AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

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;

THE GENERAL WELFARE CLAUSE
WHY DON’T WE LISTEN TO GEORGE WASHINGTON AND JAMES MADISON AND PULL THE CONSTITUTION OUT OF THE FIRE BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE ?
by JOHN W. BUGLER

We Americans find ourselves faced with the disquieting specter of a five trillion dollar national debt, a sum truly inconceivable. Many economists and politicians tell us this debt portends a disastrous financial collapse in the future and we worry. Once debt free, we are now the largest debtor nation in the world and as we find ourselves on the precipice we are confounded as to how we got there. For answers, however, we need look no further than the farewell address of our first President, george washington, who, in reference to our constitution, warned,

"Let there be no change [in the Constitution] by usurpation. For though this, in one instance may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."

Change in the constitution by usurpation? When did that happen? It happened in 1937!

Few americans realize that up until 1937 the Congress of the United States conducted its business within the boundaries of seventeen enumerated powers granted under Article I Section 8 of the United States Constitution. [Appx. 1] these powers defined clearly the areas of national purposes over which Congress could enact legislation including the allocation of funds and levying of taxes. Anything not set down in the enumerated powers was considered outside the purview of the national government and hence, a matter for the states. There were occasional challenges to the concept but it was not until Franklin Roosevelt's new deal that it was attacked in deadly earnestness.

Ill winds prevailed against the Constitution in the 1930'S. The country was in the depression and Franklin D. Roosevelt asked for extraordinary "powers similar to those necessary in time of war," to meet the emergency. Poorly crafted legislation, some of it not printed in time for floor vote were rammed through a docile and Compliant 73RD Congress. Everything he asked for was given, with little or no debate.

The first of the new deal statutes to reach the Supreme Court for review, arrived in January 1935. in the sixteen months following, The court decided ten major cases or groups of cases involving new deal statutes. In eight instances out of ten the decisions went in favor of the United States Constitution and against the new deal. Eight of the ten pieces of "must legislation" were found to be unconstitutional.

The President reacted as one would after having received a kick in a sensitive area. He went to the american people with a fireside chat and stated
"we have therefore, reached the point as a nation where we must take action to save the Constitution from the Court and the Court from itself." (March 9,1937) [II [P.754]

The President declared war on the Supreme Court.

To appreciate the depth of FDR's resolve in such issues, one need only read his correspondence to representative Snyder of Pennsylvania asking Congress to pass the national bituminous coal conservation act regardless of any doubts, "however reasonable," that it might have about the bill's Constitutionality. It appeared in this case at least, the President was urging Congress to disregard the Constitution. [2] [p.738]

"In November 1936 the Democratic Party won an overwhelming victory at the polls. The election confirmed the Roosevelt administration in power and inspired the President to attempt a reorganization of the Judiciary in order to win control of that last remaining outpost of conservative Constitutionalism, the United States Supreme Court." [2] [P.749]

Constitutional historians refer to what happened next as the "Revolution of 1937." The President proposed that for each sitting justice over the age of seventy there be appointed one new Justice to "help them with their case load." In reality FDR wanted to pack the court with six additional justices willing to declare all of his "must legislation" Constitutional.

Chief Justice Hughes was traumatized. He looked for a way to disengage the Presidents plan which appeared almost certain to pass both houses and be signed into law. What to do? What was about to happen would ultimately lead our country to the clear and present danger of economic insolvency.

One observer noted "Hughes was profoundly convinced that what was at stake in the crises precipitated by the [Presidents] court plan was nothing less than the fate of the Supreme Court's historic role as guardian of the Constitution." He went on to state that What happened next was a "decision to retreat in the immediate skirmish in order to insure victory in the larger, struggle for judicial supremacy." [3] CP.111)

The supreme court at the time consisted of four conservatives, three liberals, one moderate, and one swing. The liberals were; Stone, Cardozo and Brandeis. The conservatives were: McReynolds, Sutherland, Butler, and Van Deventer. The moderate was Hughes. The swing was Roberts.

Hughes prevailed on Roberts to desert the Conservative camp, swing over with him and join the three liberals in declaring the social security cases [Steward Machine Co. v. Davis (301 us 548, May 24, 1937)] Constitutional.[4] [P.56] This Roberts did, and by so doing, took the wind from the sails of the President's court packing plan. It went back to committee and died. one Administration official called the court's action, "the switch in time that saved nine."

This decision said in effect, Congress would no longer be held to enumerated powers but instead could tax and spend for anything; so long as it was for "general welfare."

But the words "General Welfare" in the introduction to the enumerated powers of Article I Section 8 were never intended to be an object for extension of the power to tax and spend; and up until the cases noted above, no court ever so averred.[Appx. 1]

The supreme court surrendered to the new deal on the most fundamental of constitutional issues. "it is scarcely conceivable that Chief Justice Hughes and Justice Roberts... were unaware of the political implications of their move. the President had lost a battle but won a war. In a remarkable series of decisions . ..the Court executed the most abrupt change of face in its entire history..."-[2] [p.753-754]

Justice Roberts, writing in 1951, said in effect: "We voted against the Constitution to save the Court."

His exact words were:
Looking back it is difficult to see how the Court could have resisted the popular urge ... an insistence by the Court on holding Federal power to what seemed its appropriate orbit when the Constitution was adopted might have resulted in even more radical changes to our dual structure than those which have gradually accomplished through the extension of limited jurisdiction conferred on the federal government. [3] [p.I13]
MORE HERE:
http://constitutionalawareness.org/genwelf.html

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.”
-Benjamin Franklin

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his fathers has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.”
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Joseph Milligan, April 6, 1816

“A wise and frugal government … shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.”
-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1801

“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.”
-Thomas Jefferson

“When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
-Thomas Jefferson to Charles Hammond, 1821. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors, ME 15:332

“The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.”
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to E. Carrington, May 27, 1788

“The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.”
-John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787

James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:
“With respect to the two 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.”

In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
-James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)

“…[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
-James Madison

“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, “Letter to Edmund Pendleton,”
-James Madison, January 21, 1792, in The Papers of James Madison, vol. 14,
Robert A Rutland et. al., ed (Charlottesvile: University Press of Virginia,1984).

“An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among the several bodies of magistracy as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”
-James Madison, Federalist No. 58, February 20, 1788

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
-James Madison, speech to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 16, 1788

http://conservativecolloquium.wordpress.com/2007/11/24/founding-fathers-on-charity-wealth-redistribution-and-federal-govt/

http://www.archives.gov/national-archives-experience/charters/declaration_transcript.html
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Yes, The best sign of wealth is security. It is not stuff. Ownership of stuff is merely evidence of people enjoying their security.

The problem is where in the constitution they are prevented.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

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.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed45.asp
Madison No. 45
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed41.asp
Madison No. 41
Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the 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,'' amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms to raise money for the general welfare.

'But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars.

Sorry, but this is untrue. Stuff is not evidence of people enjoying security. It is evidence of possession of items. Not the same thing at all.

Unless one has the right to hold and use his 'stuff' as he sees fit so long as he does not encroach on the unalienable, legal, civil, and Constitutional rights of others, he is not wealthy. It is indeed security of our freedoms and rights that allows us to become wealthy. As long as the government can take whatever it wants from us, we have no rights, we have no freedom, and we have no wealth.

How are we defning 'wealth' and 'security' differently than you define them?

security refers to ones' ability to maintain their lifestyle when unforeseen events happen

The ownership of stuff is not a sign of wealth, and security refers to ones' ability to maintain their lifestyle when unforeseen events happen; not some imaginary tax-deniers conception that the government cannot use your tax dollars as they see fit, legally.

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=wealth&x=24&y=9
Main Entry: wealth Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: welth also -ltth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -s
Etymology: Middle English welthe, from wele weal
1 obsolete : WEAL, WELFARE, GOOD, HAPPINESS <let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth -- I Cor 10:24 (Authorized Version)>
2 : large possessions : abundance of things that are objects of human desire : abundance of worldly estate : AFFLUENCE, RICHES
3 : abundant supply : large accumulation <piles up a great wealth of detail to show -- Ruth Moore> <wealth of original documents> : PROFUSION <wealth of curly black hair> <described with a wealth of examples>
4 a : all property that has a money value or an exchangeable value <money, wealth, possessions, and particularly the accumulation, retention, and use of them, are the distinguishing mark of the middle classes -- Ray Lewis & Angus Maude> <slaves ... were a wealth to be squandered without limit to make more wealth -- Marjory S. Douglas> b : all material objects that have economic utility; especially : the stock of useful goods having economic value in existence at any one time <national wealth>

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=security&x=26&y=5
Main Entry: 1se·cu·ri·ty Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: skyrd., s-, -rt, -i
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -es
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English securite, from Latin securitat-, securitas, from securus free from care, safe, secure + -itat-, -itas -ity
1 : the quality or state of being secure : as a : freedom from danger : SAFETY <security from famine> <security against aggression> <everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person -- U.N. Declaration of Human Rights> <seeking after the illusion of certainty ... in the form of a quest for absolute security -- E.N.Griswold> b archaic : carefree or cocky overconfidence <security is mortals' chiefest enemy -- Shakespeare> c : freedom from fear, anxiety, or care <this need for security dates back into infancy -- K.C.Garrison> <security ... thought of as a harmony between internal needs and the social availability of the means for their satisfaction -- W.C.Olson> <my one chance of security lies in fixing attention solely on the first chapter -- Arnold Bennett> d (1) : freedom from uncertainty or doubt : CONFIDENCE, ASSURANCE <knowing she still had the security of his faithful devotion -- Morley Callaghan> <distinguished by a certain security of judgment -- J.R.Lowell> (2) : sureness of technique <the cellist plays with great security but overlooks opportunities to let the sunlight in -- Arthur Berger> e : basis for confidence : GUARANTEE <our plan gives us no security that we shall get the steam engine -- G.B.Shaw> f : FIRMNESS <security of attachment> : DEPENDABILITY, STABILITY <the security of a knot> <a moral poise, a security of values that is very rare in our age -- Irving Howe & Eliezer Greenberg>
2 a : something given, deposited, or pledged to make certain the fulfillment of an obligation (as the payment of a debt) : property given or serving to make secure the enjoyment or enforcement of a right : GUARANTY, PLEDGE <the security is poor> b : one who becomes surety for another or engages himself for the performance of another's obligation : SURETY <was willing to go security for his friend> <fined and ordered to find securities for good behavior -- Edward Jenks>
3 : a written obligation, evidence, or document of ownership or creditorship (as a stock, bond, note, debenture, or certificate) giving the holder the right to demand and receive property not in his possession <a government security> <negotiable securities>; specifically : one issued to investors to finance a business enterprise
4 : something that secures : DEFENSE, PROTECTION, GUARD <their one source of security in a glowering alien climate -- A.R.Marcus>: as a : measures taken (as by a military unit) to ensure against surprise attack <the battalion ... set up security -- Walter Bernstein> b : measures taken (as by a national government or a governmental unit) to guard against espionage, observation, sabotage, and surprise <security prevents the reporting of actual production figures -- New Republic> c : protection against economic vicissitudes <government guarantees for old age security -- T.W.Arnold> <the very heavy emphasis that younger men are now placing on ... security -- Fortune> d : penal custody <the new prison system ... provides for the care of offenders on the basis of classification as to custody (maximum, medium, and minimum security) -- C.E.Johnson>
5 : the resistance of a cryptogram to cryptanalysis measured usually by the time and effort needed to solve it

security refers to ones' ability to maintain their lifestyle when unforeseen events happen