Congress, Wisconsin, Washington discussed on The Mentors Show


To serve as precedent for the next on nonsensical decision down the road and, that's what we have back in the nineteen forties congress passed the law to regulate the growing, of wheat on your own farm even if it wasn't for trade or for commerce and and and farmer Filbert up in Wisconsin. Grew more wheat on his own farm for his. Own purposes for, making bread for his own family for feeding his own cattle he grew more wheat than the. Regulators in Washington DC, has said we're allowed to him and he was prosecuted for exceeding the week quotas on his own farm even though everybody admitted none of his week was going to enter the market because it was all being used on his own farm. And and he was prosecuted and went all the way at the, supreme court and the supreme court upheld the act of congress because if, he had all sorts of farmers growing their own week then they, wouldn't need to buy weed on the Interstate market and that would have. An effect on the economy and therefore undermine congress policy of of, limiting the amount of week that could be grown So Stay upheld this. Thing you know your your audience might, make you know they. Could they could do a web search and find a a TV video clip that reason TV did some years ago called wheat weed and, ObamaCare which I interviewed and go through the whole transformation of the. Commerce power is fairly limited power to the to the. Power we now know it to be. Over the court tells us it is, today which is the power of congress and. Worse unelected bureaucrats and administrative agencies to regulate every aspect of the, economy enhance every aspect of our lives if they want. To, well you, know that's that's how I feel about it. Too I look at this and it's very discouraging to. Me I, mean one, thing one thing that has. Survived this change in the ObamaCare issue is all of the regulations that are put upon the medical. Organization so most people the spending time filling out forms as opposed to seeing patients. In that leads me to. Question I know we haven't got much Time to cover, this subject isn't, part of the problem, that law has moved off the standard, it seemed to me. When I was younger studying in school we always went back to the natural law we went back to some God given rights unalienable illegal, rights in seems now there's no reference to a standard so obviously. If there's no standard everything can run all over the. Place can you come in on that. That's right I mean and this is, this is part of the mission of the. Claremont institute having to recover the principles so the American founding and, where do we find those principles we not most in. The, constitution but, in the prior document the declaration of independence. And so there are a couple of very important principles. They're what, Thomas Jefferson, said wrote as self evident. Truth that all men all human beings are created equal and and a consequence of that self evident. Truth is that none of us have the authority to rule in other without that. Other person's consent so government. Based on consent which means election Is necessary and then the representatives are only allowed to exercise, the powers that are given to, them by the consent of the people this is the entire infrastructure of our constitutional system of government and then the second piece of that is. The reason we have those, governments by consent Not to do whatever they. Want but to secure the unalienable rights that every citizen has. Directly from their creator those rights we have come prior to government from. A higher power they're not, gifts to up? To us from government and folk securing those individual rights puts natural constraints on the. Exercise of governmental power we no longer as a society except those two basic propositions it's now become the majority view that. Government can do whatever it wants if it further some agenda. What have you and that's not what the foundation cornerstones of our system of government are Failed to look at the very word that you use consent. You know it, means an election yes but it means an election that agrees with what it is they're doing you can't just get consent because you voted. For me now I, can do anything I wanna to do I find this so so troubling and I really don't know where we're going to go with this except that, we have to do something so again we're coming up to a break and, I'd like, to we only got a few minutes left in the. Last segment of the show but it'd like you to tell us what we can do how do you what do you suggest that. We do to help or two more informed or somehow get. Us back to both the constitution in its predecessor so thanks for listening. Everybody in stick with us, because I think? We're going to hear.

Coming up next