9/11 Health Bill – The BIG Question

Posted By on December 22, 2010

Well, I may seem insensitive, uncaring and some may even say un-patriotic; BUT I’ve got a duty and a responsibility to the Constitution. I’ve heard the arguments in favor of this bill. I’ve heard the protestations of those who favor it. But I still have a problem with it.

In today’s political environment there is a push to establish the Constitutional authorization for the bills presented in Congress. The Tea Parties, the 9-12 groups, the conservative grassroots initiatives and movements across the country are calling for this.  The elections of this past November are evidence of this, and one of the many mandates given to the newly elected members of Congress.

So, where is the Constitutional justification for providing the members of New York’s finest, the NYPD and FDNY, the first responders with federally funded health care? These are local employees of the city of New York and citizens of the State of New York. Sure they are citizens of these United States, and sure it was an act of war against these United States, but how does that justify, Constitutionally, an action by the US Congress to fund such a bill?

This is just another in the ongoing debate over earmarks and Congressional pork barrel spending. Shall we dare consider the words of the Constitution? After all, in recent protest a FDNY firefighter lashed out at Congress to uphold their sworn oath. What is that primary emphasis of that oath? “To support and defend the Constitution of the United States…” So, what does the Constitution say about Congressional spending? I can find nothing.

If anyone knows of such a Constitutional authorization, please comment and let all of us know.

I feel for these “first responders.” I sympathize for them and their families, BUT the responsibility for their care is the local and state governments of New York AND CHARITIES, NOT the federal government.


About the author


Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: