Barack Obama and "The Second Bill of Rights"

Mark Whittington
What is the "Second Bill of Rights?"; The idea, that seems to be forming as part of the Barack Obama Agenda of redistributing wealth, was first articulated by none other than President Franklin Roosevelt during his 1944 State of the Union Address.

The "Second Bill of Rights", as articulated by FDR, consists of a set of positive rights, or as Barack Obama might say, rights concerning what the government must do for its citizens. These include, according to FDR:

"The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

"The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

"The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

"The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

"The right of every family to a decent home;

"The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

"The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

"The right to a good education."

The need for a "Second Bill of Rights" hjas been championed by Obama ally and advisor Cass Sunstein, Law Professor at the University of Chicago, in a book entitled "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR's Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need it More than Ever." Obama surrogate Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D) Ohio recently demanded the implementation of a "Second Bill of Rights" at an Obama campaign rally.

The revival of the concept of a "Second Bill of Rights" puts a new face on Barack Obama's seven-year-old musings about the Constitution. The Constitution suggests that human beings have rights granted to them by God (or nature if one prefers) that governments cannot take away. The government cannot take away ones right to speak or own fire arms, jail someone without just cause, take property without just compensation, and so on. These are "negative rights" according to Barack Obama.

But the "Second Bill of Rights" are "positive rights," things that the government must give one. Jobs, education, health care, housing, and so on are not things that people have the right to acquire by their own effort. Government must give people these things. There are two problems with this.

First, jobs, education, health care, housing, and so on cost money. Governments, by their nature, cannot create wealth necessary to provide such things. To get the money necessary, governments must take it away from other people which it deems to have too much of it. On other words, redistribution or "spreading" the wealth. And no one has the right to keep their wealth if the government wants to use it for its own purpose.

Second, as Tom Palmer, who reviewed Professor Sunstein's book suggested, the very idea of a "Second Bill of Rights" means that there are no God given or natural rights, but simply rights that the government grants or takes away according to its own convenience and whim.

Thus the implementation of a "Second Bill of Rights" implies a complete reversal of the founding philosophy of the United States, that government should be limited and have only those powers that the people are willing to grant it. Instead, government and not the people is all powerful and people only have the rights that government wills to grant them. That is the future that we face should Barack Obama become President with hugh majorities in the House and Senate.

Sources: Obama's Constitution, Obama's Constitution, Powerline, October 28th, 2008

Barack Obama on Redistribution of Wealth, Mark R. Whittington, Associated Content, October 27th, 2008

Published by Mark Whittington

Mark R. Whittington is a writer residing in Houston, Texas. He is the author of The Last Moonwalker, Children of Apollo, Dark Sanction, and Nocturne. He has written numerous articles, some for the Washington...   View profile

13 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Roosevelt is founding father. 2/15/2011

    He was put in power by the people sadly couldnt finish what he wanted too in America.Obama needs to finish his work! It is what America needs.FAIRNESS! People have been lost in greed and missed the point of what it means to be human. Those greedy people are gonna eat there own flesh anyways.

  • Ahmed 10/31/2010

    I suppose I get concerned by disincentives to work and creating a culture of entitlement, but at the same time attitudes of this nature completely overlook objective reality. Yes, in theory, a moral hazard exists and this can cause a welfare culture to develop. In practice? Europeans are more productive than Americans. If anyone thinks these positive rights have anything to do with just entitlement you are being myopic. Some of these are investments - having a healthy population, a literate population, a population without such stresses as poverty. These things actually make for a more stable society and one that is more productive. And there it is: positive rights are as much an ECONOMIC strategy as one to maintain welfare. A more productive society. Now, does it look a little better, now that it is in economic-only (Americanish) language? Theory is one thing, but actually observing what happens when such theories are employed gives you a far better insight.

  • PW 9/28/2010

    The Bill of Rights is to protect the people of this country from power hungry people! Listen to whatever "crisis" we have at the moment and Obama makes the American people our enemies. Bankers are not our enemies! Oil companies are not our enemies! Car manufacturers are not our enemies! The Tea Party is not our enemy! Republicans are not our enemies! They are Americans that the president wants us to turn against! Listen as Obama speaks and you'll see who he wants us to be enemies with next and it will undoubtedly be another American!

  • daniel 8/31/2010

    the bill of rights should remain the same and should not be altered. it should stay as history has made it and should never change for the sake of america and its people

  • LuxAqu 8/12/2010

    The only "God given" right is the right to struggle for survival until the day you die.

    If you want any more than that, then yes you have to join or form a society that endeavors to grant its members more.

  • JH 11/4/2009

    If Obama feels these are rights for everyone, who is suppose to pay for it!?!?!? Our founding fathers worked very hard for what we have today and not for someone to come along and ruin it in less then a year!

  • Theresa 10/19/2009

    Well THAT wasn't slanted. Great intro, very weak argument. Author's opinion = no supporting data, no references, nada. And his conclusion? It's as if Obama is a one man army that can pass any laws he wants. Last I checked we have THREE branches of government.

  • john smith 9/20/2009

    You have alredy said it. " the militia and the populace both need to be armed. Have you noticed how the murder rate has slowly gone up since J Carter started the "let's go get the guns" orders Oh, yes it's fallen a little. As the number of guns have been taken the crimes have been greater.

  • John Smith 9/20/2009

    This is a real FDR Marxist little Gem. 1st All of them make specific gurantees. This is what caused our crash in October and Novemebr. Our Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton made it law that poor people could have a home even if they could not ever make the Mortgage. The Banks were forced to do this. So they passed on a lot of losses. Plug any one of these little "RIGHTS" and in short order we'll get this same sort of thing over and over again. If you want to house the Mexicans in America then all power to you .Otherwise STOP IT.

  • Howard Theobald 9/11/2009

    Cass Sunstein is one sick man. He has never read the Bible and has not thought on the Christian foundation this great nations was founded on.

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.