• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A Parchment Barrier Needs Enforcement

Gdjjr

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2019
Messages
136
Reaction score
60
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
A "Parchment Barrier" Needs Enforcement | | Tenth Amendment Center

The Constitution can’t enforce itself.

People often quote Lysander Spooner to make the case that constitutional limits on federal power mean nothing.

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

But I find a very odd assumption buried in this line of thinking – this idea that the Constitution can or should somehow enforce itself.

Think of it this way – if a person tells you to shut up, you will almost certainly ignore them unless you know they have the ability to actually make you be quiet. Their words mean nothing unless they possess the power to back them up and put them into effect.

Constitutions work the same way. You can’t just wave the document in front of out-of-control government officials or agencies like a red cloth in front of a bull and expect them to simply stop what they’re doing. Without some enforcement mechanism, the Constitution is of little use when it comes to limiting the power of the federal government.

James Madison understood this dynamic. In Federalist #48, he described limits on power in constitutions as mere “parchment barriers.”
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier� Needs Enforcement

A "Parchment Barrier" Needs Enforcement | | Tenth Amendment Center

The Constitution can’t enforce itself.

People often quote Lysander Spooner to make the case that constitutional limits on federal power mean nothing.

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

But I find a very odd assumption buried in this line of thinking – this idea that the Constitution can or should somehow enforce itself.

Think of it this way – if a person tells you to shut up, you will almost certainly ignore them unless you know they have the ability to actually make you be quiet. Their words mean nothing unless they possess the power to back them up and put them into effect.

Constitutions work the same way. You can’t just wave the document in front of out-of-control government officials or agencies like a red cloth in front of a bull and expect them to simply stop what they’re doing. Without some enforcement mechanism, the Constitution is of little use when it comes to limiting the power of the federal government.

James Madison understood this dynamic. In Federalist #48, he described limits on power in constitutions as mere “parchment barriers.”



Did you just now learn about Might Makes Right?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier� Needs Enforcement

A "Parchment Barrier" Needs Enforcement | | Tenth Amendment Center

The Constitution can’t enforce itself.

People often quote Lysander Spooner to make the case that constitutional limits on federal power mean nothing.

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

But I find a very odd assumption buried in this line of thinking – this idea that the Constitution can or should somehow enforce itself.

Think of it this way – if a person tells you to shut up, you will almost certainly ignore them unless you know they have the ability to actually make you be quiet. Their words mean nothing unless they possess the power to back them up and put them into effect.

Constitutions work the same way. You can’t just wave the document in front of out-of-control government officials or agencies like a red cloth in front of a bull and expect them to simply stop what they’re doing. Without some enforcement mechanism, the Constitution is of little use when it comes to limiting the power of the federal government.

James Madison understood this dynamic. In Federalist #48, he described limits on power in constitutions as mere “parchment barriers.”

Agreed. That is principally why every principal federal officer, legislature, judge, and many inferior officers and employees, vow to “defend” the federal Constitution upon taking office.

A constitution is only as good as the men charged with its implementation and defense.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

A "Parchment Barrier" Needs Enforcement | | Tenth Amendment Center

The Constitution can’t enforce itself.

People often quote Lysander Spooner to make the case that constitutional limits on federal power mean nothing.

“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.”

But I find a very odd assumption buried in this line of thinking – this idea that the Constitution can or should somehow enforce itself.

Think of it this way – if a person tells you to shut up, you will almost certainly ignore them unless you know they have the ability to actually make you be quiet. Their words mean nothing unless they possess the power to back them up and put them into effect.

Constitutions work the same way. You can’t just wave the document in front of out-of-control government officials or agencies like a red cloth in front of a bull and expect them to simply stop what they’re doing. Without some enforcement mechanism, the Constitution is of little use when it comes to limiting the power of the federal government.

James Madison understood this dynamic. In Federalist #48, he described limits on power in constitutions as mere “parchment barriers.”

What federal action did you want to see prevented by the exercise of the Constitution ?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

What federal action did you want to see prevented by the exercise of the Constitution ?

Anything which restricts liberty. There are so many federal laws they can't even be counted- I'd start with the fed reserve act and obviously the income tax would be next- those 2 things fund every egregious act the gov't perpetrates-
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

Anything which restricts liberty. There are so many federal laws they can't even be counted- I'd start with the fed reserve act and obviously the income tax would be next- those 2 things fund every egregious act the gov't perpetrates-

Can you think of one in particular that has recently done so ?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

Can you think of one in particular that has recently done so ?

Can I think of one what/who?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

Can I think of one what/who?

Is you inability to scroll back to you last post really that limited ?

You said:

"Anything which restricts liberty"


Do you remember what you were talking about ?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier� Needs Enforcement

Can you think of one in particular that has recently done so ?

The Affordable Care Act and it’s insurance mandate, among other issues.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

The Affordable Care Act and it’s insurance mandate, among other issues.

The problem is that people without insurance were sucking medicaid dry and getting healthcare that was paid for by your tax dollars but was free to them. By mandating affordable insurance and charging a penalty for not having insurance, those people were forced to repay what they could afford into the system they were bilking. By not having a mandate, tax payers cover 100% of the cost of their healthcare.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier� Needs Enforcement

The problem is that people without insurance were sucking medicaid dry and getting healthcare that was paid for by your tax dollars but was free to them. By mandating affordable insurance and charging a penalty for not having insurance, those people were forced to repay what they could afford into the system they were bilking. By not having a mandate, tax payers cover 100% of the cost of their healthcare.

I understand the market-based justification for the mandate. We’re not considering economics, but the Constitution. It is the first example of the federal government requiring every citizen’s participation in a particular market. It was the single largest usurpation of state and individual rights by the federal government and sets precedent for unlimited federal power.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

The Affordable Care Act and it’s insurance mandate, among other issues.

No apostrophe needed


How does the affordable heath care acts restrict liberties ?

It makes you ensure that you and your dependents are covered.

Do you view the legal requirement for you to get auto insurance as a restriction on liberty ?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

I understand the market-based justification for the mandate. We’re not considering economics, but the Constitution. It is the first example of the federal government requiring every citizen’s participation in a particular market. It was the single largest usurpation of state and individual rights by the federal government and sets precedent for unlimited federal power.

What about the federal government requiring every citizen to financially support the police? Or to pay for roads?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

What about the federal government requiring every citizen to financially support the police? Or to pay for roads?

Or the military ?

Or schools ?

There are 21 government departments - each spending billions of tax dollars per year:

Cabinet of the United States - Wikipedia


Who isd going to pay for the reconstruction of IS infrastructure following Dorian ?
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

What about the federal government requiring every citizen to financially support the police? Or to pay for roads?

Where do you find that the federal government requires every citizen to support the police? Police are funded by local governments not the federal government. States are allowed to enact laws and regulations all on their own, no federal government needed. The only roads constructed by the federal government was the interstate hiway system, most other roads are maintained by the States and Counties.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

Where do you find that the federal government requires every citizen to support the police? ...Police are funded by local governments not the federal government....

1. The presence of thousands of criminal behind bars
Obeying the law is probably the biggest single way you can support the police.


2. FBI, DEA, Treasury agents, ATF, Secret Service, United States Bureau of Homeland Security, United States Dept of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons, Federal Protective Service, Federal Air Marshals Service, US Marshals, IRS Investigation Division, US Capitol Police, US Supreme Court Police, Dept of Defense Police...and there are more...


All are Federal Law Enforcement Agencies
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

Where do you find that the federal government requires every citizen to support the police? Police are funded by local governments not the federal government. States are allowed to enact laws and regulations all on their own, no federal government needed. The only roads constructed by the federal government was the interstate hiway system, most other roads are maintained by the States and Counties.

State taxes then. The point is: Every American is required to participate in paying for policing of their community, under threat of imprisonment. You don't have a choice.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

State taxes then. The point is: Every American is required to participate in paying for policing of their community, under threat of imprisonment. You don't have a choice.

See above...the USA has more national/federal law enforcement agencies than most.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier� Needs Enforcement

No apostrophe needed


How does the affordable heath care acts restrict liberties ?

It makes you ensure that you and your dependents are covered.

Do you view the legal requirement for you to get auto insurance as a restriction on liberty ?

It was auto-correct, big guy.

The affordable care act mandated that I purchase health insurance. If the federal government can mandate that, what can’t they mandate?

States have inherent police powers the federal government does not have, except on property owned by the federal government. States could mandate the purchase of health insurance, just not the feds.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

What about the federal government requiring every citizen to financially support the police? Or to pay for roads?

Well, interstate highways are likely allowable under the interstate commerce clause. I do not believe, however, federal funds ought to be spent to maintain state/county highways.

W/r/t police, it depends upon what you mean. Some funds expenses for federal law enforcement is legitimate, other expenditures I do not believe are.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier� Needs Enforcement

Or the military ?

Or schools ?

There are 21 government departments - each spending billions of tax dollars per year:

Cabinet of the United States - Wikipedia

Who isd going to pay for the reconstruction of IS infrastructure following Dorian ?

Art. 1, s. 8 explicitly allows congress to “raise and support armies.”

I do not think the feds have any business in education.
 
Re: A “Parchment Barrier” Needs Enforcement

Well, interstate highways are likely allowable under the interstate commerce clause. I do not believe, however, federal funds ought to be spent to maintain state/county highways.

W/r/t police, it depends upon what you mean. Some funds expenses for federal law enforcement is legitimate, other expenditures I do not believe are.

But you agree the police should be funded with your tax dollars, and not for-profit, right?
 
Back
Top Bottom