Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution of the United States of America clearly and unambiguously states: "No Bill of Attainder or Ex Post Facto Law shall be passed."
I'm sure we all remember this from our 4th grade history lessons. That's where I learned that "Ex Post Facto" means "After the Fact."
But, apparently, the Democrats and other members of Congress are not as well versed as I am about what is written in the Constitution.
First, we know that the Democrats in Congress voted to approve of a stimulus package that contained the Dodd Amendment which explicitly exempted the bonuses that AIG would pay out to its employees. Then, President Obama signed that legislation into law. This means that those bonuses were made perfectly legal according to the current Congress and the current President.
Now, they want to pass legislation that retroactively repeals that amendment.
According to the Fox News:
|Senate and House lawmakers have returned to the idea of imposing heavy taxes to recover the bonus money. |
Ten House Democrats introduced a bill Tuesday to tax all bonuses above $100,000 at 100 percent to recoup all the "outrageous" AIG bonuses.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also vowed to recover a sizeable chunk of the money.
"Remember, we, as a Congress, are not defenseless. We can also do things," the Nevada Democrat said Tuesday, announcing he has tasked Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., with crafting a proposal to recover the bonuses.
He said the legislation would be proposed by Wednesday and subject the bonuses to a tax of more than 90 percent. He also said lawmakers would soon work with the administration to complete a Wall Street accountability bill.
This is precisely what the Framers of the Constitution envisioned as an "Ex Post Facto" law.
This legislation must not even be considered. Those who will be considering it or supporting it will be in violation of their oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.
So, what would you choose? Irrational emotionalism over something that the Democrat-controlled Congress and the Democrat President approved of, or would you choose to support the explicit admonitions of the U.S. Constitution?
I choose the latter.
You can access the complete article on-line here:
To Recover AIG Bonuses, Lawmakers Scramble To Undo Protections They Approved
March 17, 2009