Posted on 02/01/2014 12:47:37 PM PST by Kaslin
My late son was on Food stamps had an EBT card that he could only use for food. He tried to stretch it out by buying mostly store brand items, but say his balance on his EBT card was $40, he spend less then the 40 bucks, so he would not get over the amount.
Bingo
“Republicans don’t want to repeal low-income food assistance - they’re in favor of a more limited scope for a valuable program...” even though the Fed has NO Constitutional authority to steal from the taxpayer to ‘provide’ for another.
As one had stated, not word ONE about the fraud and abuse, let alone the misnomer of the ‘Farm Bill’.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
cutting the amount that parasites steal from taxpayers is not stealing
Eliminate the program. Give the few people who actually need it some stamps. These stamps are only accepted for milk, flour, beans, bread, very basic staples. I bet 75% of the people on the rolls would remove themselves.
Back asswards rats at it again. Taking the remaining 99% from producers is stealing.
“percent”
Isn’t a 1% cut in DC actually mean a 1% cut in the increase...baseline budgeting it’s called...
Thanks Kaslin.
To begin with, the states have never delegated to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific power to tax and spend for food stamp purposes.
More specifically, and given the remote possibility that some freepers and lurkers aren't aware of this, Justice John Marshall had officially clarified that Congress cannot tax and spend for ANYTHING which it essentially 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.
So the irony about corrupt Democratic federal lawmakers arguing that likewise corrupt RINOs are trying to steal food from needy citizens is the following. Based on Justice Marshall's clarification of Congress's limited power to lay taxes, Congress is already wrongly stealing state revenues that could be used for state food stamp programs, stealing such revenues in the form of constitutionally indefensible federal taxes.
And that's just one major constitutional problem with the vote-winning Democratic federal food stamp program. The other problem is with the farm bill itself.
In more precise terms, the Supreme Court has historically clarified, in terms of the 10th Amendment nonetheless, that the states have never delegated to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate agriculture.
“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. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden (emphasis added).”—Mr. Justice Roberts(?), United States v. Butler, 1936.
Unfortunately, patriots who have possibly never been taught the federal govenment's constitutionally limited powers are unsurprisingly not seeing the forest for the trees concerning Section 8-unjustifiable food stamp spending in this likely constitutionally indefensible federal farm aid bill.
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.