Below is “part one” of what amounts to a trilogy blogged over a few months that I will be be reblogging.
Posted by rezinate on February 11, 2014
The Commerce Clause is an interesting power the Constitution has invested Congress with – a power divided into three different approaches -namely one dealing with foreign commerce, another with interstate commerce, and a third with “Indian” commerce.
Various SC rulings have been said to restrict these powers, but I’m doubting that as legislative manuvers and additional “regulations” always find a way to maintain existing authority to expand it.
The Commerce Clause can rightfully be said to have advanced the civil rights movement in preventing businesses from discriminating against Afro Americans in the SC ruling:
Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States, 379 U.S. 241 (1964)
But nowhere has the abuse of this power been more evident than when applied to the nations, it has in fact been a furtherance of an attempt to oppress, coerce, and assimilate ranging from the most mundane of things even to the adoption/removal of our children through the most convoluted of “interpretations”.
The CC has been for the most part about regulations, something that has become a hot button topic, but regulations within the realm of reason that actually serve a beneficial purpose are a good thing.
Regulations governing the processing and related conditions of food for example would be one of those, with almost constant reports of tainted products reaching the market place imagine the scenario if there were none. Imagine industry it there were no safety regulations, children would be still be working in underground mines and the work force seen as little more than drones with no rights.
Greed is what often drives production, and when that is the case quality will suffer – examples would be tainted infant formula from China, or their now infamous drywall, but a host of examples can be found in this country from peanuts to mining run off.
Since the huge percentage of the population are dependent on the grocery store the necessity of oversight and regulations is obvious. As they are also held hostage by utilities companies regulations that are consumer friendly would be an obvious benefit also.
What exists between the nations and the government under the CC are not trade agreements entered into by sovereign nations despite SC rulings by justice John Marshall in the earlier part of the nineteenth century.
They are in fact part of an overall control mechanism that intrudes upon the concept of tribal sovereignty and ignore what are known as “reserved rights” latent within the six hundred plus treaties the government has entered into with the nations
“Reserved Rights” – if that sounds familiar to the reader it should, as it echoes the 9th Amendment related to inherent rights not enumerated within the body of the Constitution.
An issue I have with Marshall’s tenure is his characterization of our people as “domestic dependent nations” and the role of the government as an overseer of “wards” – though I believe Marshall felt such an interpretation served our best legal interests.
Extrapolate this concept and it defines the governments position related to anyone receiving any form of public assistance-they are “dependent” and “wards” – which completely changes the dynamic further empowering the role of the one who assists.
Those words alone helped to set the stage for a generational perpetuity of dependency among the nations that continues to this day.
This very dependency has stifled any form of economic growth, job creation, infrastructure, and self reliance. We find ourselves in a such a position that if this dependency were to suddenly end it would be catastrophic.
A sobering thought that should be an impetus to an all out effort to create those things essential to the ability to wean ourselves.
Following WW2 the Marshall Plan was enacted in 1947, it’s intent was the reconstruction of Europe. A part of the effort was to remove trade barriers and modernize production ability.
Europe was devastated by the war and the Marshall Plan in my opinion was a shining moment for this country. Our nations have been no less devastated by the wars waged against us and the subsequent state of “guardianship” that has resulted, a similar effort should be made to assist us in reconstruction, an effort matching the focus and dedication of the Marshall Plan.
In 1941 what was known as the Lend – Lease act was passed, it’s purpose was to allow a then neutral U.S. to provision our allies with direct military aid, something comparable to that exclusive of military aid involving other countries with no vested interest in subjugating or fomenting unrest in the nations could also be valuable.
Don’t give us a damn thing, too many strings attached and the associated cost too high, considered it a loan we can and will repay as we grow, consider us a potential trade partner and jobs creator.
Consider us human beings with “reserved rights” ravaged by war and genocidal policies.