As we embark on this New Year, we are continuing the struggle to regain control of our governments, and escape the fate predicted by our founders. Maintaining the limited form of government our Constitution demands is vital to the preservation of this nation. If we fail, the unfortunate reality will be that we will have failed to maintain the gift of the Republic that was bought for us by the sacrifice of ease, estate, pleasure, and blood of our forefathers.
The first step to correcting a problem is understanding that you have one. We The People seem to be very aware that there is a problem. Our government, on the other hand, seems completely clueless. The President of the United States is issuing executive orders for government pay raises. Congress is engaging in every mode of spending that can be conceived. Both “sides” arguing over how much to tax and no one discusses the profligate spending. Our founders and even their immediate successors warned that this perspective in government would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.
It will take character and resolve to make the painful and difficult decisions to preserve the Republic, so that future generations will have an opportunity to enjoy the Liberty that has been purchased for us. As usual, the oracles of history have some lessons if we would simply listen.
Federal Government Out of Control
Apparently, things began to go awry for the federal government rather early on. An expansion of Congressional power through the forced construction of the General Welfare clause is one of the chief culprits. A great example of this can be found in the Congressional arguments surrounding the Cod Fishery Bill of 1792, a bill to subsidize the Cod Fishing industry. In this, James Madison defines the proper nature of government to a House wanting to unconstitutionally expand its power and reach.
Not an Indefinite Government but a Limited Government
Madison says, “I, sir, have always conceived -- I believe those who proposed the Constitution conceived -- it is still more fully known, and more material to observe, that those who ratified the Constitution conceived -- that this is not an indefinite government, deriving its powers from the general terms prefixed to the specified powers -- but a limited government, tied down to the specified powers, which explain and define the general terms.”
General Welfare Does Not Mean Generally Everything
Yes, we are supposed to have a limited and defined federal government. Madison was very simply explaining that the clause “common defense and general welfare” was not meant to expand the power of the government beyond its limitations, but to describe the purpose of the power delegated within strict confinement of those boundaries. In other words, this clause does not name a power; it simply describes the purpose for the powers named. Then with amazing foresight, Madison explains the consequence of allowing the federal government to turn these “clauses” into defined powers:
“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.”
Limitless Spending Changes the Very Nature of the Republic
Madison, in describing the consequences of this forced construction of the Constitution, prophesies for our day.
“…I venture to declare it as my opinion, that, were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America.”
Government Charity Dangerous Precedent
Yet, America did not listen. In 1831, Congress once again attempts to reconstruct its powers through the artifice of “charity.” This time, the argument is about supplying wood for the Poor of Georgetown. The Mayor of Georgetown sent a letter to the House of Representatives asking for relief of the poor of that city and soliciting the House to grant a donation of some wood in the vaults of the capitol for their use. This sparked a forgotten, yet a very relevant debate for this day.
Congress Cannot Give Public Property For Charity
The first to speak up was Congressman James Polk (D-TN), the future 11th President of the United States. In showing a moral character and commitment to the Constitution that is rarely seen today, Polk said he knew it would be viewed as being ungracious to oppose a resolution in behalf of the suffering poor of this District, or any other. However, he went on to oppose the resolution of the House to offer this support as “the precedent of appropriating the public funds for such a purpose was a bad one. He reasoned that if they allowed this seemingly small act of charity, then “every winter, when the snow fell, or the Potomac was frozen, applications would be made to Congress, and members would be engaged in the dignified object of buying and stowing wood, to give to the poor District of Columbia.” Polk opposed this spending on principle, as the House “had not the power to make the donation requested.” And what began with Georgetown would blossom into dependency throughout the nation. It was not the amount he objected to, but that the “representatives came to legislate on great concerns of the nation, not to give away the public property.” He made a final plea to the House, with their vote, to “put a check” on legislative power.
The next to argue was James Blair, Congressman from South Carolina. Blair gets right to the point; that it is not in the power of Congress to give out donations from the public treasury for the purposes of charity. He correctly reasons:
“If so, it would have power also to vote millions of the public money to feed and clothe the suffering poor. The House had no right to give away the public money for any such purpose; and if gentlemen were disposed to be liberal, let them be liberal out of their own money.”
Polk then moved the floor for the following substitute, by way of amendment:
“That the Sergeant-at-arms be required to deduct from the compensation of the members of this House on day’s pay, and deliver said sum to the Mayor of Georgetown, to be applied to purchase fuel for the paupers of that town: Provided, nevertheless, that such deduction shall be made from the compensation of such members only as vote in favor of the resolution.”
I believe our representatives could learn several lessons from this:
Let ours be the generation that listens from the framers and their experience. Let ours be the generation that avoids what others called the inevitable demise of a Republican government. Let ours be the generation that can claim the victory of Liberty for our future generations.
“Let history be consulted; let the man of experience reflect; nay, let the artificers of monarchy be asked what further materials they can need for building up their favorite system.” Address of the General Assembly to the People of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 1799
Comment
Comment by Susan J.Morningstar on January 2, 2013 at 9:48pm Just today some idiot professor stated that we should get rid of the Constitution...said it was written by landowners, etc. soooo long ago. Look out the drumbeat has started. I knew it was coming, for the Constitution stands as a road block to the left.
Comment by Debrajoe Smith-Beatty on January 2, 2013 at 6:33am Good article.
Comment by Richie Laxton on January 2, 2013 at 12:26am To further bolster your point KrisAnne:
“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, Letter to James Robertson April 20, 1831
Madison; I cannot undertake to lay my finger on the article in the federal constitution which granted a right of the congress of expending on objects of benevolence the money of their constituents. Annals of Congress house of representatives 3rd Congress, first session, page170 (1794)
“[Congressional jurisdiction of power] is limited to certain enumerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any.” – James Madison, Federalist 14
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined . . . to be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” – James Madison, Federalist 45
“If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions.” – James Madison, 1792
“This specification of particulars [the 18 enumerated powers of Article I, Section 8] evidently excludes all pretension to a general legislative authority, because an affirmative grant of special powers would be absurd as well as useless if a general authority was intended.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 83
“No legislative act … contrary to the Constitution can be valid. To deny this would be to affirm that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.” – Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 78
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1798
"The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits." –Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson insisted the Tenth Amendment was “the foundation of the Constitution” and added, “to take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn … is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.”
Writing about the “general welfare” clause in 1791, Thomas Jefferson saw the danger of misinterpreting the Constitution. The danger in the hands of Senators and Congressmen was “that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.”
Comment by Mary Vaughan on January 1, 2013 at 11:27pm Donald, your comment hits the mark. I have been saying over and over,we need to take a huge step back. Back to the foundation of our country. The basics, if you will. Follow the original policies set up to have a free and just society. Government has overstepped its position and its time for things to change. Your 12 year plan sounds spot on to me. Unfortunately, the "bleeding hearts" living in kumbaya land can't see that the government is bleeding America. Do they not see how much money the American people generate? Do they also not see how much our government SPENDS? Do they not see the lies, the corruption, the manipulation we are subjected to daily? If the government wasn't "selling us out" all the time, they wouldn't need to continually take more and more of our money. If the American people had a President that wasn't ENCOURAGING citizens to be dependant upon government hand-outs, people would HAVE to get off their butts and do some problem solving and figure out how THEY could feed, house, and clothe THEMSELVES. On another note, some questions, I would like to know. Why oh why does our government ENCOURAGE more refugees and immigrants into a nation that is trillions in debt? Why has our government ALLOWED illegal immigrants to STAY in this country AND put them on a welfare system INTENDED for LEGAL citizens? The current immigration level surpasses the birth and death rate of legal citizens. Since the government has an agenda that goes against our Constitution, it is time for the people to speak up loud and clear and REMIND them that the MASSES of legal American citizens are who provides them with their jobs, their livelihoods, and we don't feel they are doing their jobs to our satisfaction!
Comment by Hector Torres on January 1, 2013 at 10:34pm Replace Bohner, then replace the Republican party, then lets fix the big problems if we still have a chance. If its to late, go the route of our fouding fathers.
Comment by Donald Mack Flippin on January 1, 2013 at 8:48pm I am just going to touch on this very breifly. I taught high school for four
years. For the first year of that career, I was hired to teach on the Stand-
ing Rock Reservation in North Dakota. One of the reasons I was hired was
because as much American Indian blood runs through my veins as exists
within the physical bodies of many of the "Indians" who live on that reser-
vation (though I am not Sioux).
Society on the Res in those days was but a prophecy of what much of
America has become today. There was a joke going around on the Res
back in the early days 1978-1979 (though it WAS NOT a joke at all but
was the truth). A visitor to the Res asks an Indian who was born and raised
on the Res, "What do you do for a living?" Answer: "I am an Indian." The
visitor nods and says, "I understand that, but ___ what do you do for a living?"
Answer: "I understood your question. However, my answer remains the same:
I am an Indian. That is what I do for a living."
That was sad, but ___ for the majority of tribal members who lived on the Res,
that IS what they did for a living ___ they were Indians. Because they were In-
dians, they got free commodities every month, everyone lived in a cheap house
that the government built for them, and everyone received two checks from the
government each month ___ a B.I.A. welfare check, and a check for what was
known as "Buffalo Pay" (because all the buffalo had been killed off a hundred
years earlier).
For me, that was the most depressing year of my life. Because all that the
young people had to do was ___ be Indians. And all of that idle time killed
them off either spiritually or physically. Alcoholism, drugs, drunken traffic
accidents, murders, suicide ___ so much suicide.
I thought then about those people (about my people) what I think now about
half of the population of the United States: THIS WILL NOT (CANNOT) CON-
TINUE!!! Oh, it cannot be stopped all of a sudden, but it can be stopped and
completely reversed in 12 years!
How?
It will take a true leader, one who will announce to one and all: "With the ex-
ception of the elderly who are presently drawing Social Security, every human
being who is living in this nation and is on welfare (be it disability, food stamps,
general welfare, free medical care, free housing, etc.) will receive a 10% in-
crease in cash, goods, and/or services FOR THIS ONE YEAR. During this one
year period, there will be a base established for every person drawing benefits,
and that base will be the 110% that each will receive during this first year. BUT,
beforewarned! For the next ten years, that base will be reduced by 10% each
and every year. Therefore, each individual has one year to learn how to live on
10% less than what was received during the previous 12 months, etc., etc., etc.
After the end of 11 years, you will be on your own. The 12th year, no one who
is now receiving benefits will be receiving benefits any longer. As far as the
U.S. government is concerned (11 years from now), if you work, you eat; if you
don't work, you starve.
End of story; end of problem.
Now ___ what to do with all of those federal workers who are not supposed to
be working for the federal government in the first place (not according to our
Constitution) ___?
Semper Fi!
Comment by David Farrar on January 1, 2013 at 8:45pm I don't know about anybody else, but I support the re-institution of the 2% FICA 'payment', for I hesitate to call it a tax. But I see the MSM thinks this will get Republican Tea Party supporters all upset. I say it's about time they start paying into the system again.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Comment by Sally on January 1, 2013 at 7:25pm Don't sign the stupid Bill and don't raise the debt ceiling!!!!! Just stopped the darn Spending!!! Don't pay the Government workers. !!!
Hussein isn't our Dictator!!!!
Yes the Congress can do it.. they hold the purse.!!!
Comment by Pat Chadwell on January 1, 2013 at 7:07pm Until the white house and staff are replaced it is only going toget worse, for nothing in the white house is legal...
© 2013 Created by Judson Phillips.
You need to be a member of Tea Party Nation to add comments!
Join Tea Party Nation