Home » Opinion » Editorials
July 02. 2012 8:19PM
An American mandate: The Founders would be appalled
On the eve of Independence Day, many Americans are still digesting last Thursday’s ruling in which the U.S. Supreme Court declared that Congress has the authority to tax the free and independent people of the United States for the offense of not following orders Congress has given. Moreover, the content of those orders is limited only by the imaginations of the 535 members of Congress.
What might the Founders of this nation, the men who risked death to secure for posterity the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, think of such a turn of events?
As Chief Justice John Roberts noted in his ruling, “the Government’s logic would justify a mandatory purchase to solve almost any problem.” However, he wrote, although Congress may not impose such mandates under the Commerce Clause, it may pass them and then tax anyone who disobeys. That calls to memory the colonial reaction to the little-remembered Declaratory Act of 1766.
Parliament’s attempt to tax Americans without representation via the Stamp Act of 1765 was a dismal failure. To temper the calls for rebellion, Parliament repealed the act. But in its place it passed the Declaratory Act, which asserted “the king’s Majesty... had, hath, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever.”
The phrase “to bind the colonies and people of America... in all cases whatsoever” became a sort of patriot rallying cry in the 1770s. It is inconceivable that the men who rebelled against that would approve of ceding to Congress the power to order them to behave as Congress wishes.
When Samuel Adams and other Sons of Liberty threw tea chests into Boston Harbor, they were not protesting the tax, which had been passed six years before. They were protesting the Tea Act, which compelled them to buy East India Company tea and forbade them from buying or selling any other. It was a mandate to buy a specific product. It helped spark a revolution.
Now, 236 years after that revolution began, we are told that our own government can compel us to buy whatever product it wishes, to behave in virtually any way it wants, as long as it does so through its power to tax. When the Founders fought to secure the blessings of liberty for their descendants, seeing those descendants submit to the orders of a distant government was not what they had in mind.
What might the Founders of this nation, the men who risked death to secure for posterity the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, think of such a turn of events?
As Chief Justice John Roberts noted in his ruling, “the Government’s logic would justify a mandatory purchase to solve almost any problem.” However, he wrote, although Congress may not impose such mandates under the Commerce Clause, it may pass them and then tax anyone who disobeys. That calls to memory the colonial reaction to the little-remembered Declaratory Act of 1766.
Parliament’s attempt to tax Americans without representation via the Stamp Act of 1765 was a dismal failure. To temper the calls for rebellion, Parliament repealed the act. But in its place it passed the Declaratory Act, which asserted “the king’s Majesty... had, hath, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases whatsoever.”
The phrase “to bind the colonies and people of America... in all cases whatsoever” became a sort of patriot rallying cry in the 1770s. It is inconceivable that the men who rebelled against that would approve of ceding to Congress the power to order them to behave as Congress wishes.
When Samuel Adams and other Sons of Liberty threw tea chests into Boston Harbor, they were not protesting the tax, which had been passed six years before. They were protesting the Tea Act, which compelled them to buy East India Company tea and forbade them from buying or selling any other. It was a mandate to buy a specific product. It helped spark a revolution.
Now, 236 years after that revolution began, we are told that our own government can compel us to buy whatever product it wishes, to behave in virtually any way it wants, as long as it does so through its power to tax. When the Founders fought to secure the blessings of liberty for their descendants, seeing those descendants submit to the orders of a distant government was not what they had in mind.
- Roaming jihadis: A terrorist visits Manchester - 3
- Athletes and PE: Give them credit for sports - 7
- The EPA's friend: It has a loyal ally in Shea-Porter - 16
- Leading vs. following: Ayotte, Shaheen and the polls - 23
- The cupcake police: Stop! In the name of lard! - 15
- Page One Editorial: Obama is right - 27
- Taxed tips: Another NH revenue grab - 9
- Gosnell and NH: The horror of late-term abortion - 8
- Bridging the night: Bright ideas in Portsmouth - 0
Underestimating NH: Gun control picks two wrong targets
READER COMMENTS: 17- Man shot to death on Manchester street late Saturday - 2
- UNH hires firm to redesign one of its logos - 10
- Disengaged: Obama's lousy excuse - 11
- Ted Siefer's City Hall: School board on the defensive over Cupcake-gate - 1
- Garry Rayno's State House Dome: All eyes on House as casino vote nears - 2
- 43 killers on lifetime parole - but where? - 3
- Official says NH abortion sites need state scrutiny - 13
- Chechen decries Boston attack - 2
- Heroin use, deaths spike in New Hampshire - 1
NY man stable after destroying classic Porsche 911 in Route 16 wreck
READER COMMENTS: 1
Sorry, no question available



