[rintintin]

Which part of the Constitution Authorizes the Congress to allocate funds to the Citizenry in the name of subsistence?“

The “general welfare” pledge in the preamble?

I admire your principles. I hope they don’t doom the GOP at the polls in Nov.

[fhayek]

Here's my problem. I agree that it isn't up to the government to provide subsistence. People should be encouraged to get jobs. BUT, when the government is mandating that legal business are not allowed to open, then they can't just tell the displaced workers that they are on their own.

[eyeamok]

The preamble says “promote the general welfare” not Provide, and the preamble isn’t actually part of the constitution legally speaking. But I see this as a State Issue, not a Federal One. Personally I think we should abolish the food stamp program and the Feds could setup a Soup Kitchen on Every Corner in America that needs one.

[A Navy Vet]

"The “general welfare” pledge in the preamble?"

I always had a problem with that clause. IMO, it is too sweeping. It is used in every liberal give-away the dem/socs want. Although the Founding Fathers were far beyond my intellect, I've always thought that they should not have included that clause. It is just too damn vague and open-ended, and is the root of many of our nation's problems.

Maybe if they had replaced it with "promote the equal opportunity" or left it out entirely, we wouldn't be heading towards socialism. Of course, the FF's had no way of seeing such a benign statement would be so abused when they included it.

[moehoward]

“ I admire your principles. I hope they don’t doom the GOP at the polls in Nov.”

The optics suck already. The House wants $600 extended to the end of the year, Senate wants $200 for some undetermined time frame.

I can’t believe with what’s at stake the GOP is being penny wise and dollar foolish.