Cardin Townhall Question Joshua Lyons 081209

[macdogq]

Constitution did never say to purchase products or sevice forceibly that public do not need. Liberals love to twist words of constitution.

Argument against the leftists is pointless.

Leftists are self seving, and put selfishness before the good of this country.

[nelsonknows]

Under Article 1, Section 8, clause 1, Congress doesn't collect taxes for the benefit of the PEOPLE, nor does it collect duties, imposts and excises for the benefit of the PEOPLE, Congress Collects these taxes and fees to operate the GOVERNMENT as it does to provide for the general welfare of the operation of the GOVERNMENT.

[Joshua222md]

@nelsonknows - Exactly!

[nelsonknows]

The General Welfare Clause in Article 1, Section 8, clause 1 ONLY allows Congress to legislate legislation pertaining to the general welfare of the GOVERNMENT, not of the PEOPLE and may only legislate those enumerated powers otherwise named in Article 1 Section 8.

[alleygata]

I heard Joshua speak at a Tea Party. This guy is powerful, full of conviction and has DONE HIS HOMEWORK!!

[lbxx00]

No one party is to blame for this mess. The Constitution has been sh*t on equally by Democrats and Republicans. The men and women on the hill are no longer there to serves us, we, the people. They are there to line their pockets and make their "pals" wealthy by using our tax dollars.

[ReginaldL]

Holy crap - youtube took my comment!

Anyway, the case in 1936 that reinterpreted the general Welfare clause (Article 1 Section 8 Clause 1) as an enumerated power is United States vs Butler.

Hope this comment posts. It's my 8 or 9th attempt.

[sumkindazombie]

The Constitution enumerates the power to provide for the common defense and "promote the general Welfare". Promote, not provide, not legislate, promote.

[ReginaldL]

sumkindazombie - reread Constitution Article 1 Section 8 Clause 1 not the preamble.

[sumkindazombie]

US Constitution Article 1 Section 8 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;

[sumkindazombie]

"provide for the common Defence and general

Welfare of the United States" not the people, the country.

[ReginaldL]

You original quoted "promote" not "provide". Now you are saying the difference is United States means country not people. I'm not sure that is a strong argument against Congress' tax and spend powers. I'm open to persuasion.

However, I do think that United States v Butler casting the clause 1 provide.. general Welfare as an enumerated power is the true source of a lot of this country's woes and that it hasn't been interpreted that way for a very long time.

[sumkindazombie]

You asked me to re-read it, I did. I was quoting the preamble first, but the Constitution itself does not and would not contradict the preamble. United States does mean the country "We the people of the United States" means the people. I am certain they wrote what they meant. An interstate road would be an example of Congress' power to provide for the general welfare of the Country by improving interstate commerce, whereas legislating health care provides for specific welfare of individuals.

[Knot4Profit]

Me thinks the Senator is an idiot, a scoundrel or a traitor... or a combination of all the above!

[azdebi]

Something screwy is going on w/the posts on this site...weird! Some post, some don't and some just disappear...

[ReginaldL]

What the heck happens to one's comments? Some post, others disappear?

[azdebi]

You Tube is being censored...

[azdebi]

Why am I having problems posting here?

[azdebi]

Where were we? Oh, let's see, working hard, paying our bills and and having faith that we weren't electing a bunch of crooks to public office...hummmm...NOT ANY MORE! Hey sampsonblk...bet you don't own a copy of the Constitution or the Federalist Papers...keep drinkin' that Koolaid my friend...ignorance is truly bliss!

[azdebi]

Hey Sheriff Joe Supporter...any chance you know how to, or would be willing to post a video in response to this...or know someone who could? I'd love someone to put a response video up to follow this to include the wording "the founding Fathers even said that the "general welfare" clause is ONLY to be used within the confines of the enumerated powers of Art 1, Sect 8...(refer to the Federalist Papers)...The Senator was arguing incorrectly! This bill is unconstitutional!

[ReginaldL]

To be sure, the Supreme Court has interpreted Article 1 Section 8 both ways from what I read. From 1800 to 1936 general Welfare was interpreted as restricted to the enumerated powers and not a power in of itself.

[cbreitel]

So, the general welfare clause was basically meaningless, then. That's what you're suggesting? The framers of the Constitution put it in there just for kicks?

[ReginaldL]

That was a great question, Joshua! Thanks for asking it for us all. Cardin's answer basically was Congress can do anything it wants regardless of the enumerated powers.

[Joshua222md]

Thank you. I knew how he would answer, but the question needs to be asked in a public forum to all of our representatives. I'm scheduled to be on FOX & Friends tomorrow morning (8/16/09) during the early part of the 8am hour. Hopefully, I'll have the opportunity to keep the enumerated powers in the conversation.

[cbreitel]

I love how you asked him a question by demanding he provide you an answer that doesn't contain the actual correct answer.

The irony is that if a health care reform bill doesn't qualify as providing for the "general welfare" of the nation, nothing does.

[Joshua222md]

You should love it more that he wasn't prepared to answer...and that he invoked the Articles of Confederation. Here's a good commentary of my position on the GW clause:

Do a google search for congress-a-wealth-eating-virus (by 10th Amendment Center)

I also believe that one cannot simply look at each piece of the Constitution independent from the entire purpose of its crafting. When interpreting, one must reflect on founders vision on Self-evident truths, Unalienable rights, & Natural Law.

[cbreitel]

Actually, considering that there is no real constitutional issue here that he would have studied beforehand, he was surprisingly WELL prepared to answer your question.

Your view on how a clause should be interpreted sometimes comes into play, but only when there is an ambiguity at issue. There isn't one here. The federal government isn't proposing interference into any issues of state law.

[myralangerhas]

sampson, your knowledge of the Constitution is vastly, ....er, uh, nonexistent.

[arpadzigisfari]

I protested the war in Iraq 3 times before it started and oppose Obamacare. I voted for Gore but did not hang on to anger about the election. I now consider myself to be conservative.

The Founding Fathers wanted limited government and wanted us to avoid entangling alliances. We need to return to our roots.

We need to stop labeling each other (racist, bigot, wing nuts, etc.) and start listening respectfully to each other. Ive been on both sides and most people are well-meaning and sincere.

[sampsonblk]

Hey friend, your constitutional points are absurd.

Congress doesn't have the express authority to build roads either. But I bet you don't complain when you drive in the interstate.

Did you complain about constitutionality of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars?

Well you SHOULD have. That was the time to prove yourself a supporter of the constitution.

[ReginaldL]

sampsonblk - read the Constitution and get back to us. Read Federalist Papers #41 for James Madison's view of Article 1 Section 8 general Welfare.

The Constitution has been trampled on since it's inception. That doesn't make the trampling justified and suitable for correction. The Supreme Court can screw up, too.

It's about time we citizens realized the govt works for us and start calling our representatives when they overstep their authority.

[sampsonblk]

I have read the constitution many times. What is your point?

Selective outrage is what I see. And none of it is actually based on the constitution, which many of the protesters cared nothing about till Obama got into office.

Where were you when the 4th amendment was discarded?

[cbreitel]

James Madison's point of view is that of one of many framers of the Constitution. Not everyone agreed with him. The starting point of any discussion of constitutional provisions is the plain language of the clause, and the clause you're fighting about doesn't support the position you've taken.

[ReginaldL]

It's a general clause followed by an enumeration of specifics. Madison's view was there would be no point in the specifics if the general clause meant to include the points enumerated and those not enumerated. The general clause serves as an introduction to the following particulars. From 1800 to 1936 that view point was supported by the Supreme Court (from what I've read).

[cbreitel]

I don't know what cases you refer to since the GW clause hasn't been the subject of significant Supreme Court litigation relative to other clauses concerning Congressional powers. And more importantly, I still fail to understand what restraint on state powers any reform of national health care would pose in the first place. I'm not seeing a constitutional issue at all.

[ReginaldL]

I don't know the motivation of the change in the 1930's. I believe it was actually a conservative Supreme Court that tossed aside 136 years of precedence and declared the general Welfare clause an actual enumerated power and the specified powers that follow some sort of verbal ornaments.

Note the explosion in the Federal gov't size and power since then. The it's been open season on the Treasury ever since. A spoils system has developed and it'll corrupt us all.

[cbreitel]

I'm not aware of any case that's held the GW clause to be an "actual enumerated power". Yes, the court scaled back its restrictions on Congressional powers over the decades but that was largely due to its refined view of the 10th amendment and the interstate commerce clause. It's reached a fair balance between the two these days in my opinion.

[JSenator06]

No, congress doesn't have the power to provide for healthcare, they merely have the power to legilslative in areas specifically granted to the Fed by the US Constitution, and the power to enforce the US constitution through legislation. That is ALL!

[tomandmary55]

where was obama born?

[SheriffJoeSupporter]

Joshua,

Bravo! This is the dirty little secret about much of what Congress legislates -- they usurp the people's and state's powers. Why? Because "we the people" don't read the Constitution and, unlike you, demand they abide by it as their Article VI oath to support the Constitution and enact only laws in pursuance of it.

"We the people" must relearn our civics lessons and then become precinct committeemen in the Republican Party to retake it and then retake the Congress and Presidency.

[TallieKay]

Your just jealous your not an American with true freedoms and rightsif you are an American you are the IDIOT teymaniand should be first on the TrainJust keep drinking the KOOLADE your gona need it..

[Article1Section8]

Wow, this is powerful and gutsy. Would that more people had the courage to say what you did. You've properly identified the problem with our politicians ignoring Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution.

[teymani]

americans are a bunch of idiots .they deserve what they got.