Posted on 07/21/2009 3:41:31 PM PDT by Federalist Society
Below is Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. This is the Scope of Congress' authority to enact legislation. I'm curious, can someone point me to the one that states that Congress can overhaul the healthcare system, or enact hate crimes legislation, or bail out GM, the banks, etc., cause I'm not seeing it.
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
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 a 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, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And
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.
And it’s even more evident when you read the 10th Amendment.
It is all being herded under the “Interstate Trade” crapola. With out THAT particular law, the ability to regulate interstate trade, we would be SO much better off, because the Fed will have lost it’s tool, the means by which they pass all that socialist crap they are shoving down our throats.
They pack it all into two words: “general welfare”.
One only needs to the packed Supreme Court of FDR. They found unlimited powers in the power to regulate commerce between the states and to regulate commerce within the states because by it’s existence it affected commerce outside the state.
Simple, the power was invented by an activist court. Comforting, Huh!
They think the Commerce Claus threw out the 10th Amendment.
During the last SC session, several justices expressed need for the ‘right case’ to address the commerce clause. They felt the current interpretation was way too broad, and said so. Interesting they would say that.
I read provide for the common defense and general welfare as more of a preamble type statement as to why they are granting the powers that follow that statement. If provide for the general welfare was a power, then the Federal Government would have unlimited power to act, which the framers were fearful of happening. So, I don’t buy those two worlds as a power.
bump
In Obamaland there is no Constitution.
“With respect to the words “general welfare,” I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”—James Madison
I completely agree. But then, they are obviously not listening to us much these days, are they?
I’M WITH YOU!
WHERE IS ONE LAWYER SMART ENOUGH TO CHALLENGE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THESE COMMUNIST ACTS???
I am a lawyer, but evidently I’m not smart enough. I kinda tend to think that those words mean what they mean (Constitution), and you don’t read something into it that’s not there.
Congress = American Politburo
I think the "authority" originated from the same source that decided a "right to privacy" means one has the right to kill unborn children.
You’re correct, FS. The phrase, “...provide for the General Welfare...” is a GOAL, not a GRANT OF AUTHORITY. The authority granted is spelled out and LIMITED. The ultimate GOAL is to maintain a common defense and provide for the general welfare of We, the People... but most specifically by limiting governmental authority and leaving us alone to DO IT OURSELVES.
Hallelujah, Brother or Sister. Amen!
You see, what they do is read things into it that are not there and supply meaning as Constitutional that is not there.
The dims don’t pay any attention to that silly little document. After all, it’s a living thing that they can change as they see fit.
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.