How’s that for being Captain Obvious? But, Roy, if it is for benevolent purposes then that is different, right? WRONG! The Framers of the American Constitution in 1787 never intended for the money of the American people to be forcibly taken from us or the federal coffers and used for benevolent purposes. What I am going to say is almost ancient history now in the light of the ever changing situation in America but I believe it is still relevant and needs addressing.
In 1794 when the U.S. Congress voted to appropriate $15,000 for relief for French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo (now Haiti) to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison disapproved. He is arguably the father of the U.S. Constitution and knew the intent of the wording and provisions. He said, “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.” Where is Mr. Madison today? He does not exist in the U.S. Congress.
The normal federal budget has surpassed $2.5 Trillion and at least two-thirds of it is spent on “objects of benevolence.” So much for following the Constitution as politicians are so adept at insisting the other party do but exempt themselves. We have had a few, precious few, presidents who held the sentiments and understanding of Mr. Madison.
In 1854, President Franklin Pierce vetoed a bill to appropriate funds for the mentally ill. That would get him crucified today and probably impeached. He said, “I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity.” He insisted that approving the measure, “would be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of States is founded.” Wow! Many Americans, if not most, disagree with those two gentlemen. I do not!
President Grover Cleveland vetoed several congressional appropriations based on those very sentiments, insisting there was no constitutional authority for them. If something is unconstitutional even if it is deemed for benevolent purposes it is still unconstitutional. President Cleveland argued, “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit.”
Mr. Madison and Jefferson both agreed that it was not in the purview of Congress to do whatever it wanted with federal money and attempt to promote the General Welfare. They argued that if that transpired then the Government would no longer be a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions. They did not believe, nor do I, that Congress is afforded Unlimited Powers in the Constitution.
Today, the Democrats and far too many Republicans have gone off the deep end in pursuit of benevolence. They are spending like the proverbial ‘drunken sailor’ and as though money was in abundant supply or grew on trees. The relief or stimulus packages passed and the ones being proposed were and are laden with indefensible spending for indefensible purposes.
Yet, few are arguing the Constitutionality of the attempts. The focus seems to be, “does it help me and my party in seeking reelection.” That is terribly flawed and something that should trouble every Lover of Freedom and American Patriot. If you claim to be a Constitutionalist or a Conservative and you support this insane spending, I argue you are losing sight of those positions. Go ahead and throw something at the computer screen and immediately find the unfriend button on Facebook. That is my view.
Yes, I care about human misery and suffering. No, I do not want people to starve. However, I do not believe that it is Constitutionally defensible for the federal government to take on that responsibility. Biblically, it is first the family, secondly the church, thirdly the community, then possibly the State but not the Federal Government. Charity and caring for the poor and needy is not a constitutional function of the federal government.
I bristle at the prospects of my tax dollars being used to bail out incompetent and liberal profligacy those Blue States have engaged. Some of them have virtually bankrupted their states in pursuit of their brand of benevolent spending and seeking to make their citizens beholding to the government for sustenance. I bristled when Governor Gavin Newsom of California attempted to blackmail the federal government unless billions were forwarded to his state. He has doled out millions in taxpayer dollars to care for the illegals in his state and wants the rest of us to bail him out. His threat to lay off first responders should end his political career, but it won’t.
We have witnessed the rise of mini tyrants in various states and cities during this incredibly trying destruction of our economy. The fear engendered in people over COVID-19 has opened the door for unhindered abridgment of our Constitutional Liberties and Freedoms. The willingness of Blue States to allow the rioting and looting to go unchallenged is a threat to our Republic. Our Constitution has been shredded in more ways than can be enumerated, largely by those mini tyrants.
If the American people in those states reelect those, now openly despotic tyrants, it is difficult to sympathize with the good people of those states who detest what has been happening and want constitutionality to prevail. I won’t be so callous as to say, “Move Away From There!” Some cannot because of family, livelihood, and other reasons so they are stuck. I weep for them.
Imagine, the people in those states who openly protest being called “domestic terrorists” because they want the constitution to be observed and followed. Hillary Clinton and some of those governors identify them by that distinction. If they are ‘terrorists’ then sign me up. I call them defenders of the Constitution and Freedom and that would, in my view, make them patriots willing to fight tyranny at home and abroad.
In today’s world, if you disagree with the Left you are deemed a terrorist, a racist, suffer from some phobia, and are without empathy or sympathy. They deem you to be a heartless Republican who wants grandmother to die and people to suffer. They are authoritarians and totalitarians who apparently believe they have a divine right to rule and determine what we can or cannot believe or do. They do not consider any rights as inalienable because they do not believe in the giver of those rights. They are advocates of a global agenda that seeks to usher in a New World Order that is anti-American at every level.
I could never support a political party that wants abortion on demand, illegals to be afforded the same rights as legal citizens, and disregards our rights to personal property. A party that bans God from their platform, strips any mention of the Bible from public venues, and ignores the founding principles of America I can never support. Love me or hate me, I stand for Faith, Family, and Freedom and will do so until God takes me home.
Governor Abbott in Texas tweeted a chart that infuriated the Left but was refreshing for my eyes and heart. I share it for your own perusal.
God bless you and God bless America!