Posted on 11/03/2019 12:52:26 PM PST by ProgressingAmerica
There's an interesting headline out there today, which can serve as a good educational moment. Due to the ravages of the fires out in California, the White House is threatening to cut off federal funding.
Now first off, The notion of this phrase "federal funding" (the article also uses the phrase "state funding") is offensive because it's dishonest. It's welfare, that's what it is. I'm not interested in P.C. comfort terms. As I wrote in May of 2017, when the progressives were starting off building their nanny-state empire, they had a very specific list of welfare queens - 48 of them to be exact. When progressives are determined to achieve a goal, they are very crafty in a deceitful way of achieving their goals.
The progressive notion of putting the states on welfare first, before turning individuals into welfare queens was destined for success.
But why are we keeping around such a relic from a discredited ideology? I mean, I know why the progressives want to keep it, it's because they really don't like the states and want to subjugate them just like they want to subjugate us. That's why they put together court rulings such as Wickard v. Filburn. Count me out. Wickard also needs to be repealed.
Now in the short term, there is probably some merit to getting California to actually do something useful about these fires. Federal Government does in fact have California on food stamps, so why not cut off said food stamps? Ok, well if we only want to engage in extreme short term thinking is that workable. That's not what I'm talking about though. I'm talking about the underlying issue of this long-standing welfare scheme, and looking out over America as a whole over the last 100+ years, these schemes of progressivism are an absolute horrific failure.
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Even more laughable are the talking heads out there that are saying that Trump is bullying the states using federal aid. No, he isn’t. Trump wasn’t alive in 1914 when the states were put onto welfare.
This is the media trying to have it both ways.
When Obama wanted the states to do a certain thing, what did he do? Cut their aid.
When Jimmy Carter wanted the states to do a certain thing, what did he do? Cut their aid.
When JFK wanted the states to do a certain thing, what did he do? Cut their aid.
When FDR wanted the states to do a certain thing, what did he do? Cut their aid.
It’s all par for the course with these progressives. They want complete social control over everything you hold dear. And let’s calculate this. We could do great damage to progressivism by repealing state welfare. Which is why you DON’T see anybody in the media saying that it should all be repealed. They just whine that Trump is using state welfare the incorrect way.
Of course, if any one cares about recovering our Free Constitutional Republic.
But the political powers in all of the states are more interested in their own political fortunes by being financial dependent on the Fascist Feds than in INDEPENDENCE from them.
Only the people of each state can change that by electing uncorrupted non-political leaders who BELIEVE in restoring our Free Constitutional Republic which is based on the Declaration of INDEPENDENCE!!!
If you fall across the border from Squatamala with your Ninos you get the full boat welfare. If you’re a ‘refugee’ you get full boat welfare. If you’re an legal immigrant you get full boat welfare. If you’re a native born American and want to raise a family, well, you and the wife better get to work, unless of course you’re of the appropriate social class.
We really need to get the FEDGOV out of our lives, restricting them to the enumerated powers granted by the constitution. Everything else, including welfare, education, infrastructure, and and the taxes to support them, should be a function of the States. Then people could choose free, less intrusive states, or all powerful nanny states to live their life, and pay the price in their taxes. It would also tie their votes more directly to their wallet.
We really need to get the FEDGOV out of our lives, restricting them to the enumerated powers granted by the constitution.
Federal government is the solution to every problem. We are not patient enough to let the market place work............
Absolutely. Great post. Let them sink in their own dystopic swamp. They can tax their subjects into prosperity. Besides, we can’t afford it...
Whiney welfare states ALERT!
No one wants to bail out California because they make stupid choices that cause the fires.
This issue has nothing to do with ‘welfare’ it has to do with liberal stupidity. Let the environment nuts bail them out.
No one wants to bail out California because they make stupid choices that cause the fires.
This issue has nothing to do with ‘welfare’ it has to do with liberal stupidity. Let the environmental nuts bail them out.
Government purposely fails so that we all have to eventually bail them out over and over. That’s all part of their scheme.
No subsidies to state and local governments, big corporations, small business, agriculture, educational institutions, or individuals. The government should pay for what it needs to buy, but get it out of the subsidy business altogether. Government money brings government control.
Also, all those dollars flowing from Washington centralize teh government in violation of the Constitution.
Not unless the personal _income_tax_ is repealed as lawful DC would do. Otherwise DC is stealing the states income, reaching right past their sovereign boundary and seizing the property of the state and its citizens.
Any taxation of USAians by DC is lawfully through an bill of apportionment which DC sends to each state. Its citizens are immune to direct DC taxes.
Does there remain any lawful law in DC?
Pretty much every person I know who "identifies as conservative" would disagree with the above. Those whose believe this are not conservatives at all. Unfortunately, the Congress is infested with such "conservatives".
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
- President Reagan Aug. 12, 1986
From related threads…
Let’s put it this way. One of the very few federal domestic spending programs that the states have expressly constitutionally given Congress the specific power to tax and spend for is the US Mail Service (1.8.7).
"Article I, Section 8, Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads;"
Consider that if a given federal domestic spending program is not reasonably related to the mail service, and most of them aren’t, then patriots can bet that it is unconstitutional and win their bet probably most of the time imo.
In other words, such programs are based on state powers, and uniquely associate state revenues, that the feds have been stealing from the states, and continue to steal, in the form of unconstitutional federal taxes, taxes 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.
”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 fact, the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified that the Founding States had left the care of the people 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.)
Justices Brandeis had later reflected on Bingham words, putting it this way about unique, 10th Amendment (10A)-protected state powers to care for the people.
"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.)
So why are citizens now being oppressed by an unconstitutionally big federal government?
Let’s consider the “before and after” interpretations of 10A by previous generations of Supreme Court justices. Using inappropriate words like “concept” and “implicit,” the excerpt below from Wickard v. Filburn (Wickard) shows what was left of the defense of 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 blatantly ignoring the reasonable Butler interpretation of 10A when they scandalously 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.
Post-17th Amendment career Democrats and RINOs are now using the Court's scandalous Wickard interpretation of 10A to blatantly ignore Section 8-limited powers for all unconstitutional federal domestic spending imo.
The remedy for unconstitutionally big federal government on our backs…
Patriots need to elect a new patriot Congress in the 2020 elections that will not only promise to fully support PDJT's already very successful work for MAGA, now KAG, but will also do this.
New patriot lawmakers also need to promise to work with PDJT to surrender state powers that the feds have stolen from the states back to the states.
And to make such changes permanent, patriots need to further support PDJT in working with the states to repeal the 16th and ill-conceived 17th Amendments.
"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.
Excerpted from 17th Amendment: "The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof [emphasis added], for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures."
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.” —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.