Skip to comments.Republicans Endorse Platform Language to Dismantle Most of the Federal Government*
Posted on 08/31/2012 10:31:57 AM PDT by Kaslin
I wish the Republican Platform was binding.
Why? Because the GOP, for all intents and purposes, has just proposed to eliminate the Department of Education, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of Energy, the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Health and Human Services, along with a host of other government programs, agencies, and departments.
More specifically, they endorsed the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which means they put themselves on record in favor of getting rid of all federal spending and intervention that is inconsistent with the Founding Fathers vision of a limited central government.
Heres some of the story, as reported by The Hill,
All federal spending should be reviewed to ensure powers reserved for the states are not given to the federal government, according to the GOP platform approved Tuesday. The platform language is meant to ensure all federal spending meets the requirements of the 10th amendment, which prohibits state powers from being given to the feds. We support the review and examination of all federal agencies to eliminate wasteful spending, operational inefficiencies, or abuse of power to determine whether they are performing functions that are better performed by the States, the platform reads. These functions, as appropriate, should be returned to the States in accordance with the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
For those of you who dont have your Cato Institute picket Constitutions handy, heres what the 10th Amendment says.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
In other words, the 10th Amendment is basically a back-up plan to re-emphasize that the federal government was prohibited from exercising power in any area other than what is specified in the enumerated powers section of Article I, Section VIII.
And if you look at those enumerated powers, that pretty much invalidates much of what happens in Washington.
Thats the good news. The bad news is that the Republican platform will have less impact on a potential Romney presidency than this blog. In other words, Republicans dont intend to live up to this promise. Heck, they dont even know that they have such a position. Thats why I included the asterisk in the title and must draw your attention to this fine print.
But I suppose its good that they included this language in the platform, even if its merely empty political rhetoric
P.S. If they did abide by the 10th Amendment, it means that Obamacare also would be repealed.
P.P.S. Yes, this implies limits on democracy. Our Founding Fathers, contrary to E.J. Dionnes superficial analysis, were opposed to untrammeled majoritarianism and wanted to make sure 51 percent of the people couldnt vote to rape and pillage 49 percent of the people.
The EPA and NLRB both need to be eliminated, as well.
When you say “commercial operators,” there’s the rub. They’d have to be involved in commerce to be commercial, and if we’re talking about commerce why bring up “navigation”? Because the decision extended the power beyond commerce to non-commercial navigation, that’s why. Otherwise there’s be no controversy and no decision to force kids to study in textbooks.
Oh yes it did apply to intrastate navigation.
As for Wickard, yes it is immeasurably worse for extending the definition of “commerce” to include everything affecting commerce. But did you know, and check me if I’m wrong but I seem to remember the majority opinion in Wickard citing Marshall in Gibbons as having held that navigation was regulatable because it affected commerce. Or at least it was implied. Which is false, since Marshall pretended navigation was commerce, though everyone knows better. But there it is: Gibbon is an explicit inspiration for your bated Wickard.
As for the Clean Air Act, that’s all well and good. But I was talking about water, obviously. I ‘ll eat my hat if the phrase “navigatable waterways” doesn’t pop up any time they want to justify backyard pond regulations.
As for the part about “carriers” such as railroads, you have it backwards. Gibbons was decided in the 1820s when hydrocommerce (if that’s a word) was king. The principle that the feds can meddle with railroads whenever and wherever they want, even on lines that don’t cross borders, came later and was inspired by Gibbons.
By the way, I think Gibbons had a good effect. And it was in line with the intent if the commerce clause, which was to prevent interstate trade wars. Had it been after the 14th amendment and had they struck the state monopoly on steamship passage down on 9th amendment antimonopoly principle I’d be all for it. But they didn’t, and they acted unconstitutionally.
I’ll believe it when I see it on April 15th.
Having interacted with you for many years here on FR, I’d install you in that job in a heartbeat.
The more Ithink about it the more I realize how apt is your choice of the term “commercial operator” for understanding how wrongheaded is our post-Gibbons and more importantly post-Wickard Constitutional mindset. The law struck down in Gibbons conferred a monopoly on some steamship service operating within New York. That service was certainly a commercial enterprise, but in what did its commerce consist? Ferrying passengers across the river? No, that’s navigation, not commerce. Where was the commerce, then? Why, when the passenger bought the ticket, that ‘s when. Thar was a commercial transaction. The rest is what was laid for in the commercial transaction, not the commerce itself.
Whence this notion that whatever a “commercial operator” does is commerce? Not so. Commerce is commerce, and calling navigation, manufacturing, storing, and all the other actions of commercial enterprises commerce is unjustified by common experience and the dictionary.
Marshall had to have his way, partly out if the noble instinct to strike down unearned privilege. But after navigation became commerce later railroad travel was too. Eventually so was manufacturing and everything else done for a buck, and entirely within one stare too. Then anything that affects commerce is commerce, and finally almost not doing anything, at least according to four SCOTUS justices.
Republicans going to refund all the money workers paid into “govt. handouts” like social security and medicare all their working lives? Didn’t think so. The politicians will consider all the money paid into those programs by workers as belonging to the politicians.
Are you talking about Shreveport?
Thank you. That is pretty humbling actually...
the Republican dogs are egg sucking hounds too
they will say anything to get elected then it will back to business as usual, they may even repal Obamacare but they will quickly replace it with Romneycare [/pragmatic cynicism]
Don't tase me eggs, bro!
The GOP’s promises are pretty meaningless
If they would just Let. Our. People. Go. there would be so much money floating around people would be burning it. There is so much pent up economic energy in this country yearning to breath free... it boggles the mind to imagine it loosed upon the world.
Then eliminate half the federal courts.
If it happened it would be, of course, a miracle from Heaven rivaling the miracle of the founding of our great country.
I have said for decades that most of what the federal government spends money on is in violation of the constitution. The notion that the “commerce clause” and the “general welfare” clause override everything else in the document is simply imbecilic. I don’t care how many law degrees a judge has it takes an idiot to believe that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.