President Biden’s Shifting Constitutional Interpretation Has No Foundation

 President Joe Biden apparently believes the U.S. Constitution that he swore to uphold and defend is different today than when he was sworn into office. In his mind, the Constitution isn’t the foundational bedrock upon which our rights are guaranteed and our laws are rooted.

The president’s uninformed remarks came during a press availability when he met with the Chair and Ranking Member of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) to discuss his pending nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court.

“You know, there’s always a renewed national debate, every time we nominate, any president, nominates a justice, because the Constitution is always evolving slightly in terms of additional rights, or curtailing rights,” President Biden said, according news reports. “And it’s always an issue.”

President Biden revealed the diverging schools of thought when it comes to Constitutional jurisprudence, or judicial philosophy. Does the Constitution mean what is written in the context of what the words meant at the time it was written or do definitions and interpretation shift over time to meet whims of society? Think of it this way.  Is the Constitution the solid foundation upon which we build the house we live in, or is it just the tent stakes that can be uprooted and moved from time-to-time as the sands shift? The genius of the Constitution is it provides a means for amending it in a democratic fashion, which has been used 27 times since it was ratified in 1788. A “living constitution” revised by unelected judges is undemocratic.  

There are those, like President Biden, who believe the courts are a way to pursue a revisionist agenda, or an attempt to rewrite the nation’s founding principles. Here’s why that’s a dangerous idea.

Words Have Meaning

The U.S. Supreme Court is predominantly filled with justices that describe themselves as “originalists.” That is, they ascribe to the legal theory that the words of the Constitution mean what they say in the understanding of what those words meant at the time the text was written. Simply put, the words in the Constitution mean what they say, not what would be reinterpreted 10 years or 100 years from now. Those remain constant.

The late Justice Antonin Scalia was a fierce defender of originalism. He joked once that, “My burden is not to show that originalism is perfect, but that it beats the other alternatives, and that, believe me, is not difficult.”

That was apparent when Justice Scalia authored the 2008 landmark Heller decision that upheld the Second Amendment as an individual right. Justice Scalia pored over the 27 words comprising the amendment and examined the definitions of those words at the time they were written. That’s where he determined that the words “bear arms” meant that included bearing arms for individual defense, as it was defined in English law that provided the historic context for the drafting of the Second Amendment.

“All these questions pose enormous difficulty for non-originalists, who must agonize over what the modern Constitution ought to mean with regard to each of these subjects, and then agonize over the very same questions five or 10 years later, because times change,” Justice Scalia explained in a University of Virginia lecture.

Today’s Supreme Court has six justices who describe themselves as originalists or textualists, including Chief Justice John Roberts, Justices Clarence Thomas, Thomas Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. That’s the balance of the court. The three remaining seats are filled by retiring Justice Stephen Breyer, and Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. They ascribe to a judicial philosophy of a “living Constitution,” or the text is applied as the meaning is understood in modern society. Even if President Biden nominates another with a similar legal theory, the Court’s balance will remain unchanged.

Definitions Drift… One Way

The problem of ripping the words of the Constitution from their anchors is that these definitions will drift. When it comes to the Second Amendment, that drift always seems to be in one direction. Gun control advocates never cede that the tide changes on their pet issue and that one year the public may favor tighter restrictions, but those attitudes ebb as we’ve seen lately with support for gun control at historic lows

A favorite talking point among gun control advocates is that the Founding Fathers could never have imagined Modern Sporting Rifles, or AR-15-style rifles, in existence today. That’s bunk. David Kopel, a gun rights advocate and Cato Institute scholar wrote in The Washington Post that repeating arms were in existence before the founding of the American colonies. Multi-shot firearms and repeating firearms were not just invented, but used. The Puckle gun, a repeater, was patented in 1718.

Still, the tidal patterns never shift back in their “living Constitution.” That’s despite evidence that the Founding Fathers could never have imagined such levels of gun control, especially since they held an aversion to an overzealous centralized government that wielded too much authority.

Federalist No. 51, which provided context for the Founding Fathers’ notions on government, proved that. “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary,” credited to James Madison under the pseudonym Publius.

That underscores the danger in presidents reinterpreting the Constitution to fit their beliefs instead of respecting that the Constitution is a social contract with “We the People.” That doesn’t change, shift or evolve.

The Right to Life Movement Needs to Fight As Hard as the Left

 

The pro-life movement is at a crossroads and making great progress towards the goal of eliminating abortion. Texas is leading the nation with a law called the Heartbeat Bill that has made its way to the United States Supreme Court. Pro-lifers need to take this moment to fight has hard as the left in supporting state laws that don’t allow abortions when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. This issue is too important to wait.

When Texas passed the new law, the Courts did not comply with the left’s push to block the law. This law that has saved Texas lives and Texas Right to Life fully supported the law. Also, the Texas Catholic Conference fully supported this law. Any pro-lifer with a strategy to save lives would want that law in their state: Texas or any other.

And other states followed Texas’ lead. According to ABC News late last year leaders in the states of Arkansas, Florida, South Dakota, Idaho, Indiana, and Oklahoma have all drafted up and pushed their own heartbeat legislation. There is a strategy in place nationally to get these laws passed in multiple states to forward the pro-life goal of limiting abortion. One state has become a case study in cronyism and personalities getting in the way of good policy.

There has been resistance from Republicans in South Dakota to the pro-life effort that has many national leaders scratching their heads. These pro-life members have blocked legislation that will mimic the Texas law and ban abortions when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. This is a good law for states with pro-life leaders bold enough to take the pro-life fight right to the pro-abortion left.

Sadly, some Republicans in South Dakota are intent on preventing Governor Kristi Noem from attaining a legislative win in an election year, because they want a fellow legislator to replace her in the governor’s office. Cronyism has motivated a handful of the South Dakota legislators to do the bidding of former state House Speaker Rep. Steven Haugaard who is running against Noem for governor. It is shocking that pro-lifers in South Dakota would put personalities before saving the lives of babies.  

When you study the arguments of these opponents of the pro-life bill, they don’t hold water. South Dakota Right to Life has joined the Planned Parenthood South Dakota Action Fund to oppose the South Dakota heartbeat bill. You read that correctly – both the South Dakota division of the National Right to Life Committee and Planned Parenthood oppose a pro-life governor’s bill to ban abortions when a fetal heartbeat can be detected. If that sounds ridiculous to you – join the club.

Look no further a Fox News report on February 2, 2022, for the evidence. Fox reported that SD Right to Life Director, Dale Bartscher made the argument that “we were not in support of the governor’s original draft language” while SD Planned Parenthood argued that the governor was “decimating reproductive rights in our state” with this same bill. Adding to the ridiculous way in which some South Dakota conservatives are contorting themselves into opposing a Texas-style fetal heartbeat are the completely different grounds that some South Dakota pro-life legislators are using. 

South Dakota Republican legislators are claiming this pro-life bill will slow down the goals of pro-lifers in the state. Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and board member of SD Right to Life, Rep. Jon Hansen, argued according to The Argus Leader, “adopting a fetal heartbeat bill now would be premature given pending litigation between the state of South Dakota and Planned Parenthood in the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court as well as other abortion-related cases expected to impact the standing of Roe v. Wade.” Rep. Hansen and a handful of others actually make the case that somehow this pro-life bill needs to be opposed because it will slow the effort in South Dakota to ban all South Dakota abortions.

Saving America From Its Looming Decline

 

When the history of this American era is written, the top headline will not be about election controversies or critical race theory or even COVID-19. This will be known most of all as the era when America sold out its future generations. This week, America’s national debt surpassed $30 trillion for the first time, a full $7 trillion increase from just two years ago.

How did this happen, and who’s to blame? President Bill Clinton was no deficit hawk, but with a Republican Congress keeping him largely in line and with the dot-com boom providing record government revenues, Clinton gets a pass. His eight years added to the deficit, but not by much by today’s standards. As measured against the size of the U.S. economy, the debt ratio actually went down under Clinton.

The real debt explosion happened on the watch of the four presidents in the 22 years since Clinton, two Republicans and two Democrats. There were plenty of emergencies during these 22 years to justify huge and often wasteful spending binges (the war in the Middle East, Hurricane Katrina, the financial crisis, COVID-19). Regardless, the result of this 22-year period was an increase in the national debt from just under $6 trillion (55% the size of the U.S. economy at the time) at the start of the Bush years to $30 trillion (130% the size of the U.S. economy) today. And this deficit spending binge shows no signs of receding. In 2021 alone, the US added nearly $3 trillion to its national debt — about 12.5% of the entire American economy.

Dwarfing the role of the often-wasteful spending programs of the last four presidents, the bulk of America’s debt problem is driven by Social Security and Medicare. These programs, offering retirement and health care entitlements for all Americans, accounted for a full 25% of all federal spending in 2021. As more baby boomers hit retirement and less Americans work, without reforms, the debt impact of these programs is set to explode.

Why does all this matter? In 2021, the federal government spent $300 billion on debt interest alone. That is $2,400 for every household in America. With the inflation America is seeing under President Joe Biden’s watch, interest rates are going up. For every 1% increase in interest rates, at today’s debt levels, the federal government will pay another $225 billion in annual interest. With just a 2% rise in interest rates, the federal government will pay more each year on debt interest that it does on national defense.

It’s easy to blame politicians for America’s debt-ridden predicament. They deserve a lot of blame — maybe none more than Republicans who campaigned as the party of limited government and spending restraint while governing as just the opposite.

The deeper truth is that we are all to blame. The facts are clear. The facts have been clear for decades now, but there has been no national will to take on the debt problem. Politicians who tried to broach the topic were punished, George W. Bush’s attempt at Social Security reform being the most obvious example.

Americans have enjoyed the benefits of relatively low taxes along with lavish government spending. Rather than sound the alarm, America’s elites on Wall Street and in big business, those who claim to know better, have led the pack for increased government spending. It has helped their short-term bottom lines. The media is also to blame. When Biden uses budget gimmicks to pretend his so-called Build Back Better program won’t add to the debt, the media largely lets it go.

America’s looming fiscal catastrophe used to be decades away. The boom in spending in recent years has accelerated the timeline. The net effect will be a decline in American national power. The beneficiaries will be America’s adversaries, particularly China. How can America effectively check increased Chinese aggression in their region and beyond if the debt starts limiting spending on national defense? This is the world we are leaving for our kids.

Is there any solution today? The first step is to stop the bleeding. Biden’s new debt-financed entitlement spending proposals are not responsible at today’s debt levels. Luckily, it seems Sen. Joe Manchin understands this.

The next step, which we are nowhere close to, is to acknowledge the problem and begin discussing solutions. America needs a national leader strong enough to step forward and say enough is enough. It is flat-out immoral to burden future generations of Americans the way we are doing.

Will anyone listen to real talk like this? There’s some evidence there’s a chance. Huge numbers of Americans feel like we are a country in decline. They are longing for change. There’s a chance that they could reward someone strong enough to park all the phony political speak and tell the truth.

There is also a real-world example. Back in 1992, when the national debt was only $4 trillion (60% the size of the U.S. economy then), billionaire Ross Perot mounted the most successful third-party Presidential candidacy in modern history, largely on a platform of American renewal and real talk about the debt problems. Perot got nearly 20% of the popular vote even after pausing his campaign until only a month before Election Day. Perot was ahead of his time. He had identified the problems, but back then, America had decades to fix them. Today, a strong case can be made that unless reforms are put in place soon, the results could be catastrophic. Is this likely to work? Probably not, but given the national mood and the near breakdown in American politics, maybe. More importantly, there is no better option on the table. Given the repercussions of just staying on the course to disaster, it seems worth a shot.

February 2022 update

 

Now a days, I like writing on Internet Movie Database and creating lists. I am playing Diablo 2 Resurrected and accomplished Act 4 (out of 5) with my amazon. I like looking on Indeed and looking at company reviews. I like watching Epic Economist, Jeremiah Babe, I allegedly, and some antiques shows like Real Nifty Vintage and Thrifter, Junker Vintage Hunter on old 20^th century items, because the items were so pretty and well made. I had a great safe childhood so it reminds of stuff from grandparents (silent generation) and baby boomers (parents).

I am 38 so the parties ended in the early 2010s. I was going to bars in my 20s to see if anyone was dancing or get relationships in River Falls. River Falls bars were safe at the time, and I have some pictures of 2000s and 2010s. I was in Emmas bar, Bos and Mine, Juniors. I liked connecting with bar crawling groups. River Falls had the St. Patrick’s Day bar brawling event where the streets were closed and 100 people were bar crawling.

I like posting on Instagram, Flickr. This is when my jobs lasted 5 days to 17 months in my life. I liked working, but they cut my hours on the 8th month, which was okay,. Then the military employees requested my job and laid me off when it moved to Baldwin. My last job only lasted 4 days. The manager lied about hard drugs, and the Human Resources department backed up the manager. I tried training in returns but he didn’t want me working there on the 4^th hour. The job market was tight so I moved Minnesota eventually after my 35^th birthday.

Biden Is Subsidizing High Energy Bills He Helped Create. Here’s How.

 

After significantly reducing U.S. energy supply by limiting natural gas leasing and cutting off the Keystone XL pipeline, President Joe Biden is using the most recent Wuhan coronavirus relief package and $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill to subsidize an exponential increase in energy prices. 

“The White House is joining states, localities, advocacy groups, and utilities in encouraging American families to apply for programs that can help hard-pressed families address home energy costs. These resources include the record funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) provided by the Biden-Harris Administration this year and funds to reduce home energy costs in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” the White House released in a statement Tuesday touting National Energy Assistance Day. “In addition to outreach efforts across the Administration, the White House also announced information encouraging states to use all available American Rescue Plan resources for energy assistance and funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to reduce home energy costs.”

According to Biden’s Energy Information Administration energy prices increased in 2021 more than any other commodity. 

“Energy prices used in the S&P Goldman Sachs Commodity Index (GSCI) ended 2021 59% higher than the first trading day of the year,” EIA reports. “Prices in energy commodity futures markets greatly increased throughout 2021. For example, the futures price of RBOB (a reformulated grade of gasoline used as the benchmark for gasoline trading) increased by 67% during 2021.”