Bruce Thornton writes at Frontpagemag.com:
A few days ago CNN anchor Brooke Baldwin, speaking about the Republican House bill defunding Obamacare, commented, "Certainly not the way the Founding Fathers maybe drew this thing up."
It’s certainly a surprise to hear an anchor on CNN, an organization biased in favor of progressives, appealing to the authority of the Constitution. For a century the progressives have been telling us that the Constitution is an outmoded document from a different age, and needs to be "modernized" to meet the challenges of a new world. . . .
Ms. Baldwin vs. Knowledge vs. U.S. Constitution: "If we probe Baldwin’s appeal to constitutional authority to buttress her attack on the House bill, then, we can see that she knows little or nothing about why the Founders 'drew this thing up' the way they did," Thornton writes.
"The key issue is Article 1.7.1.: 'All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.' We need to understand the reasons why the Framers gave the House this responsibility."
Founders' Distrust of Brooke Baldwin: "We should remember that the Founders’ distrust of human nature extended also to elites that monopolized power, as well as to the masses." Thornton explains. "Hence 'elites' in the government had to be 'checked and balanced' as much as the masses.
Thornton points out that "against those continuing to argue for giving the Senate the power of the purse, George Mason countered, 'An aristocratic body, like the screw in mechanics, working its way by slow degrees, and holding fast whatever it gains, should ever be suspected of an encroaching tendency. ––The purse strings should never be put into its hands.' As a compromise to placate the smaller states, the Senate was given the power to add amendments to the money bills originating in the House."
And That's a Wrap: "Contrary to Baldwin, then, the House bill to defund Obamacare is consistent with the intent of the Founders," Thornton concludes. "The law is unpopular, with 52% of the people opposing it. Its exceptions and exemptions doled out to political favorites are unjust, its constitutional violations blatant, and its incompetent construction, confused rollout, and unforeseen future costs dangerous for the public fisc and our exploding debt. If ever there was a 'grievance' needing 'redress,' Obamacare is it."