Texans take their rights seriously.
A bill that has been prefiled for the 2011 state legislative session
creates penalties of up to $5,000 in fines and up to five years in jail
for anyone guilty of the "felony" of attempting "to enforce an act,
order, law, statute, rule or regulation" of Obamacare, the president's
plan that effectively nationalizes the health-care decision making
process.
The plan by Texas Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, effectively would nullify
the federal health care legislation in his state.
At least, that is what the bill that "relates to federal health care
legislation" says:
The federal Act:
(1) is invalid in this state;
(2) is not recognized by this state;
(3) is specifically rejected by this state; and
(4) is null and void and of no effect in this state.
It provides that "a person who is an official, agent, or employee of
the United States or an employee of a corporation providing services to
the United States commits an offense if the person enforces or attempts
to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule, or regulation of the
United States in violation of this chapter."
It explains that the "assumption of power by the federal government
in enacting the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590;
Pub. L. No. 111-148) as amended by the Health Care and Education
Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872; Pub. L. No. 111-152) interferes
with the right of the people of this state to regulate health care as
they determine is appropriate, and makes a mockery of James Madison's
assurance in Federalist Paper Number 45 that the powers delegated to the
federal government are 'few and defined' while those that remain in the
state governments are 'numerous and indefinite.'"
An analysis of the issue by Michael Maharrey of the Tenth Amendment
Center explains that there already is a widespread dissatisfaction
across the United States from the mandates of Obamacare.
"The passage of the health care act opened the eyes of many
previously apathetic citizens, making them aware of the rapidly
expanding scope and influence of the federal government and its
intrusiveness into their everyday lives," he explained.
"They intuitively understand that requiring them to purchase health
insurance falls far beyond the powers granted to Congress by the
Constitution. Suddenly awake and alarmed by the fact that the federal
government has grown so far out of control, and frustrated by what they
see as the lack of responsiveness by politicians in D.C., many Americans
find themselves looking for answers," he said.
He noted that 14 states already have sued to block implementation of
Obamacare, and there probably are more than a dozen lawsuits brought by
other plaintiffs already, too.
The states' claim states, "The Constitution nowhere authorizes the
United States to mandate, either directly or under threat of penalty,
that all citizens and legal residents have qualifying health care
coverage."
But he explained that the Texas plan takes the issue "a step
further."
"While some might call this legislation radical, it rests squarely
within the scope of state power as understood by the framers of the
Constitution. James Madison wrote in the Virginia Resolution of 1798
that states not only have a right, but a duty to step in when the
federal government oversteps its authority," Maharrey wrote.
He quoted Madison's work:
That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that
it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the
compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain
sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no
further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in
that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and
dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact,
the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty
bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for
maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights
and liberties appertaining to them.
Michael Boldin, founder of the
Tenth Amendment Center,
said under the Constitution and a historic understanding of the rights
and responsibilities of states, Berman's plan is reasonable.