Unfortunately, with the decline of good journalism there is a declining ability to sort things out.
The graph scale is such that one can only read red and blue. My guess is that this represents the party in power in the Presidency. However, how is a split in the party in power shown (Presidency in hands of one party and Congress in the hands of the other)? It seems to me that we had rather significant periods in which this were true. If the Presidency is in the hands of one party and the Congress is in the hands of the other, how many times did a veto or the threat of an override of a veto take effect? Seems significant.
The fact remains, no one has answered Bob's question. Is a Federal (not states' because of the 10th Amendment) takeover of healthcare a legitimate use of Federal power? I can't find anything in Article 1, Section 8 that allows for this. When I check an annotated version of the Constitution, it's not there either.
There is a distinction between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
sorry about the graph quality. the shades of red/blue correspond to control of congess, with shades to depict relative weight of majority. Here is the link.
I'm not familiar with that site, but the graph is one of the nicer depictions. It can be verified easily via numerous official sites if it's validity is in question.
As a matter of fact, the Federal government doesn't build roads or erect stop signs. While the Feds contribute, it is the states that do all these things. If it's not a state project, the Feds can't build it even if they want it (short of Federal installations).
However, the current debate on healthcare is really bizarre. Where the usual relationship is usually Feds to the states, this debate focuses on a potential relationship between the Feds and the citizens of the various states. This calls into question 10th Amendment issues.
It amazes me that many will label themself as a Rep. or Dem. when they do this some seem to lose the ability to admit when one of their "side" F**** UP.
That helps explain how Congress can have an approval rating in the teens as a body, yet unless they are caught with a dead intern in their closet the incumbants all get re-elected
This polarization allows the politicians to avoid any accountability for what they are doing to our country.
I'm more of the "Hate em All" affiliation, because they are all screwing us
As of late i tend to agree with what you just posted MJH. The party that reflects my views is republican (conservative extremist i suppose you could say) but with all the pandering for votes that goes on and the money power grabbed we are getting bent over and taking it form all sides. If there was a one term limit and no lifelong benefits we may actually get folks that only go into politics to help the country since no one in their right mind would do it for any other reason (I know this won't happen but its a thought)