Posted on 05/02/2014 12:46:32 PM PDT by nascarnation
Simply put, the delegates to the first Constitutional Convention had discussed the idea of delegating to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific power to build roads and canals to carry freight, but had dropped the idea. In fact, the following excerpt from Thomas Jefferson's writings reflects this.
“A proposition was made to them to authorize Congress to open canals ... But the whole was rejected [emphasis added], and one of the reasons for rejection urged in debate was, that then they would have a power to erect a bank, which would render the great cities, where there were prejudices and jealousies on the subject, adverse to the reception of the Constitution.” —Jefferson’s Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791.
In fact, President James Madison vetoed a bill by the 14th(?) Congress to build roads and canals, Madison's constitutionally required veto letter emphasizing that, other than postal roads (Clause 7 of Section 8 of Article I), the states have never delegated to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific power to build roads and canals.
Veto of federal public works bill
Interestingly, Madison used wording from the Constitution in his letter to Congress which clearly indicates that federal power to regulate, tax and spend for a national highway system should not be interpolated from Section 8's General Defense or Commerce Clause clause powers.
And with all due respect to the family and supporters of the late President Eisenhower, please consider the following. Although Eisenhower signed the bill which established the nation's interstate highway system, Eisenhower was evidently clueless, as evidenced by Madison's veto of the public works bill, to the idea that Congress first needed to petition the states for a highways amendment to the Constitution. And if the states had chosen to ratify Eisenhower's amendement, then Congress would have had the constitutional authority that it needed to tax and spend to build the nation's highways system, and Eisenhower would have been an even greater hero than he was. So now the USA has an interstate highway system that was arguably build outside the framework of the Constitution imo.
The bottom line is that, unless the states amend the Constitution to allow Congress to lay taxes for maintaining the nation's highway system, Congress should not be laying taxes to maintain and expand the system in order to comply with Justice John Marshall's official clarification of Congress's limited power to lay taxes.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
So interstate highway tolls are arguably a fair way for the people and companies who use the highways to pay for them.
Wasn’t a lot of the money in Barack’s original ‘stimulus’ supposed to go to ‘infrastructure’? I would like to tell all the Dem donors that were the recipients of our hard earned taxpayer monies: GIVE IT BACK!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.