Quantcast
Opinion

My view: Understanding the Constitution is different than knowing it

Comments

Return To Article
  • T. Party Pleasant Grove, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 2:03 a.m.

    Mr. Howell seems intent on packing as many falsehoods into one page as it will hold.

    Mike Lee supported full funding of the government (including debt payment), but withholding funding for one program, Obamacare. Barack Obama and Harry Reid chose to shut down the government rather than work out a compromise. The president's position was "I will not negotiate."

    Mike Lee proved remarkably prescient, in light of the website disaster, and the hundreds of thousands of insurance cancelations being received by people who had been told, "If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan." Obamacare is a slow-wrecking train, with millions more cancelations to come.

    Orrin Hatch had told everyone he would fight Obamacare, but did nothing except undermine those who tried. Mr. Howell now stands with the weasel caucus.

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 6:22 a.m.

    Here, here.

  • Mikhail ALPINE, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 7:05 a.m.

    Bad is good. Good is bad. Light is dark. Dark is light. This editorial is standing on its head and has the roles reversed.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 7:13 a.m.

    Agreed!

    What a well thought out, well explained and well articulated letter.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 7:26 a.m.

    Thank you, Mr. Howell, for saying what needs to be said about our state's disastrous junior senator.

    Mike Lee is the perfect example of how badly dysfunctional the Utah's GOP nominations process has become.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Nov. 5, 2013 7:39 a.m.

    Here's one of the prime problems with this and most constitutional debates. "The inspired Constitution". Once that phrase passes someone's lips you know a reasonable discussion is out the window. It doesn't matter whether you agree with the argument or not. With a document like the constitution and a changing world like ours there's always something new to consider.

    Bringing God into the discussion just calcifies opinions. You can argue about what a group of men, as brilliant as they were meant and how compromises they made look in the light of modern society but when you truly believe that God was whispering in their ears..after all how could a group of men in the 1780's know what 2013 would bring..but God? Hey God knows all, therefor I'm right.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 5, 2013 7:41 a.m.

    What a bunch of nonsense! The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. A Senator takes an oath to defend that Supreme Law. Hatch ran from the battle. He hid from anyone who demanded that he stand for something. Lee was at the head of that battle. He can read. He can count. There are seventeen duties that we have authorized Congress to tax us to provide. Health care is not on that list. It is not an authorized duty of Congress; therefore, it is to be left to the States or to the People. Mr. Howell should know that if he wants to run for office again.

    No one gave Congress the right to pick and choose which parts of the Constitution they are required to defend. Their job is to defend ALL of the Constitution ALL of the time. Over 90 Senators went AWOL in the heat of battle. Mr. Howell further misstated when he told us that Congress shut down the government. That shutdown was the fault of Obama and Reid and no one else. Obama and Reid drew the red line in the sand. In two months the battle recommences.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 8:22 a.m.

    Sen. Howell, Who said:

    “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

    March 2006 Then Sen and always the truthful one Brack Obama.

    Was he saying the U.S, should not pay its debt?

    "The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for Obamacare.
    The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for Obamacare. If Sen. Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run Obamacare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.
    You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want".(Thomas Sowell)

    Sen. Howell are you really saying we can keep our Doctor if we like him. Period

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 8:25 a.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah
    What a bunch of nonsense! The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.

    ============

    What a bunch of nonsense!

    The ACA passed the House
    The ACA passed the Senate
    The ACA was signed by the President
    The ACA was upheld by the Supreme Court

    It IS the Law.

    Mike Lee did not have the votes,
    so he threatened a "shutdown if need be", and got it.
    How is that "defending" the Constituion?

    He TRAMPLED it, plain and simple.

    Seriously,
    I wish you'd get as wound around the axle over real Constituional rights being trampled --
    such as;
    shutting down the Government when you don't have the votes,
    right to privacy,
    Bush's Patiort Act and NSA spying on Citizens,
    Bush's Offensive wars for oil based on lies,
    the Citizen's United ruling,
    right to assemble [Union busting],
    ect.

    Ironies of the day --
    1. I applaud Orrin Hatch, and I didn't even vote for him. But YOU did.
    2. When Mike Lee refuses to compromise, you call it standing on principle.
    When Pres. Obama refuses to compromise, you call it tyranny.

    Having a double standard like that is being a hypocrite.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 8:31 a.m.

    @Mike Ricahrds: Did Mr. Lee threaten to send the country into default to get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP too? If he had done so, you might have a valid point. But by only going after the one part of government provided healthcare that is directly tied to President Obama, he proved that he is only interested in being a partisan hack, not a defender of your version of the constitution..

  • Unreconstructed Reb Chantilly, VA
    Nov. 5, 2013 8:40 a.m.

    I'm really tired of Tea Party propagandists spouting off on what the Constitution does or doesn't mean, as though there's a single, objective, absolute way or interpreting and applying a document meant to outline broad principles of liberty and governance.

    If the Only True Patriots in this country are the ones who share your narrow interpretation of the Constitution, you're reading it wrong.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Nov. 5, 2013 8:57 a.m.

    “And, surely, the founders did not believe the budget-making power of Congress would ever be used to threaten the lawmaking power of that same Congress simply because Congress passed a law that a few lawmakers find disagreeable.”

    THE key sentence in this article and the one most of the Lee supporters in this forum fail to understand. The annual appropriations process has nothing to do with the law making process and the two have never been conflated in our entire history… until 2013.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    Who closed the parks and the monuments, Senator Lee or Obama? Who said that he would not sign any legislation, even when EVERYTHING was funded except the ACA that he refused to fully implement, Senator Lee or Obama? Who ignored the Constitution and decided that he would LEGISLATE by only implementing those parts of Obama that he wanted to implement, Senator Lee or Obama?

    If liberals would stop defending their "hero" long enough to realize what he is doing, would Obama still be their "hero"? What other President in history has lied to us as much as Obama? He knew full well that HE and Senator Reid shut down the government, but he lied to us about his involvement. He blamed the Republicans for something that he did. He lied to us about ObamaCare. No wonder he refuses to implement that "law".

    The Legislature has the authority to change the law. The President does not. His authority is to enforce the laws passed by Congress. Obama refused and still refuses to implement ObamaCare. That is both nonfeasance and malfeasance, both are misdemeanors under the Constitution. If he is so dead-set against implementing ObamaCare, why should Congress fund it?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:18 a.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    There are seventeen duties that we have authorized Congress to tax us to provide. Health care is not on that list.

    ==========

    Neither is the United States Air Force or Marine Corps Mike,
    Only the Army and Navy is "spelled out" verbatium in Article 8:11, 12 of the Constitution YOU read,
    therefore the USAF and USMC are not "Contitutional" per you.

    Why don't you get on your soap box and decry those as well?
    [hint: because you'd be wrong, that's why.]

  • Steve C. Warren WEST VALLEY CITY, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    Excellent article, Mr. Howell.

    I do, however, think the headline ("Understanding the Constitution is different than knowing it") is terrible. In the print edition, it's even worse: "Understanding different than knowing" Way too vague. How about: "Hatch displays statesmanship, Lee shows ignorance" Or: "Hatch acts like statesman, Lee doesn't"

    By the way, it's different "from" not different "than." Check the AP Stylebook.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:27 a.m.

    Some posters have forgotten what the Constitution contains. Congress is the only branch of government that is allowed to tax us. Only the House has the authority to initiate revenue bills. Congress is the only branch of government that is allowed to legislate. The Executive Branch is the only branch that is allowed to enforce the laws passed by Congress.

    The House initiated and passed a revenue bill, as required by law. The Senate tried to initiate a different bill by removing major provisions from the House passed bill. That is not allowed under the Constitution. The Senate can amend and can confer. Removing provisions is not amending and it is not conferring.

    The President cannot force Congress to raise taxes, no matter how much he is in love with his "signature legislation".

    All parts of the government that were shut down had been fully funded. Obama refused to allow people to work at their assigned duties when all funds were available for their work. He shut down the government because Congress would not fund a law that he has refused to implement.

    Mike Lee understands his duty. Obama does not understand his.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:28 a.m.

    So,
    In the future --

    If the Republicans EVER pass a law that Democrats don't like or approve of,
    It is their sworn "Constitutional duty" to withhold Federal Funding and not pass ANY budget unless they get their way ---

    Am I hearing you right Mike Lee and Mike Richards?

    Because IMHO --
    that is treason and trampling the Constitution and harming the United States of America.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:42 a.m.

    LDS Liberal,

    The DOD is not authorized by the Constitution, which is the part of government that you have told us that you work for. Do you think that the Constitution applies to all of us, or to just those who don't get a paycheck from the DOD?

    I have no qualms about requiring that the Air Force once again becoming part of the Army, as it once was, nor do I have any qualms about the Marines once again becoming part of the Navy. If that happens, then the DOD must also become the "War Department" as it once was and it must be disbanded whenever we are not in a declared war.

    I'm willing require that the government obey the Supreme Law. Are you? Senator Lee would support those changes. Obama would support those changes; he would support any change that reduced defense spending.

  • J Thompson SPRINGVILLE, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    Can you believe that a poster used the word "treason" to describe those who uphold the Constitution and said that it is they who "trample" the Constitution. No wonder things are so upside down. A "traitor" is someone who perverts the Supreme Law of the land. Mike Lee stood for the Constitution. He knows his duty. He performed his duty. He did everything that he could do to protect this nation against enemies foreign and domestic. Harry Reid did the opposite. He assumed authority not given him. He refused to allow bills to be voted on. He supported the shutdown of the government. Obama also did the opposite. He refused to implement ObamaCare. He shut down parts of the government, claiming a lack of funding when those parts had been fully funded. He lied about who was responsible.

    It there was "treason" committed, it was not by Mike Lee and it is not by those who support and uphold the Constitution, as it is written, not as the liberals wish that it had been written.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 9:59 a.m.

    ■Congress routinely enacts changes to mandatory spending programs as part of its annual appropriations process. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recognizes these changes when analyzing spending bills and scores them as CHiMPS—changes in mandatory program spending

    ■Congress has already defunded mandatory programs within Obamacare—and done so through appropriations measures. Section 1857 of the continuing resolution Congress enacted in April 2011 (P.L. 112-10) “permanently cancelled” $2.2 billion in mandatory funding to Obamacare’s co-op health insurance program.

    ■Congress has also defunded elements of health care entitlements for decades. Every year since 1976, Congress has enacted the Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funding of abortion. This provision, enacted as part of discretionary appropriations legislation, prohibits abortion coverage in the Medicaid entitlement program.

    So never say never

  • Lightbearer Brigham City, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:00 a.m.

    Re: "The Senate can amend and can confer. Removing provisions is not amending and it is not conferring."

    Removing is amending: "amend ... to alter formally by modification, deletion, or addition" (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Note the word "deletion."

    The conservative Heritage Foundation, commenting on the Origination Clause (Article I, Section 7, Clause 1), says that "the Senate's power to amend is generally understood in practice to be so broad that the Senate can replace the entire text of a bill that technically originates in the House."

  • Unreconstructed Reb Chantilly, VA
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:05 a.m.

    Mike Richards,

    "Who closed the parks and the monuments, Senator Lee or Obama?"

    That's a nonsensical question coming from folks with your position on Constitutional interpretation. True Constitutional Originalists should question whether it's even legal under the express and enumerated powers of the Constitution for the Federal government to even operate national parks and monuments in the first place. After all, the creation of the National Park Service was just another liberal effort to subvert the Constitution by noted Progressives like Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:12 a.m.

    Couldn't DISAGREE more with this article. By the way - I sent Senator Hatch a SCORCHING letter regarding his absurd statements about Senator Lee and I got a disappointing letter back from Senator Hatch. Senator Lee was RIGHT and Senator Hatch was WRONG. Senator Lee fulfilled his promises to FIGHT for our bill of rights and do everything in his power to stop Obamacare. Senator Hatch did what exactly??? NOTHING!! Too afraid to rock the boat and too afraid to damage his 35 year relationships with his Democrat friends in congress Hatch did nothing. We booted Bob Bennett out because he had become so ineffective and useless in the Senate that it was hard to tell what color he really was. He certainly was NOT a conservative and now he is out of a job ...as Orin Hatch SHOULD also be. Mike Lee did stand for principle as we asked him to and he did NOT cave and he did ROCK the boat and guess what ??? Mike WAS RIGHT!!!! Even democrats are now asking for a one year delay for Obamacare!!!! As for the shut down - does anyone even remember it???

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:14 a.m.

    Scott Howell suggests mike lee is a failed ideologue who does not understand constitutional principles...

    However...

    Millions showed up last weekend to give mike lee a standing ovation (even outdoing r. ted cruz's standing ovation)...

    A we're number 1 standing ovation for a failed ideologue who does not understand constitutional principles...

    Amazing.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    Thanks for proving my point Richards, Thompson, et al…

    The annual appropriations bill did not “withhold” funding for Obamacare (as Mr. Sowell falsely puts it). Instead it added amendments to the funding bill that sought to change a law – see the difference. And don’t take my word for it, read the bill – there was no (zero) funding appropriated to Obamacare because like many laws on the books it does not require annual reauthorization of funding. Instead the conflated law-changing amendments tried to remove the individual mandate, delay implementation or repeal the medical device tax.

    Again, all things that have NOTHING to do with annual appropriations.

    What the House Republicans did would be analogous to House Democrats during Bush’s last two years passing a funding bill than contained a law-changing (poison pill) amendment to, say, kill DOMA.

    If Bush threatened to veto that bill would you say he “shut down the government?”

    @Mike Richards

    Your last comment was hilarious in its explanation of a completely calcified Constitution that leaves no room changing realities (e.g., the invention of the airplane) or even names of departments.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:21 a.m.

    re:Roland Kayser

    turn on your news channel - anything but MSNBC - and guess what is being talked about?? The DISASTER that is OBAMACARE!! That's right Roland - even the liberal Washington Post has been blasting Obama for lying to the American people and recounting the stories of MILLIONS who are suffering because of Obamacare EXACTLY as Mike Lee said would happen. There are a few senators who stood for the American people and the rest ran away. Interesting now that Obamacare has turned on its head Orin Hatch is out there blasting Obamacare. Where was Orin a month ago?? Hiding with John McCain? Mike Lee as far as I'm concerned is a EXACTLY the sort we need in congress today. Mike Lee is Mr Smith goes to Washington. We booted Bob Bennett from the senate because he had become so ineffective in NOT standing for conservative values and now Hatch is a carbon copy of Bennett. Conservatives LOVE Mike Lee and progressives hate him. Which camp do you fall within??

  • Ranch Here, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:36 a.m.

    @There You Go Again;

    That must have been a true Jesus miracle right up there with the loaves and fishes. A few handfulls turns into "millions".

    LOL

  • Fed Employee Lehi, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    J Thompson: You need to read the whole part of section 7 of the Constitution. It states: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills."

    The Senate is allowed to change and/or propose spending bills and send them back to the House.

  • carpoolmom SOUTH JORDAN, Salt Lake
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:47 a.m.

    Thank you Mike and patriot you said it perfectly! Hatch ran on doing all in his power to defund Obamacare. Why did people vote for Hatch if they think its wrong to do what Lee did. If there were other options why hasn't Hatch done them? Hatch knew he could not do anything but lied to us saying he would get rid of it to get elected. That is not a statesman. I don't understand how you can be grateful he did nothing and will do nothing when that was his big promise to do something. And I don't believe a statesman would continue to run year after year. A statesman doesn't add to the debt every year till the country is broken just so he can get reelected or by adding SNAP and medicaid and pork to every bill. Do you notice Obama will never compromise or the Dems yet Hatch says we need to compromise or in otherwords do what the Dems want. I want a fighter for my principles and to compromise only after getting at least one thing in each battle.

  • Fitz Murray, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:48 a.m.

    Mr. Howell has well written letter, but without citations to back it up, it is an opinion and not fact. In a letter from James Madison to Thomas Jefferson dated Oct 24, 1787, Mr. Madison writes "...Adding to these considerations the natural diversity of human opinions on all new and complicated subjects, it is impossible to consider the degree of concord which ultimately prevailed as less than a miracle." Even then, Madison was being kind. Three of Madsion's Virginian associates left the convention, as did other members from other states sent to this convention. All Rhode Island delegates left the convention and refused to sign the Constitution in Sept 1787 (note there are only 12 states that signed the document in Sep 1787). The type of contention that we just witnessed in today's Congress is not new. It has continued from the days of the founding fathers to today. Unfortunately, contention has always been a part of our elected leaders.

  • McMurphy St George, Utah
    Nov. 5, 2013 11:01 a.m.

    @ Unreconstructed has it right. Based on the number of 5 to 4 decisions by the Supreme Court what the Constitution really means is not as black and white as some would have us to believe.

  • Fitz Murray, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 11:05 a.m.

    @LDS Liberal, your reference to ACA clearing SCOTUS is not quite accurate. The Court ruled that under the Commerce Clause, ACA is unconstitutional. Then the CJ said that Congress had the authority to tax and so the penalty clause (which is what ACA refers labels it and states it is not a tax) could be considered a tax. SCOTUS, essentially, ruled that it was okay to tax an unconstitutional law. I have yet to get my arms around such a conflicting opinion. It would seem that the CJ was trying to be a modern day political Solomon.

    @pragmatistferlife, you need to spend some time researching the founding fathers. They were all very religious. In 1788, MA, NY, and VA all submitted a bill of rights to the newly created Congress. MA proposed a version of the bill of rights on Feb 6, 1788. It reads in part "...acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Supreme Ruler of the Universe in affording the people of the United States in the course of his providence an opportunity deliberately and peaceful...entering into an explicit and solemn Compact..." Our founding fathers clearly believed that God guided them in creating the Constitution.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 11:21 a.m.

    I would take Mike Lee's understanding of the law and the Constitution over Harry Reid anytime for any reason. Those who believe that Mike Lee doesn't understand the Constitution sound really arrogant. Mike Lee, along with his father, spent most of his life reading and understanding the Constitution. From all appearances and policies, our President doesn't even believe in it!

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Nov. 5, 2013 11:43 a.m.

    Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah
    LDS Liberal,

    The DOD is not authorized by the Constitution, which is the part of government that you have told us that you work for.

    9:42 a.m. Nov. 5, 2013

    =========

    Ya Mike the DoD is not authorized by the Constitution {LOL, rolling my eyes} --

    preamble:
    "...provide for the common defense..."

    not to mention Section 8:11, 12, 13, and 14
    which spell out specifically the Constitutional requirements of having and maintaining a military.

    But go ahead,
    keep showing us your irreverence and contempt towards the Constitution you SAY you know, love, and defend.

    As a Veteran and Civil servant to the DoD.
    Bashing my jobs or my pay-checks, is tantamount to bashing the Constitution.

    If you don't like me working to defend you,
    Fine.
    Amend the Constitution, stop the wars, and send me packing!

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    Nov. 5, 2013 11:54 a.m.

    @Fitz – “you need to spend some time researching the founding fathers. They were all very religious.”

    Perhaps, but probably not in the same way most of the Religious Right thinks, as evidenced by a few quotes below.

    "The United States in is no sense founded upon the Christian religion." George Washington

    "Revealed religion has no weight with me." Benjamin Franklin

    "I disbelieve all holy men and holy books." Thomas Paine

    "In no instance have churches been the guardians of the liberties of the people." James Madison

    "The Christian god is cruel, vindictive, capricious, and unjust." Thomas Jefferson

    "What has been Christianity's fruits? Superstition, bigotry, and persecution." James Madison

    @patriot

    It’s the constitutional process we’re talking about, not any single law. I’m curious - by your “ends justify the means” logic, what means of stopping Obamacare would be out-of-bounds for you?

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 12:13 p.m.

    re:Open Minded Mormon

    If you want to rant about someone who ditched our brave soldiers and left them hanging then why not direct your rant toward BARACK OBAMA and HILARY CLINTON who did indeed leave two patriotic brave former Navy Seals and a US ambassador to face the wrath of thousands of terrorist mobsters ALONE who attacked our embassy in Benghazi? This is THE most disgraceful thing I have ever seen a president do and then forge a predictable bag of lies to attempt to cover up. Listen to parents of these brave Seals ...you will feel the righteous anger from parents who saw their sons abandoned by a politician who cared more about protecting his pathetic record than he did protecting American lives.

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 12:45 p.m.

    To "Scott N. Howell" I hate to bring reality into your opinion, but Lee and those that supported him in the senate were not trying to ignore the public debts. In fact, over the past 37 years the government has shut down 18 times because a budget could not be passed.

    Here is where reality probably missed you. Senator Lee and House Republicans had a budget proposal that paid for the government debts and funded everything in the government except for Obamacare. Obamacare was not a debt at this point because we didn't owe anybody anything for that.

    To "LDS Liberal" Congress and the Supreme court also voted for and upheld the Jim Crow laws. Along with voting laws that prohibited women and blacks from voting. Should we reinstate those since they were passed legally and supported by the Supreme court?

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Nov. 5, 2013 1:04 p.m.

    patriot
    Cedar Hills, UT
    re:Open Minded Mormon

    If you want to rant about someone who ditched our brave soldiers and left them hanging then why not direct your rant toward BARACK OBAMA and HILARY CLINTON who did indeed leave two patriotic brave former Navy Seals and a US ambassador to face the wrath of thousands of terrorist mobsters ALONE who attacked our embassy in Benghazi?

    =========

    As opposed to what?

    The small minority of politicians who ditched our brave Civil Servants, Military, poor, sick, elderly and left them jobless,
    I direct my rant toward MIKE LEE and TED CRUZ and others who did indeed leave 50 Million patriotic and brave civil servants, service members, poor, sick, elderly to face the wrath of a handful of domestic terrorist mobsters who attacked our COUNTRY right here in AMERICA?

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Nov. 5, 2013 1:21 p.m.

    RedShirtUofU
    Andoria, UT

    To "LDS Liberal" Congress and the Supreme court also voted for and upheld the Jim Crow laws. Along with voting laws that prohibited women and blacks from voting. Should we reinstate those since they were passed legally and supported by the Supreme court?

    12:45 p.m. Nov. 5, 2013

    ==========

    No,
    but I remind you that they were all repealed and replaced when they had sufficent VOTES,
    and not on split second before.

    Even all the blood shed in the Civil War couldn't change those facts,
    it still took the VOTES from Congress and the President and the Supremem Court to CHANGE those laws.

    Something you modern day Rebels still can get quite through those thick skulls!

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Nov. 5, 2013 1:39 p.m.

    Just like this article suggests --

    Some posters [usually Tea-Party types] are classic examples of those who think they "know" the Constitution,
    but don't really "Understand" the Constitution.

  • Unreconstructed Reb Chantilly, VA
    Nov. 5, 2013 1:46 p.m.

    RedShirtUofU,

    No, if you want reality, look to Tyler D's post, which explains succinctly what was so different about this particular budget crisis, and how the demand to defund Obamacare stepped far outside of the appropriations process.

    "Congress and the Supreme court also voted for and upheld the Jim Crow laws. Along with voting laws that prohibited women and blacks from voting."

    No, Congress never voted for Jim Crow. That was squarely a state's rights issue, one that ironically ended up ceding more power to the federal government because of its blatant abuses and the expansion of federal civil rights authority.

    And laws prohibiting women's and black suffrage are the fault of the *original* Constitution, something that one should bear in mind before viewing it as a sancrosanct document and its authors as perfect.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 2:46 p.m.

    re:Open Minded Mormon

    Better check the record guy - Mike Lee voted to FULLY FUND the military. It was Barack and Harry that cut the funding for the military and the VA and military funerals. Barack could have and should have issued an executive order providing funding for those military services but he did NOTHING! It was left to charities to fund the funerals. Disgraceful!! If you recall also - the WWII vets weren't angry at Mike Lee, they were angry with Barack Obama for closing THEIR memorial and then protested IN FRONT of the White House. Again - better check the record before you rant.

    Finally my point about Benghazi was this - I never heard a peep out of you regarding that terrible and disgraceful time in American history when the President of the United states left our brave soldiers to DIE along with a standing US ambassador. Care to explain??? If you are going to stand for our military then do it but don't be two faced about it.

  • Z South Jordan, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 3:12 p.m.

    This is a fine piece of political rhetoric disguised as informed opinion. We will be seeing you in 3 years, Mr. Howell. You had better get your arguments in better shape before then.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Nov. 5, 2013 3:34 p.m.

    LDS Liberal/Open Minded Mormon,

    Which do you want? Do you want an absolute interpretation of the Constitution or do you want your interpretation of the Constitution? If you argue that the DOD is authorized because it contributes to the "common defense" of this nation, then you would surely argue that the Air Force and the Marines also contribute to the "common defense". If you argue that the Air Force and the Marines are unconstitutional, then you must also argue that your employer, the DOD, is unconstitutional.

    Mike Lee has taken a stand to ensure that the Constitution is upheld, as written, (or amended). Obama, Reid, and (apparently you) have decided that whatever is in their (your) best interests constitutes the Supreme Law of the Land. You can't have it both ways. Either you stand for the Constitution, as written, including resigning your position at the DOD, or you claim that everything is situational - as long as you see a personal benefit. I don't work for any department of government, nor would I work for any department of government that is not explicitly authorized by the Constitution. You work for the DOD. What more needs to be said?

  • RedShirtUofU Andoria, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 3:59 p.m.

    To "Open Minded Mormon" if we could get rid of Jim Crow laws using votes from Congress and the President, why can't we do the same with Obamacare? You made it sound as if any law enacted by congress was written in stone, but now you say that it can be erased just as easily as it was created.

    So tell us, how is Lee's work to get rid of Obamacare any different than getting rid of Jim Crow laws? They both use the law, both require Congress to vote on the issue, and for the President to sign it into law.

    It seems like you are just telling those who disagree with you to sit down, shut up, and color.

  • Badgerbadger Murray, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 6:41 p.m.

    Wow! A democrat running for the senate is trashing Lee and doesn't like what he has done.

    Such news!!!??? An aspiring liberal disagrees with a conservative.

    Don't know why this is in the paper.

  • Mkithpen Sandy, UT
    Nov. 5, 2013 10:50 p.m.

    Scott Howell - after reading your article again I can only say "what a bunch of HOG WASH!" and waste of print space. President Obama shut down the government when he wouldn't negotiate on anything associated to the Non-affordable Care Act. Hatch let it go on longer than needed by not supporting the Jr Senator in upholding the Constitution in stead of waiting to find a way to negotiate around it. What's wrong with understanding and supporting the Constitution at every turn in the road. Something along the lines of birth, hard work, prosperity and corruption comes to mind. Where in this cycle do you think Obama and the non ethical leadership of Harry Reid has taken us? Where is Mr Hatch in this? Mr Hatch can wash his hands by sitting quietly, but that wont cleanse the fact that he didn't stand when he should have.

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    Nov. 6, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    Keep dreaming Scott. Maybe you should have stayed at IBM and studied your Constitution a little more. I applaud what Lee tried to do, he just could have gone about it a different way.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 6, 2013 12:16 p.m.

    @T. Party
    "Barack Obama and Harry Reid chose to shut down the government rather than work out a compromise."

    Democrats accepted the House funding levels on EVERYTHING except Obamacare, including many things they didn't want (like research cuts). You just didn't notice because they weren't throwing a temper tantrum over it.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 6, 2013 12:33 p.m.

    @patriot
    "the WWII vets weren't angry at Mike Lee"

    Oh please... WWII vets weren't united in anger. They were divided. Conservatives angry at Obama, liberals angry at Lee. Lee and friends just put more effort into political staging than Obama.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 6, 2013 5:59 p.m.

    Tea party is finished. They took their shot, failed miserably.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 7, 2013 10:50 a.m.

    According to the US Constitution, all revenue bills must originate in the House. According to the SCOTUS, the ACA is a taxing bill and therefore a revenue bill. The ACA originated in the Senate, so doesn't that mean that the ACA MUST now be voided and the process of enacting it start over again by having it originate in the House?

    It appears the House passed a continuing resolution that covered all the legal obligations of the US Government.

  • Kirk R Graves West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 7, 2013 11:46 a.m.

    @Atl

    "Democrats accepted the House funding levels on EVERYTHING except Obamacare".

    If that were true, then why didn't they accept the individual continuing resolutions passed by the House?

    No, they simply refused to compromise and had no compunctions against a shut-down. There were multiple opportunities for the Senate to a) avoid a shutdown, or b) end the shutdown much sooner. However, so long as the media were spinning it as the House Conservative's fault, they had no motive to resolve the problem, which they could have done at any time.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 8, 2013 12:23 a.m.

    "Either you stand for the Constitution, as written, including resigning your position at the DOD, or you claim that everything is situational - as long as you see a personal benefit. "

    So you see the DOD as situational, and unconstitutional. Really? But what is really odd is that you say the DOD is unconstitutional, yet you say the War Department is constitutional. Can you show me where the War Depatment is in the Constitution any more then the DOD?

    But of course, it is a silly argument; both the Department of Defense and the War Department are constitutional.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Nov. 8, 2013 4:55 a.m.

    @Kirk R Graves 11:46 a.m. Nov. 7, 2013

    You forget, or don't want to acknowledge, that the Senate had already amended the House's first bill to clean it up, passed the amended version, and sent it back to the house where there were sufficient votes to pass the cleaned up version. It was never brought to a vote by the far right (not true conservative) House leadership. Why? They waned to play politics, and didn't car that the government would be shut down. It is the House far right (not conservative) leadership that could have avoided the shutdown. They didn't want to. THAT is where the blame rightly lies.

  • Kirk R Graves West Jordan, UT
    Nov. 8, 2013 10:23 a.m.

    @Furry1993
    So, it wasn't the Senate's fault for not passing the House's bill, but it is the House's fault for not passing the Senate's version?

    Makes perfect sense.

    The initial shutdown occurred because the Senate decided to not take up the House's version of the bill before the weekend. They could have taken up and approved it before the shutdown but chose not to.

    You fail to mention that the House didn't take up the Senate's amended bill because it was in the processes of offering smaller, piecemeal, bills that would get funding to the most critical areas of government. The Senate then refused to take up those bills because they knew that the media was currently on their side and it was politically expedient to let the blame continue to fall on the House. If the Senate had take up those bills they would have had to pass them or look like the bad guys and shift the political points back in favor of the House.

  • Mikhail ALPINE, UT
    Nov. 8, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    @Roland Kayser

    I wasn't aware that Senator Lee was in the Senate when Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP were being implemented. In hindsight, maybe it would have been a good thing to have such opposition at the time these were implemented. How are they working out? How is is going with Obamacare. Perhaps you are the partisan in this discussion. Perhaps the opposition to your hero, Mr. Obama, has to do with his bad policies and bad administration. Perhaps it is your objectivity that is in question.

  • CynicJim Taylorsville, UT
    Nov. 9, 2013 9:05 p.m.

    Please, Senator Lee, don't learn about the constitution from Hatch!

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Nov. 10, 2013 9:07 a.m.

    @Kirk R Graves

    Not accurate. The Senate had already addressed the issue, and the ball was in the House's court with a bill that would be passed if the House ever voted on it. If the House had first rejected the Senate's clean bill, the you would have a point . . . but they didn't. It was the House's turn to act on the already-existing bill, rather than trying to play politics and practice extortion. The far right House leadership would rather play politics and practice extortion than work for the good of the country by addressing an already-existing bill. The far right Republicans in the House caused the shutdown when they didn't act on their already-passed, but cleaned up by the Senate, bill.