Many to the left are spewing that the Constitution says the government has the power to create a government-run option for healthcare by viture of Article I, Sec. 8 General Welfare clause.
Madison is basically saying to his Anti-consolidationists opponents in their objection that the general Welfare clause will allow for all kinds of fiscal irresponsibility â¦
âDonât be idiots mouthing absurdities. It is obvious that this general statement is qualified and limited by the Constitution itself in what follows. No right reasoning person would ever conclude that that the enumeration of the particulars wouldnât set definitive parameters on the meaning of âgeneral Welfare,â nor would reasonably intelligent people ever conclude that the specifying of the particulars was only intended to confuse and mislead as to what is meant by the âgeneral Welfareâ phrase.â
It seems Madison had the same problem I do in forgetting that truths that are so painfully obvious to one person arenât necessarily obvious to another person. I conclude this because a generation of idiots did rise up mouthing absurdities and justifying it all in the name of the âgeneral Welfareâ clause.
Finally, Madison himself gives a historical lesson as to where the phrase âgeneral Welfareâ came from.
âThe objection here is the more extraordinary, as it appears that the language used by the convention is a copy from the articles of Confederation. The objects of the Union among the States, as described in article third, are âtheir common defense, security of their liberties, and mutual and general welfare. ââ The terms of article eighth are still more identical: âAll charges of war and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury,'â etc. A similar language again occurs in article ninth. Construe either of these articles by the rules, which would justify the construction put on the new Constitution, and they vest in the existing Congress a power to legislate in all cases whatsoever. But what would have been thought of that assembly, if, attaching themselves to these general expressions, and disregarding the specifications, which ascertain and limit their import, they had exercised an unlimited power of providing for the common defense and general welfare? I appeal to the objectors themselves, whether they would in that case have employed the same reasoning in justification of Congress as they now make use of against the convention. How difficult it is for error to escape its own condemnation!â
Madisonâs point here is that this language was used before and nobody concluded what the Anti-consolidationists were concluding, to wit, that the Federal Government had the right to do anything it desired in the name of the âgeneral Welfare,â clause.
In the end all the general Welfare clause allowed was for the Federal Government to promote (which, by the way, is a different word than legislate) the good of the whole people and not any particular special interest group. The ABC legislation of Rooseveltâs New Deal was not for the good of the whole people but rather was political payoff to Rooseveltâs political cronies done in order to help Roosevelt solidify an unbeatable Democratic Electoral college.
So, the âgeneral Welfareâ clause cannot be appealed to in order to justify the ABC legislation of the New Deal. The âgeneral Welfareâ clause cannot be appealed to in order to justify taking money from the taxpayers in order to give money to corporate giants like Archer Daniel Midlands or Boeing. The âgeneral Welfareâ clause does not justify taking money from the taxpayers in order to give Foreign Aid to Saudi Arabia so it can free up their money to build and support Islamic Mosques in America. And finally, the âgeneral Welfareâ clause certainly cannot be appealed to in order to take wages from the taxpayer in order to pay the wages of College teaches who donât know what history says about the âgeneral Welfareâ clause and who are instrumental in shaping a generation of idiots who mouth absurdities. I suggest everyone read Federalist Papers 41.
Test