NFIB V. Sebelius

It is quite difficult to ascribe modern meaning to ancient texts. One could argue that there is no greater folly. The Constitution has been the guiding document of this country since its ratification over two hundred and thirty years ago, and for all of its scruples, is still the most important political document ever written. Thus, it is the role of several of our most hallowed institutions to ascribe modern meanings to ancient texts. The main visionary behind the Constitution, James Madison, would not understand our world today. He would probably have not envisioned that a half-black and per another, dumber President, quite possibly Kenyan man would eventually become the President himself over two hundred years after the formation of America.

Sebelius – the individual mandate and the forced expansion of Medicaid – were both derided by its critics as fantastic overreaches by the federal government, but of the two, only the coerced Medicaid expansion was struck down. Madison argues in Federalist #45 that the size of the federal government, both figuratively and literally, should not exceed that of the States: he says that “The members of the legislative, executive, and judiciary departments of thirteen and more States, the justices of peace, officers of militia, ministerial officers of justice, with all the county, corporation, and town officers, for three millions and more of people, intermixed, and having particular acquaintance with every class and circle of people, must exceed, beyond all proportion, both in number and influence, those of every description who will be employed in the administration of the federal system.” (“Federalist 45” 1) The sheer existence of a program the size of Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid, three building blocks of modern American governing, would be of absolute shock to Madison. This modern understanding of the role of the federal government has still prevailed, often due to the vagueness of the Constitution itself. In defending the phrasing of the Constitution, Madison offers: “It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare… But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare?” (“Federalist 41” 1)