What the decision means: producers are the slaves of non-producers
To me, the key to Roberts’s opinion is the expansion of the alleged Congressional taxing power, and the commands pursuant to this alleged power over the right of the People, acting through their State legislatures, to govern themselves.
- end of initial entry -
The more I think about this decision, the greater the similarities to Chief Justice Roger Taney’s majority opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857).
What underlies the welfare state is the principle (found nowhere in the Federal constitution) that the recipient class has a “right” to the exertions of the productive class.
This “right” has started to generate social conflict, because the demands of the recipient class have grown beyond the means of the productive class—at least those means that the productive class, acting through elections, are willing to part with.
Roberts’s decision is that a producer has NO RIGHTS that a recipient, or his agent, are bound to respect. If the recipients take through constitutional legislation, that’s fine. But if meeting their demands requires unconstitutional legislation, or requires calling a tail a leg (or a fine a tax), that’s also fine.
Like Dred Scott v. Sandford, and unlike Roe v. Wade, this decision to vitiate the rights of the producers has a strong geographic/sectional component. The recipient class is highly localized. Twenty-six states are on record as opposing the requirements of Obamacare, and more than 26 will be wrecked by its exactions, if they ever come to pass.
Roger Taney thought his decision would ensure peace—instead, it precipitated war.
John Roberts has done a foolish, reckless thing and the road ahead is rocky indeed.
Bill A. writes:
The transformation of the class of uninsured victims into a class of predatory free-riders will end with the condemnation of the unemployed as parasites, and their trans-shipment to forced labor camps. This is a classic Communist pattern.
JC in Houston writes:
With the 4th of July coming up there will be several readings of the Declaration here around town. I’ve always found this particular grievance against King George in the declaration ironic in view of the federal leviathan that presses down on us today:
Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 02, 2012 11:04 AM | Send
“He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.”
The founders didn’t know how good they had it under George III !