And the key words are: "to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;"
The common defense is explicitly stated and agreed to by every American. Now, the "general welfare" statement is of the US, not of each citizen of the US. The entitlements are explicitely for the "general welfare" of specific groups of citizens to the detriment of other US citizens. Any entitlement that improves the general welfare of one citizen by harming the general welfare of another citizen can not be considered "providing" for the general welfare of the United States.
Mis-use of the words "general welfare" will be the key that Hillary holds and expects all Liberals to use to open the wallets of all the productive members of our society.
Any entitlement that improves the general welfare of one citizen by harming the general welfare of another citizen can not be considered "providing" for the general welfare of the United States.
The limit on that still resides in the hands of the electorate, exercising that "eternal vigilance" that is the price of attaining and keeping freedom.
The problem we deal with however is the disconnect between largess and the perception of its costs by large segments of the electorate.
The exercise of "eternal vigilance", is a bit limited with government imposed horse blinders on.
Walter Williams nails the essential:
"So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?"
Don't perceive the cost, ... pigout