Five years later, White House and critics fight over stimulus law

As told by Democrats, the stimulus law is a tale of officials using government effectively to shield families from a severe economic crisis triggered by inadequately regulated speculation. In that accounting, the law is a prime example of how a strong central government can help the average person.

To Republicans, by contrast, the law provides proof that government spending does little other than to burden future generations with debt.

Given the continued weakness in the economy, Republicans have the simpler case to make: Good times have not yet returned, therefore, Obama’s policies have failed.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio demonstrated the approach in a videotaped message, which he opened by referring to the anniversary of the “failed stimulus program.”

In that accounting, the law is a prime example of how a strong central government can help the average person.

Whose central government are they talking about? Surely not the constitutionally-limited power USA federal government!

In fact, Justice John Marshall had officially clarified that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue which Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.

“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.

And "government" power to lay taxes to help the average person is not one of those Section 8 powers, several constitutonal experts having noted that the states had reserved "government" power to care for the people uniquely to themselves.

“Our citizens have wisely formed themselves into one nation as to others and several States as among themselves. To the united nation belong our external and mutual relations; to each State, severally, the care of our persons (emphasis added), our property, our reputation and religious freedom.” —Thomas Jefferson: To Rhode Island Assembly, 1801.
Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government (emphases added). I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country.” —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
”7. Sovereignty, for the protection of the rights of life and personal liberty within the respective States, rests alone with the States (emphases added).” —United States v. Cruikshank, 1875.

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.