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 To temper the calls for rebellion, Parliament repealed the act.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.
- John Stossel: Who has true grit anymore? - 0
- Another View: New Hampshire would take a risky bet on casinos - 6
- Ramesh Ponnuru: In flextime fight, liberals play to their stereotype - 0
- Jonah Goldberg: Benghazi's smoking guns - 1
- Another View: Nashua does need to conduct its own review of commuter rail - 1
- George Will: Forgetting the lessons of Watergate - 0
- Charles Arlinghaus: Screeching lies does not count as debate - 2
- Another View: Sen. Ayotte is doing the right thing on gun violence - 22
- Pat Buchanan: Requiem for the Grand Old Party - 6
Another View -- Ryan Gallagher: The U.S. government spies on reporters all too frequently
READER COMMENTS: 4- John Habib's City Sports: Tourney time nears for JVs, too - 0
- NHIAA Scoreboard, May 17, 2013 - 0
- NHIAA Roundup: Hanover's Cravero hurls another no-hitter - 0
- Lawyer says Northern Pass in 'a corner' - 0
- Fisher Cats score in 9th to win - 0
- Sox edge Twins in 10, 3-2 - 0
- Nashua man arrested on charges of sexually assaulting underage girl - 0
- Mass. men arrested on drugs, weapons charges - 0
- Memorial boys take city track meet for 10th straight year - 0
NHIAA Tennis: Bedford is championship-focused
READER COMMENTS: 0
Sorry, no question available



