I have a very simple standard for constitutionalism.

If a candidate wants to adopt a strict constitutional limits position and promises to legislate on that basis, then I will vote for him or her. That means he or she must agree to support legislation abolishing the 2010 healthcare reform bill, the Social Security Act, the Medicare and Medicaid programs, the various environmental protection acts (Clean Water, Clean Air, etc.), government regulation of nuclear power production, food and drug and consumer product safety, all agriculture subsidies, NASA, student loan programs, income tax deductions for home mortgage interest, and air traffic safety.

If they adopt the position that the Constitution was engineered to be a flexible, evolving framework, and based on that, they promise to retain all of the above functions of government, then I will at least listen to them. At least they are being intellectually consistent.

But if they campaign on the idea that the 2010 healthcare act is non-Constitutional, but will not sign on to legislation to eliminate all those other programs of comparable constitutionality, then I will reject that candidate for his or her hypocrisy.