Senator Murray Statement on New Trump Administration SNAP Rule

How could the nation have survived without the 17th Amendment? /sarc

"There is absolutely no reason to deny struggling individuals the food assistance they need."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

I agree with Sen. Murray in principle. But misguided, post-17th Amendment ratification Murray doesn’t seem to understand that the Founding States gave responsibility to care for the poor uniquely to the states, including churches, not the federal government.

From related threads…

Justice Joseph Story for example, had indicated that the states have never expressly constitutionally given the feds the specific power take care of poor people.

"The power to regulate manufactures, not having been confided to congress, they have no more right to act upon it, than they have to interfere with the systems of education, the poor laws, or the road laws, of the states [emphases added]. Congress is empowered to lay taxes for revenue, it is true; but there is no power to encourage, protect, or meddle with manufactures." —Joseph Story, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1, Commentaries on the Constitution 2
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.

Also, the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had likewise clarified that the Founding States had left the care of the people uniquely to the states, not the feds.

”[…] the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen, under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Federal Constitution, is in the States, and not in the Federal Government [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe, 1866. (See about middle of 3rd column.)

So why are career lawmakers now providing vote-winning (hint) social spending programs since the states have never given the feds the express constitutional power to tax and spend for such services?

"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.

Regarding unconstitutional federal domestic spending, using inappropriate words like “concept” and “implicit,” the excerpt below from Wickard v. Filburn (Wickard) shows what was left of the defense of 10th Amendment (10A)-protected state sovereignty by the last of the state sovereignty-respecting majority justices in United States v. Butler, FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices later ignoring the reasonable Butler interpretation of 10A when they treasonously decided Wickard in Congress’s favor imo.

"10th Amendment: 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."
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
"In discussion and decision, the point of reference, instead of being what was "necessary and proper" to the exercise by Congress of its granted power, was often some concept [???] of sovereignty thought to be implicit [??? emphases added] in the status of statehood." —Wickard v. Filburn, 1942.

Consider that the states now struggle to care for the poor and hungry because the corrupt federal government keeps stealing state revenues in the form of unconstitutional taxes according to the Gibbons excerpt above, taxes that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.

The remedy for unconstitutionally big federal government…

Patriots must elect a new patriot Congress in the 2020 elections that will not only promise to fully support PDJT's vision for MAGA, now KAG, but will also do the following.

New patriot lawmakers also need to promise to work with PDJT to put a stop to unconstitutional federal taxes, taxes that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers, and also surrender state powers that the post-17th Amendment ratification feds have been stealing from the states back to the states.

Once unconstitutional federal taxes are stopped then each state will ultimately find new revenues to experiment with its own social spending programs, depending on what the legal majority citizen voters of a given state want.

Justice Brandeis later put it this way about the "laboratories of democracy," the unique powers of the sovereign states to serve the people, depending on what the legal majority citizen voters of a given state want.

"It is one of the happy incidents of the federal system that a single courageous State may, if its citizens choose [emphasis added], serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.” —Justice Brandeis, Laboratories of democracy.
(Note that constitutional limits on states as laboratories of democracy is that states cannot establish privileged / protected classes or abridge constitutionally enumerated rights, and must maintain a constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government.)

And to make such changes permanent, patriots need to further support PDJT in working with the states to repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments to the Constitution.

Remember in November 2020!

MAGA! Now KAG! (Keep America Great!)

"The “Holy Grail” of organized crime is to control government power to tax." —me
"The 16th Amendment effectively repealed the involuntary servitude aspect of the 13th Amendment imo, evidenced by unconstitutional federal taxes." —me
- "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.
- "13th Amendment, Section 1:
  Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude [emphasis added], except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."
- "16th Amendment:
  The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
"The constitutionally undefined political parties are basically rival, corrupt voter unions, “union dues” paid by means of unconstitutional federal taxes. Belonging to a political party means that you are a subject, not a member.” —me
"Patriots need to support PDJT in demanding that Congress moves "April 15" tax day to the day before election day." —me
"The smart crooks long ago figured out that getting themselves elected to federal office to make unconstitutional tax laws to fill their pockets is a much easier way to make a living than robbing banks." —me
"Federal career lawmakers probably laugh all the way to the bank to deposit bribes for putting loopholes for the rich and corporations in tax appropriations laws, Congress actually not having the express constitutional authority to make most appropriations laws where domestic policy is concerned. Such laws are based on stolen state powers and uniquely associated stolen state revenues." —me

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.