It's not just the so-called "Slaughter solution" that's unconstituitonal.

Many states--38 at one count--are planning to sue the federal government if it forces this mandatory Medicaid bill up our collective national ass. And, believe me, the government is not only planning to do so, but is trying to shield those voting "aye" on the sandstone dildo from the consequences of those votes.

That, right there is what makes the Slaughter solution unconstitutional. Article I, section 7, of the United States Constitution stipulates "But in all such cases the votes of both houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each house respectively."

In other words, any "aye" votes must be recorded, by name, and released to the public. Otherwise, it goes directly against the Constitution. The Founding Fathers wanted the government to be held responsible for whatever it chooses to try to do.

Some so-called "experts" in Constitutional law claims that the laws and resolutions that states may pass against the giant sandstone dildo the federal government is aiming right for our national pucker are unconstitutional, since federal law overrides those set by the states; however, that sandstone dildo is, in and of itself, unconstitutional. Nowhere in Article I, Section 8 is congress given the power to rape the nation with this nine-inch-thick (it is 2200 pages) sandstone dildo.

So, what can congress do? It can:

• Make money, take money, borrow money, and make laws about money
• Build roads and post offices and other federal infrastructure
• Grant copyrights
• Punish piracy
• Declare war, carry out war, raise and fund militias, armies, navies, et. al. to keep us as a nation safe and protect our national sovereignty

But nowhere in the Constitution is Congress granted the power to tell us that we must buy health insurance that covers x, y, and z, or be fined up to 2% of our income or $2200--whichever's greater--to be enforced by the IRS. Nowhere do I see the power to regulate the health care industry at all, not even under the guise of regulating interstate commerce, given that most states won't let their residents buy insurance from other states, for fear that their residents might choose to buy the Kia version of health insurance rather than the Cadillac or Mercedes Benz plans.

Nowhere do I see congress granted the power to legislate, regulate, and ration our choices in caring for our health as individuals. That power is, according to the tenth amendment, reserved to the states or to the individual.