On
March 10, 2014 an article was published about Perry’s
Constitutional Philosophy on TexasMonthly.com.
In my opinion I would say I do not agree with the original argument of the
author, which it talks about Perry’s speech at the annual conservative
political action conference CPAC regarding send-off the health insurance and
education business and look up for other few things. I agree that Perry’s
speech was a good one that mentioned a lot of important matters but regarding
the constitution terms, there are elastic terms could go on or match the time changing.
Regarding the health care, the government should still focus on that matter
because it is not like creating a new law and leave the people including the
low income ones suffering from the insurance companies, which will give their
options that most of them cannot get benefit from it, but only pay monthly fees
for coverage. Although the author did not rely on evidentiary support but I
think the part of their argument (that did not work) is by suggesting that the
elasticity is necessary and important in the constitution. As it should be, but
our constitution is elastic, I mean how can America be the greatest country in
the world without having a great constitution? I think Washington is focusing
for now on the new laws, such as the health insurance, because it is new
change, so it still dealing with this law until reaching a perfect situation
for all the Americans. A conclusion at the end of this argument is valid and I
would assign a mid grade for this argument because although it brought some
good points; however, it did not have evidentiary support for what
they argue about.
