Holding the President Accountable to the Constitution

Holding the President Accountable to the Constitution

Poliquin challenges President’s executive overreach on amnesty

 

WASHINGTON – Today, Maine’s Second District Congressman, Bruce Poliquin, voted for a measure to, for the first time in our Nation’s history, file an amicus brief in the Supreme Court case the United States v. Texas, on behalf of the entire House of Representatives, that will challenge the legitimacy of President Obama’s executive order to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.  Congressman Poliquin released the following statement:

 

“The President is not permitted to write law—only Congress is,” said Congressman Poliquin. “Last year, the President defied the democratic process and violated our Nation’s Constitution by unilaterally granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. Today, the House is protecting its Article I authority, defending our Nation’s democratic principles and challenging the President on his illegal overreach.

 

“We must have thoughtful reform of our broken immigration system—not unilateral and unconstitutional action by any Administration without the consent of the American People. As a Nation of immigrants, we should welcome legal immigration and should strive to fix our broken immigration system, but that must be done through the democratic process.”

 

Items to Note:

 

The Battle for Expression: Faith versus Sex

“Give me your huddled masses”   This famous quote from the Statue of Liberty was intended to be a description of the very heart and core of the American belief. The “huddled masses” came to this Nation for the freedom to express their beliefs without fear of reprisal from their government.

For hundreds of years this was the standard by which the United States stood, but things have changed. Political leaders of today are now advising religious leaders that they are free to hold their views but not free to publicly express them. This is not the freedom that drew the masses across the ocean to the fertile shores of the New World.

If the measure of religious freedom were simply to hold a personal belief with no allowance for outward expression, there would have been no need for the many peoples of faith to flee their lands and come to the New World. These people were not persecuted for their quiet inner beliefs, but for the way they publicly expressed their faith: The way they dressed, the tenets of their faith, their style of worship, and their defiance or non-adherence to government sanctioned churches.

These persecutions drove them to a new world where they could worship with a freedom to express their faith. Later, our Founding Fathers constructed our Constitution with the intent to preserve that freedom. Much of the freedoms we once enjoyed stemmed from this desire to protect Religious Freedom.

Yet now, as our society is increasingly permeated with the influence of hedonism, a new freedom has emerged that cannot function in an amicable relationship to all other freedoms. The emergence of sexual freedom has signaled a death knell to the Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion, and Assembly if those freedoms do not comply with the edicts and whims of the Freedom to Sex. While the American people are struggling to find the Freedom to Sex in the Constitution, our government has fully complied with its demands.

With the rise of sexual expression, the marriage tradition, specifically in its Christian form, is viewed as a hindrance to its free expression. For now, Christianity has been the target of choice for persecutions because of its “archaic” moral codes and perceived intolerance to the “new freedom”. Once government has sufficiently squelched the voice of Christians, drunk with its new power, be assured it will search for other voices of dissidents to squash.

We have become a nation defined by our sexual acts. Heterosexual, homosexual, gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, transsexual are all terms referring to a sexual act defined by the individuals or victims engaged in the act, but now, we have become individuals defined by the sexual act. The balance has shifted.

History is again repeating itself as the self-indulgent rail against the impervious nature of religion. The relativists cannot comprehend why faith, for the most part, remains unflinching in its morality, even in the face of a populace disdain. The moralist’s stance in an immoral culture is viewed as an obstruction to the “new freedom”.

For people of faith, sex is one facet in a happy life. For the hedonist, sex is way of life. The God-fearing view sex as a private and sacred relation within their marriage and have no need or desire for public affirmation. This infuriates the hedonist who finds his value and satisfaction in fleeting moments of pleasure and must constantly seek popular affirmation to find his worth.

The recent events surrounding the defense of religious expression in Indiana, and now Arkansas, bring into sharp contrast the competing freedoms in our Country. People of faith want to continue to express their faith as they have done for centuries in the United States. Those defined by their sexuality crave affirmation for the public expression of their sex acts. Any criticism, rebuke, belief, or disparagement that challenges their sexuality is viewed as a threat to their freedom to sex, the “new freedom”, and must be silenced. Sadly, it seems we have made a choice in our Nation that free expression of sex is more valuable than all other expression of freedoms especially faith.

Bill to Repeal IPAB to be Announced

Sources in Washington D.C. have informed TMCV that Congressman Bruce Poliquin intends to announce the end of this week, possibly Thursday morning, that he is an original co-sponsor of a bill HR 1190 which repeals the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) established by the Affordable Care Act.  IPAB has been labeled by the Cato Institute as perhaps the most unconstitutional part of the ACA, and may be the most unconstitutional creation in the history of the United States.  It has also been denounced by the AAMC, the Association of American Medical Colleges.

IPAB is a regulatory board created through the Affordable Care Act, at the behest of President OBama and his Chief architect at the time Peter Orszag to bypass the checks and balances our government.  The board is composed of 15 healthcare professionals appointed by the President.  The regulatory “proposals” that are issued from IPAB are to be implemented immediately by the Secretary of Health and Human Services without approval from Congress.  If all three branches of government cannot come up with a bill that matches the precise intent of the IPAB “proposal” it becomes law, with no vote from Congress and the President  has no power of veto.

But the appalling autonomy of IPAB does not stop there!  If Congress fails to repeal IPAB before 2017, language in ACA prevents all three branches from repealing this board and/or altering any of its proposals at any time.  This gives IPAB the power to alter the Constitution through statute, or its “proposals”.  Not only does IPAB hold regulatory control over ObamaCare but it also has been granted oversight in the private healthcare market.

This is a brief overview of the egregious attack on the Constitution this facet of the ACA represents. TMCV intends to post several articles on IPAB in anticipation of the announcement of Poliquin that he has joined forces with Rep. David Roe (R-TN) to repeal IPAB.  Diane Cohen, lead counsel challenging the constitutionality of IPAB, and Michael F. Cannon, director of health policies for the Cato Institute, aptly describe IPAB as not just unconstitutional, but “anti-constitutional”.

IPAB must be repealed and abolished.  We applaud Rep. Poliquin (R-ME) and Rep. David Roe (R-TN) for their leadership on this.