IMHO the SCOTUS ran off the rails with the commerce clause 80 or so years ago and so now we are up to our eyeballs in federal laws and regulations over matters that ought to be the purview of the state and local governments, like what the freaking school lunch menu should be.
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.
Well grouping all of the GOP is silly because many of them believe different things
Look at the gay rights issue, millions of them support it and reference the constitution while many also don't
so they cant be grouped together
but in general many people (no matter party), treat the constitution like they do religion or own self morals. "I like what is on this page or in this right or passage etc and I dont like this one, or I dont like it applied to people i dont like etc and they pick and choose.
Basically this below:
Unconstitutional Procedure Being Used to Pass Unconstitutional ObamaCare - Breitbart
The Right Strikes Back: A New Legal Challenge for Obamacare
Say, doesn’t the Constitution require tax bills to originate in the House? « Hot Air
Constitution Be Damned - ObamaCare Vote Next Week | RedState
I could go through many more Conservative commentary on the unconstitutionality of using the reconciliation process, not to mention the second link is conservative groups challenging the law in court based on reconciliation.
What Hillary Clinton's email fail tells us: Cybersecurity begins at home | Fox News
I could find more on Hillary as well but this article starts with "constitutionality aside..."
As for the second part....sure! There's no doubt that's the case. There's also no doubt there are avenues Congress can use to challenge the agreement through the legislative process (though post letter I doubt any Dems will play ball). That hasn't stopped the typical unconstitutional yells from the right though.
“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes
There's no question reconciliation is a tactic that McConnell will use this year.
The Senate Parliamentarian has directly given permission and GOPs are just deciding what to use it on, since it appears it can only be used once.
As we've seen with the House, the GOP has two caucuses, the Freedom Caucus and the AAN/Elites.
A stalemate that has frozen DC since the GOP took the House in 2011.
We will continue to have showdowns, such as with the doc fix this month, the debt ceiling soon after, and the transportation trust fund going bankrupt in May.
The attempt to add Keystone to the Transportation/Infrastructure Bill is certainly a GOP talking point right now .
Chemists Have Solutions .
"SECTION II. Punishes seditious writings.
1. Definition of offence:
To write, print, utter or publish, or cause it to be done, or assist in it, any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States, or either House of Congress, or the President, with intent to defame, or bring either into contempt or disrepute, or to excite against either the hatred of the people of the United States, or to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations.
2. Grade of offence:
Fine not exceeding $2000, and imprisonment not exceeding two years.
Can you imagine the outrage if this was passed today? People would be screaming about the violation of freedom of speech. And yet, this was passed shortly after the Constitution was ratified.
The Constitution was written at the Constitutional Convention. There were 30-40 people attending daily, for almost 4 months. It also had to be ratified by the entire nation, a process that required descriptions in the Federalist Papers.But just for accuracy, it was Madison who wrote the bulk of the Constitution and we can see the debate of contributors to the writing in the Federalist Papers. So if you want to go off any founder's view, it should probably be Madison.
Madison was the primary author of the Bill of Rights. However, those amendments had to be ratified by the entire nation. We also have no idea what Madison would genuinely say about the modern world
So, whose understanding matter here? Is it only the people who wrote it? The people who ratified it? The judges and public today?
And how easy is it, really, to apply 200+ year old Constitutional provisions to the modern world? Just the other day, Jeb Bush thought it was crazy to apply a 1936 communications law to the Internet -- yet presumably, he has no problems applying principles crafted 1787. Seems a bit selective to me.
The President has a great many powers, but without Congressional Approval, the vast majority of them are temporary. And once he or she leaves office they can become null and void by the next President. That is what the entire issue the last several years with the expanding use of Executive Orders has been about, and the letter to Iran. Iran is not the United States, and members of Congress were simply reiterating that only Congress has the right to ratify a treaty that extends beyond the term of a single President.
President Obama can sign any agreement with Iran that he wants, but it will have no effect in law unless Congress ratifys it.
War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. - John Stuart Mill