repubs on the list as well--Chuck Grassley, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Jerry Moran, Kelly Ayotte and Bob Corker.  

As if there weren't already abundant reasons to wonder if the Republican Party has become a far-right party, this one is a lulu.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site