Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: U.S. Constitution, Amendment X

  1. #21
    Guru Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,000

    Re: U.S. Constitution, Amendment X

    Quote Originally Posted by Terryj View Post
    If one looks at Article 1 of the Constitution this spells out the operation and powers of the Federal Government. Sections 1 through 7 spells out how Congress shall operate, Sections 8 through 10 spells out the powers Congress has. All other powers are reserved to the States and the People. The people and the States can give congress powers not spelled out in the Constitution, this process is done by amendments.

    To look at the abuses of Congress, 1) healthcare, congress has not been given the power to regulate healthcare, nowhere is this addressed in the Constitution and nowhere has the people given this power to the Federal Government.
    2) gun control, again congress has never been given the power to address this.

    These are just two examples of the abuse of congress.

    Congress claim to have the authority under the "general welfare" clause of the Constitution, however, this is a bastardized version of the original intent.

    In 1792 Madison was debating the Cod Fisheries Bill, and what he said has unfortunately come to pass.

    "If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion in to their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county, and parish and pay them out of the public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor . . . Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America."
    While Congress did claim to have authority under this imaginary General Welfare Clause, the Supreme Court shot it down in United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936) when they were tossing 11 of FDR's 15 illegal New Deal programs. This is what they had to say on the subject:
    If the novel view of the General Welfare Clause now advanced in support of the tax were accepted, that clause would not only enable Congress to supplant the States in the regulation of agriculture and of all other industries as well, but would furnish the means whereby all of the other provisions of the Constitution, sedulously framed to define and limit the power of the United States and preserve the powers of the States, could be broken down, the independence of the individual States obliterated, and the United States converted into a central government exercising uncontrolled police power throughout the Union superseding all local control over local concerns.
    As you can see, the Supreme Court held Madison's (and Jefferson's) point of view on the subject. The General Welfare is the purpose for which Congress may tax, it is not a power unto itself.

  2. #22
    Guru Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,000

    Re: U.S. Constitution, Amendment X

    Quote Originally Posted by Terryj View Post
    Correct, under FDR, the federal government abandoned our Constitution: FDR proposed “New Deal” schemes; Congress passed them. At first, the Supreme Court opined (generally 5 to 4) that “New Deal” programs were unconstitutional as outside the powers granted to Congress. But when FDR threatened to “pack the court” by adding judges who would do his bidding, one judge flipped to the liberal side, and the Court started approving New Deal programs (generally 5 to 4).

    Since then, law schools don’t teach the Constitution. Instead, they teach Supreme Court opinions which purport to explain why Congress has the power to regulate anything it pleases. The law schools thus produced generations of constitutionally illiterate lawyers and judges who have been wrongly taught that the “general welfare” clause, along with the “interstate commerce” and the “necessary and proper” clauses, permit Congress to do whatever it wants!

    If one looks at the meaning of "welfare" as the Founders of the Constitution understood it is completely different than the meaning of the word in today's usage:

    Welfare: Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government (Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828)

    Welfare: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (1969), gave a new meaning: “Public relief – on welfare. Dependent on public relief”.

    Huge difference between the two, those who seek to understand what the Constitution means needs to understand the meaning of the words as applied in its creation.
    Actually, it was Congress that told FDR "no" when he sought to pack the court after having the overwhelming majority of his New Deal programs tossed by the Supreme Court. FDR then wanted to implement a mandatory retirement age of 72 on the Supreme Court. Congress said no to that as well. That is when the Supreme Court justices began dropping off. In just 6 years, after Congress tells FDR "no" to his court packing and retirement schemes, all 9 justices will have managed to conveniently die and be replaced by just one President.

  3. #23
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    223,038

    Re: U.S. Constitution, Amendment X

    Quote Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
    While Congress did claim to have authority under this imaginary General Welfare Clause, the Supreme Court shot it down in United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936) when they were tossing 11 of FDR's 15 illegal New Deal programs. This is what they had to say on the subject:


    As you can see, the Supreme Court held Madison's (and Jefferson's) point of view on the subject. The General Welfare is the purpose for which Congress may tax, it is not a power unto itself.
    Indeed, if the concept of the welfare clause was that which the FDR minions claimed, then why would the founders have put all those things in Article One, Section 8?
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Yeah; a shotgun IS a rifle; it uses a different load.
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    You know that Reagan signed the Brady Bill - right?
    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    The only "sport" that most gun owners participate in is suicide or murder.

  4. #24
    Guru Glitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Alaska (61.5N, -149W)
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,000

    Re: U.S. Constitution, Amendment X

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Indeed, if the concept of the welfare clause was that which the FDR minions claimed, then why would the founders have put all those things in Article One, Section 8?
    That was precisely the argument Thomas Jefferson gave in 1791 in his opinion of the first National Bank of the United States.
    To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, “to lay taxes for the purpose of providing for the general welfare.” For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless.

    It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.
    It should be noted that Jefferson lost that argument in 1791 because the first National Bank of the United States was created.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •