Regarding a so-called federal retirement tax, patriots are reminded that a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that Congress is prohibited from appropriating taxes in the name of state power issues, basically any issue, such as retirement, that 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.
The reason that there are unconstitutional federal social spending programs like Social Security and Medicare is the following imo. Taking Social Security for example, FDR’s state-sovereignty ignoring justices wrongly accepted Congress’s claim that the Constitution’s General Welfare Clause (1.8.1) gave Congress the specific power to establish social spending programs like Social Security as evidenced by the Court’s decision in Helvering v. Davis.
But the major constitutional problem with regarding the General Welfare Clause as a specific delegation of power is the following. Noting that James Madison is generally regarded as the father of the Constitution, FDR’s activist justices wrongly ignored President James Madison’s official clarification that the General Welfare Clause was not intended as an express delegation of power, but meant to be understood only as an introductory clause for the clauses that followed it in Section 8 which are delegations of specific power.
”To refer the power in question to the clause "to provide for common defense and general welfare" would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation, as rendering the special and careful enumeration of powers which follow the clause nugatory and improper. Such a view of the Constitution would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them, the terms "common defense and general welfare" embracing every object and act within the purview of a legislative trust.” —James Madison, Veto of federal public works bill, 1817
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump / Pence by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will also put a stop to unconstitutonal federal taxes and likewise unconstitutional inteference in state affairs as evidenced by FDR’s unconstitutional “New Deal” spending programs.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
I agree with you about the origins and lack of Constitutionality of SS and Medicare.
Basically anything can be justified under the General Welfare clause. For example everyone could be given a swimming pool, tennis court or basketball court at their home because exercise is a general good. They way they interpret the General Welfare clause, that would be an easy case to make.
But, since the money was taken involuntarily by Federal decree, does not make it right to then turn it over to Wall Street by Federal decree.
We should not stop there. Then we could eliminate unnecessary and undesirable but constitutional programs. However, can we admit that, as right as we are, this is a fantasy that will NEVER OCCUR?
Suppose that Republicans are more sympathetic to our program than are Demonrats (this is NOT to be taken for granted but just suppose). Suppose that we start with just the two programs you mentioned. Suppose that there are 435 Republican candidates for 435 full Congressional seats and each and every one makes a "contract with America" just to eliminate Social Security and Medicare (and Medicaid for that matter). Each makes his/her position quite public. After the votes are counted, not 3 of these candidates would be elected.
If you disagree, tell us what you think to back your position and make the election of many candidates a credible possibility. Convince me.
Our constitution's written provisions have been intentionally (liberal intentions) eroded since at least Lincoln and probably earlier than him.