Robo
Verified User
There has been some debate here lately about the “General Welfare Clause” of our Constitution, (Article One, Section Eight).
Here’s Thomas Jefferson’s interpretation.
“To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, to lay taxes of providing for the general welfare. For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase 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.” (Thomas Jefferson to George Washington)
Here’s Alexander Hamilton’s interpretation,
Alexander Hamilton, only after the Constitution had been ratified,[18] argued for a broad interpretation which viewed spending as an enumerated power Congress could exercise independently to benefit the general welfare, such as to assist national needs in agriculture or education, provided that the spending is general in nature and does not favor any specific section of the country over any other
Here’s the challenge to the progressive left and anybody else who disagrees with Jefferson’s interpretation.
Why is Jefferson’s interpretation not correct? Why, as Jefferson noted, doesn’t any other interpretation, (including Hamilton’s) render the Constitution to a “single clause” and make the rest of the Constitution null and void?
By what authority does the federal government/Congress & Presidents author and enforce social programs, subsidies and bail outs that are NOT enumerated in the Constitution as a power of the federal government?
Of what value is the 10th amendment to the Constitution or any other amendment or article in the Constitution if the general welfare clause is the trumping clause that determines any and all actions the federal government wishes to take can be claimed to be “in the general welfare” and thereby constitutional?
Here’s Thomas Jefferson’s interpretation.
“To lay taxes to provide for the general welfare of the United States, that is to say, to lay taxes of providing for the general welfare. For the laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase, not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please, which might be for the good of the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase 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.” (Thomas Jefferson to George Washington)
Here’s Alexander Hamilton’s interpretation,
Alexander Hamilton, only after the Constitution had been ratified,[18] argued for a broad interpretation which viewed spending as an enumerated power Congress could exercise independently to benefit the general welfare, such as to assist national needs in agriculture or education, provided that the spending is general in nature and does not favor any specific section of the country over any other
Here’s the challenge to the progressive left and anybody else who disagrees with Jefferson’s interpretation.
Why is Jefferson’s interpretation not correct? Why, as Jefferson noted, doesn’t any other interpretation, (including Hamilton’s) render the Constitution to a “single clause” and make the rest of the Constitution null and void?
By what authority does the federal government/Congress & Presidents author and enforce social programs, subsidies and bail outs that are NOT enumerated in the Constitution as a power of the federal government?
Of what value is the 10th amendment to the Constitution or any other amendment or article in the Constitution if the general welfare clause is the trumping clause that determines any and all actions the federal government wishes to take can be claimed to be “in the general welfare” and thereby constitutional?
