What's the point of having a constitution why not just a general welfare clause?

Of course I don't agree with this position, but for those who use the general welfare clause to basically let the government do whatever it wants, why have a constitution or bill of rights at all? Here, allow me to simplify for you guys:

"We the people establish a government for the general welfare of all."

There you go, the Bush-heads can have endless war, the Obamabots can have endless welfare. Everybody happy(except Thomas Jefferson).

I say this because the general attitude of the "welfare clausers" is that 'well, you may not like it, but it justifies everything from speed limits to the war on terrorism." Quite a broad concept. If this were the case, why have a constitution at all? And if the constitution is no longer serving its role, why not just have one sentence: the government can do anything. I don't get it, are millions of federal laws somehow more efficient, when at the end of the day the only law half way legalizing their antics is the general welfare clause or the interstate commerce clause?

Personally, I hold the view that the General Welfare clause should be interpreted like James Madison wanted it to be. That is a narrow construction of the clause, asserting that spending must be at least tangentially tied to one of the other specifically enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate or foreign commerce, or providing for the military, as the General Welfare Clause is not a specific grant of power, but a statement of purpose qualifying the power to tax.

Unfortunately, the Hamiltonian view which is broader, has been upheld by the courts.

Originally posted by tsawyer2
Personally, I hold the view that the General Welfare clause should be interpreted like James Madison wanted it to be. That is a narrow construction of the clause, asserting that spending must be at least tangentially tied to one of the other specifically enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate or foreign commerce, or providing for the military, as the General Welfare Clause is not a specific grant of power, but a statement of purpose qualifying the power to tax.

Unfortunately, the Hamiltonian view which is broader, has been upheld by the courts.

I agree with your sentiment. Just because the courts upheld it does not make it law. I think that is the other myth of the constitution that the judicial branch is the "last bastion of democracy" which is ridiculous on two fronts, one in that America is not a democracy but a representative democracy founded on Republican laws and two because the supreme court is 9 justices hardly a democracy. The congress can pass a law overruling the judicial branch in their lenient interpretation of the constitution. If only people were to become educated on the issues first.

reply to post by filosophia


The General Welfare Clause in Article 1, Section 8 is not a clause at all. It is a pre-amble to the 17 enumerated powers of Congress. It is saying that in order to provide for the general welfare, Congress is allowed to do these specific things. Progressives have twisted it to mean that the Government can do whatever it wants as long as it takes the general welfare of the public into consideration. The proof that this illogical and incorrect "interpretation" of Article 1, Section 8 is the 10th amendment. If the Federal Government had the power to act in any way they see fit, then there would be no reason for the 10th amendment, which gives all other powers and authority not found in Article 1, Section 8 to the individual states.

Here is what our Federal Government is allowed to do, and nothing more.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imports and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; [Altered by Amendment XVI "Income tax".]

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THAT'S IT... so tell me how we got to where we are right now? How can this plain English be misinterpreted to mean something that it clearly does not?

Originally posted by filosophia
If only people were to become educated on the issues first.

You are absolutely correct about people needing to become educated on the issues. Also, people need to actually read what is in the Constitution and not just let politicians tell them what is in it. Then, when our lawmakers try to pass something that is unconstitutional, an educated public can stand up and tell them it's bull.

reply to post by OptimusSubprime


I totally agree with you! People think that if it is not listed in the constitution, the government can do it, which is completely wrong. They say that since it does not prohibit the federal government from emitting bills of credit, they can do that, which is wrong, congress only has the power to coin money, not emit bills of credit (even if that were the case the state could not do it and would still have to accept gold and silver as the only legal tender, so multiple arguments can be used to debunk the federal bill of credit assumption thereby making the federal reserve unconstitutional).

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by OptimusSubprime

 

I totally agree with you! People think that if it is not listed in the constitution, the government can do it, which is completely wrong. They say that since it does not prohibit the federal government from emitting bills of credit, they can do that, which is wrong, congress only has the power to coin money, not emit bills of credit (even if that were the case the state could not do it and would still have to accept gold and silver as the only legal tender, so multiple arguments can be used to debunk the federal bill of credit assumption thereby making the federal reserve unconstitutional).

Yes, and they key word there is in fact COIN. It doesn't say PRINT. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 was where it all started going downhill.

Originally posted by tsawyer2
Personally, I hold the view that the General Welfare clause should be interpreted like James Madison wanted it to be. That is a narrow construction of the clause, asserting that spending must be at least tangentially tied to one of the other specifically enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate or foreign commerce, or providing for the military, as the General Welfare Clause is not a specific grant of power, but a statement of purpose qualifying the power to tax.

Unfortunately, the Hamiltonian view which is broader, has been upheld by the courts.

Thats funny becouse Hamilton on the direct issue of tax money being set aside for the poor or indegent called this idea "the vapors of a melancholy mind".

Originally posted by Logarock

Originally posted by tsawyer2
Personally, I hold the view that the General Welfare clause should be interpreted like James Madison wanted it to be. That is a narrow construction of the clause, asserting that spending must be at least tangentially tied to one of the other specifically enumerated powers, such as regulating interstate or foreign commerce, or providing for the military, as the General Welfare Clause is not a specific grant of power, but a statement of purpose qualifying the power to tax.

Unfortunately, the Hamiltonian view which is broader, has been upheld by the courts.

Thats funny becouse Hamilton on the direct issue of tax money being set aside for the poor or indegent called this idea "the vapors of a melancholy mind".

And here is a quote by Thomas Jefferson on Alexander Hamilton:

Hamilton was indeed a singular character. Of acute understanding, disinterested, honest, and honorable in all private transactions, amiable in society, and duly valuing virtue in private life, yet so bewitched & perverted by the British example, as to be under thoro' conviction that corruption was essential to the government of a nation.

www.marksquotes.com...

In terms of general welfare there is also the United Nations 'Universal Deceleration of Human Rights' www.un.org... . Just something to think about when trying to define the role of government.

reply to post by filosophia

Now thats a rip!