[mrsmith]

Yes, matters that the Founders did not address- or were anbiguous or divided upon- are wide open to debate .

But when the understanding was universally agreed upon- what's the point in even discussing it?

In fairness, this thread has Crockett's (apocryphal?) remarks upon domestic charity not foreign charity. The federal power domestically was very limited and it is not at all clear that it is constitutional for the feds to give money to American citizens. Like Madison, I personally don't think so.

[LS]

You make an interesting point on "clearly understood matters." For example, there was never any mention of the word "gold" in the Federal Reserve Act because everyone at the time understood that banks would continue to use gold as their "reserve currency." But, of course, that quickly changed.

BTW, if I haven't pinged you alerady, please check out my newly released book, "A Patriot's HIstory of the United States" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1595230017/qid=1092168718/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/002-0543492-4011203?v=glance&s=books