Congressman Anthony Weiner - debating the constitutionality of the health bill is not important!

Please note that he clearly did not say that he did not care about the Constitution. I think he said that debating the constitutionality of the health bill is not important and I'm not happy about that either.

To my mind, that is the same thing. Caring about the Constitution means that we must debate the constitutionality of the issues of the day and not just whether a law is needed or not or whether it is good or bad.

But unfortunately, the Congressman is correct. With the exception of a few so called extremist right wingers or tea partyers no one, democrat or republican, really cares about the constitutionality of most laws today. They just care about their bottom line.

Please take the time to read the rest of this so that you will fully understand what you are watching.

This video is taken from a town hall meeting held in Brooklyn, NY on August 31, 2009 with Congressman Anthony Weiner Democrat-NY. He represents the state's 9th Congressional district that includes parts of Brooklyn and Queens.

I want to make it clear that I think the Congressman is a very talented, nice and sincere guy. And he was very kind to take my question even when he was ready to leave. So I was very reluctant to post this video. Maybe I should cut the guy some slack. Hey, it was the last question of the night and maybe he was just tired.

The health care debate at this meeting went the same way as most other Town Hall meetings have. The Congressman and many others argued that we need reform and it saves money and is not dangerous while others argued that we do not need it and we'll all go broke and well die if it is passed. All of this is what I expected to hear.

What bothered me was his answer to my question about the constitutionality of the health bill. My point is that the constitutionality of the bill should be debated first and if it is unconstitutional then it does not matter whether it is needed or not or whether it is good or bad. Health care cannot be fixed by creating new programs but only through measures that are within the limits of the Constitution. I asked him if he could point to language in the Constitution that allowed for this legislation.

He gave the usual answer that it was covered under the general welfare clause and wasn't something the Constitution prohibited. He added that this type of law had been made before with Social Security and Medicare and that everyone is fine with them now.

This did not answer my question and I tried to tell him he was missing the point. First, I was not asking about history but about the current bill and how we should proceed going forward. Beyond that, I tried to explain that it isn't a matter of what Congress can get away with passing into law but about whether Congress has any business making laws that are unconstitutional. If it is a matter of finally deciding exactly what general welfare covers then let us clear that up first and then debate the merits of the bill.

I put the question to him another way and asked him if health care was a right under the Constitution.

He answered that he wasn't exactly sure but who cares. Please note that he clearly did not say that he did not care about the Constitution. I think what he said was that the constitutionality of the health bill is not an important part of the debate. The point is that the people need this and it is going to save us money.

Unfortunately, he is correct. With the exception of a few so called extremist right wingers no one, democrat or republican, really cares about the constitutionality of most laws today. They just care about their bottom line.

At the beginning of my question the Congressman asked me who the video was for I told him that I didn't know how to use the camera and it is true. I didn't know how to capture the crowd on camera and turn the camera so that I could also get the Congressman's response and that is why the entire meeting shows only the Congressman. Beyond that, I was not sure how to upload it to YouTube.

However, I think that this last part of his response to my question was so alarmingly wrongheaded and dangerous that I took the time to learn how to post it on YouTube. And I think it should bother liberals as much as conservatives. So I hope to post the rest of the meeting when I can.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Congressman
• Anthony
• Weiner
• Constitution
• constitutionality
• of
• the
• health
• care
• bill
• reform
• Obama
• town
• hall
• meeting
• Article one
• section eight
• taxing
• spending
• obamacare
• town hall
• democrat
• liberal

[Mambu152]

It is ironic that Weiner should be asking who the camera is for and if he is going to see himself somewhere. I am not gloating. I think it is very sad.

[biggetjeknor]

America is really f-up!! Is it constitutional?!!? Do I even have a right to medical care!?!?!? you guys need to f''n develop yourselves! Weiner probably has to fight his "unconstitutional" image after this...Don't give up Tony!!!!

Mambu this is such a stupid question because the philosophy of The constitution is WE THE PEOPLE. After all the things USA has done, for a (freakin) jew to ask if THIS is constitutional?....damn man......America is really f-up!

[Mambu152]

@biggetjeknor The philosophy of the Constitution is that we the people have certain inalienable rights and that the government has limits to what it can do to us. It is not about what the Government has the right to do FOR us but what it does not have the right to do TO us. All Americans should be concerned about what the government tries to do for them because there is always a price to pay and often the price is liberty. Being a (freaking) Jew has nothing to do with it. I am an American.

[NiceVideos11]

When the constitution was written blacks were slaves...... I guess we should all go back to picking cotton..... Thank God for Amendments and Bills to correct a document that contains flaws....

Where was all the uproar when Bush actually DID trample all over the fourth Amendment???

Health Care IS a right, like Education is a right... unless you're a minority apparently....

[Mambu152]

@NiceVideos11 You’re saying is that the constitution is flawed. Agreed. It was made by men not GD. That’s why the founders allowed for change. But the changes must be made constitutionally.

Re Bush: Are you saying two wrongs make a right? Bush broke the constitution there so Obama can too?

You've a constitutional right to provide for your own health care/ education but where does the constitution say the government must provide health care or education for you?

[elizawyo]

Asking if healthcare is constitutional is a meaningless question. If they didn't, the government would be pointless. Allowing every American to get paid for work they've done is not in the constitution but it's a law. The government makes a lot of laws that aren't in the constitution. Anyone knows that. He''s wasting the Rep's time and responding to what Weiner says without letting him respond...just like a child.

[Mambu152]

Of course not all laws are in the constitution. The point is that every law must be constitutional. That he doesn't even want to consider that is very telling. As far as wasting his time, I'd heard his answer. He was not addressing the point but he wasn't letting me follow up. He did this all night. When someone agreed he'd let them talk but when someone wanted to follow up a tough question he'd cut them off and filibuster. This was the only way to get heard and he didn't even hear that.

[prisonerofalliance]

The point is health care is not unconstitutional. Not all laws are in the constitution -- the founders wanted the constitution to place restrictions and set fundamentals, not to contain every law for the future. The constitution says nothing about airplanes. Is the FAA unconstitutional? The anti-health care "patriots" yelling about the constitution know absolutely nothing about their own country's core principles which they're supposedly defending.

[8MinutesofMusic]

i love Anthony Weiner ... Weiner is real hope and change Weiner 4 president 2012

[Relbl]

@tankebaner True - so are you against Donald Duck as a national mascot? He seems to be a perfect fit for America: talks loud, can barely understand him, and gets angry at everything he doesn't understand (which happens to be a lot). Pretty bang on pal. I would just like to say that I hope every person that's against a national healthcare plan that covers all no matter what gets their wish to go bankrupt from disease treatment and die anyway as a pauper - you too can join the other 50000 per year

[Mambu152]

@gcadenaz

what you are saying is that two wrongs make a right. They broke the constitution there so do it here too. So the question is very good. Why is the constitutionality of the law not a consideration?

At any rate, it is too late now.

[flapjackmaka]

Weiner is such a flippin idiot!

[tankebaner]

I think and I think Rep. Weiner thinks that as long as the constiution does not say anything about it the congress and the president have the right to implement laws. The constiution provides minority rights and defines how the government is run but as long as there is nothing said in the constiution its a fair go its allowed. Thus the government could not take away the freedom of speech, but it could, if it wanted to select Donald Duck as a national mascot, it would be silly, but they could.