Bail-out questions

[yguy]

Originally Posted by maddog

Well, I disagree with that. The society has to function somehow, and under social compact and democratic principles, we elect representatives to act for us. We the People are the sovereign; we have to carry out certain functions, and the sole power granted by the people to do so is the power to tax. It's not "illegitimate," it's agreed upon. It's right there in the Constitution. Therefore, the tax revenues are not "your money," they are "our" money -- that without which there is no state.

Madison, the chief architect of the Constitution, had this to say to such as you:

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.

What do you know that he didn't?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by yguy

Madison, the chief architect of the Constitution, had this to say to such as you:

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.

What do you know that he didn't?

I think the following covers it.

Article I: The Legislature
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
Clause 1:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

[yguy]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I think the following covers it.

Article I: The Legislature
Section 8 - Powers of Congress
Clause 1:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

And you think Madison was ignorant of that provision?

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by yguy

And you think Madison was ignorant of that provision?

Ah, chief justice yguy - practicing cartoon constitutional law again, are we?

Several things to illuminate your trolling mind:

1. Madison authored parts of the Constitution, not all of it - before you try to connect Madison to Article I you need to prove that he, in fact, wrote it;

2. Whether Madison believed it was constitutional or not is hardly the point; the Constitution has mechanisms (amendments, court appeals, etc.) to decide questions of constitutionality. All such challenges to programs launched under "general welfare" have been failed challenges;

3. On the question of general welfare, Madison had lost an argument to Hamilton. And out of spite and stubbornness he took the position you quoted above as a direct result of losing that argument with Hamilton. Britannica:

Elected to the new House of Representatives, Madison sponsored the first 10 amendments to the Constitution—the Bill of Rights—placing emphasis in debate on freedom of religion, speech, and press. His leadership in the House, which caused the Massachusetts congressman Fisher Ames to call him “our first man,” came to an end when he split with Secretary of the Treasury Hamilton over methods of funding the war debts. Hamilton's aim was to strengthen the national government by cementing men of wealth to it; Madison sought to protect the interests of Revolutionary veterans.

Hamilton's victory turned Madison into a strict constructionist of the congressional power to appropriate for the general welfare. He denied the existence of implied power to establish a national bank to aid the Treasury. Later, as president, he asked for and obtained a bank as “almost [a] necessity” for that purpose, but he contended that it was constitutional only because Hamilton's bank had gone without constitutional challenge. Unwillingness to admit error was a lifelong characteristic. The break over funding split Congress into Madisonian and Hamiltonian factions, with Fisher Ames now calling Madison a “desperate party leader” who enforced a discipline “as severe as the Prussian.” (Madisonians turned into Jeffersonians after Jefferson, having returned from France, became secretary of state.)

Notice how Madison - while claiming that the national bank was unconstitutional - nevertheless made use of it while he was President, trying to quibble away his previous attack on Hamilton over....(wait for it): establishing a national bank, via the general welfare clause. So much for Madison taking a consistent view on the general welfare clause of the Constitution.

So your quotation from Madison above, when viewed with proper context, is actually the fruit of a bitter man seeking revenge against an enemy and cannot be viewed as his unbiased commentary on the welfare clause. Given the above, you haven't even begun to support your case.

Ah, yguy - how *little* you know about the topics you deign to pontificate upon.