I've always found it silly when people ask questions like that of the Constitution. Not every issue is clearly outlined- not only because many of the prominent issues we face today were unknown to the founding fathers, but also because a certain degree of ambiguity ensures that our government is flexible to the times. Almost all issues of our time drift into the grey of the necessary and proper clause. We are confronted not with issues of policy, but with conflicts of philosophy. The founding fathers expected that national leaders would be members of the intellectual elite, individuals able to interpret what is right for the nation as a whole. But are they? Have we reached a point when conflict no longer sparks compromise? Politicians and individuals alike have become so entrenched in their own ideals that a philosophical war may never be won by either side. However, the policies themselves will be resolved- either implemented or dismissed. It's strange that an issue between Jefferson and Hamilton is still a problem today. Strict vs. loose interpretation. How much power should the states have? Can the government limit personal freedom for the common good?
In interpreting the philosophy of the Constitution, I think it's important to look to its philosophical foundation: John Locke. To consider Locke is to consider the social contract. The social contract is, "[The] belief that political structures and the legitimacy of the state derive from an (explicit or implicit) agreement by individual human beings to surrender (some or all of) their private rights in order to secure the protection and stability of an effective social organization or government." Perhaps many Americans today would disagree with this, but did the founding fathers? Considering they were heavily influenced by Lockean philosophy in drafting the Constitution, it may be safe to assume they would.
I want to return to the original question. Does the government have the right to make us purchase healthcare? The real question is this: Does universal healthcare secure the protection and stability of an effective social organization or government? A difficult question to answer, but certainly one to consider.
More about Locke:
A kind of interesting site that provides opposing viewpoints on current issues:
No comments:
Post a Comment