But to claim that "public schooling", "the food and drug industry", or other matters of concern [environmental] that effect our entire Nation's welfare in it's whole, should be exempted from control; that it is "socialistic" to put any control upon it, is sheer folly.
Here are a few quotes from James Madison on this subject. The first is from The Federalist, #41, and concerns the general welfare clause in Article 1, Section 8, which echos the general welfare clause in the preamble:
For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceeding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effects than to confound and mislead is an absurdity...
This one is from a Congressional debate in 1792:
If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the hightest object of state legislation down to the minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress...
These quotes show that Madison saw the Constitution's statements about the general welfare as general and subject to the enumeration of powers. He specifically rules out federal involvement in education along with a lot of other things that lots of people view as being good for the general welfare of the Union. I assume the other Framers felt similarly.
I agree, but we are not discussing the running of public education by
federal officers or the funding of same. The Federal government may
indeed be reimbursing states in some amount, but it is the states that
do the taxation and the dispensing of public funds to pay for public
services, including education.
The federal government should make certain Constitutional rights
are upheld inside those public establishments [as well as all others]
and I sincerely doubt Mr. Madison was considering otherwise when
he made those comments.
There is a vast difference between demanding that federal [Constitutional]
guidelines are followed and the actual operation of services. Ie: Any
state may offer a public service of any nature, provided by tariffs, fees,
taxation or contribution, but those services cannot be denied to any
specific group prejudicially, or granted to any group prejudicially. To
do so would be unconstitutional and reason for federal intervention.
I am against this new federal marshal plan regarding airport/airline
security, as well as federal subsidy to airlines for their decline in business.
But I am not against any federal guidelines regarding the type and
quality of security needed to keep our skies safe and our terrestrial
citizenry safe from falling aircraft.
I believe anything that crosses a state line falls to federal jurisdiction,
as well as anything that arrives from or departs for, foreign soil. That
does not mean the federal government should run the business, but only
set the guidelines. Would Madison argue otherwise?