Rep. Pete Stark doesn’t believe there are constitutional limits on federal government

August 01, 2010 -- 3:00 AM
Sun, 2010-08-01 03:00

What is Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., thinking? Following the publication of a video in which the congressman derides his own constituents for their concerns over border security (suggesting that they probably “kill people”), Stark spoke at a town hall in which he noted that there are few limitations on the federal government. Here’s what he said:

“I think that there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life. The basis for that would be how would it affect other people.”

After the questioner asks what possible constitutional limits there are, then, if Obamacare can pass constitutional muster, Stark replies: “The federal government yes, can do most anything in this country.”

The questioner, outraged: “You, sir, and people like you are destroying this nation.”

Stark, smirking: “And I guess you’re here to save it. And that makes me very uncomfortable.”

Here’s the video:

That last part is a harder soundbite to sell, but it’s worse than the mere philosophy that our government can expand without limit. This is where the rubber meets the road on the differences between the ruling class and the people. Because for an elected representative to think his power limitless isn’t all that unusual — this is a pretty widely held belief among Republicans and Democrats. To state it out loud makes the comment newsworthy. But it’s mocking the voter who confronts him over it that takes the cake.

Yes, this is a town hall. Angry Tea Partier? Sure.

You can complain all you like about Sarah Palin’s behavior, Andrew Breitbart’s supposed irresponsibility, the radicalism of the tea parties, and the obstructionism of Republicans, but at some point you’re going to have to address the corruption or the radical dedication to hegemony held by those in actual power. Prof. Stephen Bainbridge of UCLA has a post up on his blog saying it must be very embarrassing to be a conservative these days, and joining David Klinghoffer in yearning for the intellectual purity of Russell Kirk and the collegiality of William F. Buckley, but whenever Buckley and Kirk encountered this kind of arrogance, you can bet they would have lined up with the Tea Party “radicals.” (If you want to see “radical,” take a look at Buckley’s mayoral run or threatening to sock Gore Vidal in the face.)

Stark could have easily dismissed the assertion that Obamacare is kind of like slavery by noting the hyperbole of the statement, but he understood the philosophy behind the point. What limitations are there? Well, not many!

“The federal government can do most anything in this country,” he said, and, well, honestly. We’ve just seen it with Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, TARP, and the stimulus. We’re seeing it in the make-it-up-as-we-go-along nature of the Arizona lawsuit, which isn’t about stopping deportation and more about preventing public scrutiny to avoid “controversy.”

At the point where we’re appointing taxpayer-funded commissions that refuse to disclose how it’s spending its money while demanding more, or that the biggest news is that a non-government entity accuses another non-government entity of racism, the eye is most certainly off the ball.