Interpreting Harriet Miers
Robert Reich
October 06, 2005

Excerpts:

Before 1937, a majority of justices, saying they were "strictly interpreting" the Constitution, struck down as unconstitutional laws setting minimum wages and maximum hours, and barring child labor.

The economic values of those justices favored private property over community standards of fair play. To them, due process of law was mostly about freedom to contract and liberty was the ability to accumulate personal wealth.

Then, early in 1937, one of those justice switched sides (coincidentally, his last name was Roberts) and the court’s new majority chose community over property. They said they were still strictly interpreting the Constitution. But suddenly, due process was about making laws fairly, and liberty was about giving people opportunities to get ahead.

We no longer have a Great Depression to contend with, as we did then. But we’ve still got big questions of economic values. The U.S. economy has been growing at a healthy clip. But the typical household’s income has barely budged for years. Meanwhile, the number of poor Americans continues to grow. According to the Census Bureau, only the top 5 percent of households have been enjoying real economic gains. Almost all the economic growth has gone to the top.

This raises profound questions about American values. Not since the Gilded Age of the 1890s has this nation experienced anything like the inequality of income, wealth and opportunity we’re now witnessing.

Should we try to reverse this trend? Does the Constitution require that we provide all our citizens with an equal opportunity to get ahead? Is the widening gap evidence we’re failing at this?

If you see our society as a group of individuals for whom government exists mainly to protect property, you’d probably answer these questions with a "no." If you see America as a national community whose citizens have responsibilities for the well-being of one another, you’d say "yes."

source

I say YES! We have a responsibility for the well being of each other. Guess some of these right wingers should review the words of Jesus.

Here is the lesson right from the pages of the CBN: (Why don't these folks practice what they preach?).

"While Jesus was teaching he admonished an expert in knowing God’s law to “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

“But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. `Look after him,' he said, `and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

Then Jesus asked, "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."

Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise." (Luke 10:30-37 NIV)"