Replies

I don't see how that you can think that you've described what power that the "general welfare" clause has. You seem to have written it off as conveying absolutely no meaning or power.

I don't see how you think it's somehow a test of my interpretation (which is, lest you forget, the interpretation of the people who wrote it) that I make it a grant of power, i.e., that I agree with you. I have no intention of making it anything other than it is: the justification for the power to tax, just as promoting the progress of science and the useful arts is the reason for the power to grant patents and copyrights. I don't have to ascribe anything more to it and I don't want to, because that's not what it says.

it is clear that our Constitution empowers government with unenumerated powers

Quite the contrary. It's clear that it does no such thing. It gives the government a few powers and the power to do things necessary and proper to the other things. Calling your debunked position "clear" won't change the reality of the situation. Your person interpretation is at odds with the plain meaning of the text, the other clauses in the same document, and the later statements of the authors (and not just while they were trying to get it ratified). You took the wrong side. Get over it.

which is the only reasonable way to read the "common defense" (air force, national missile defense) and "general welfare" (social security, soldiers pensions) clauses.

Your "only reasonable way" makes large portions incoherent. Why grant other powers? In paticular, why grant the power you claim was granted over the whole country over an area "not to exceed ten miles square"? And why reserve powers not granted to the federal government for the states when there are no such powers?

"Quite the contrary. It's clear that it does no such thing."

Ah, but there's the rub: our Constitution does convey upon the federal government some unenumerated powers.

For instance, the power to tax is granted, but left unenumerated are which taxes and excises can be granted.

The power to pay debts is granted, but which debts to pay (or not - see Southern debts of 1865) are left unenumerated.

Likewise, the power to provide for our common defense is left unenumerated. Otherwise today's national missile defense and air force would be unConstitutional.

So it follows that the power to provide for our "general welfare" is also an unenumerated power because which programs for our general welfare are likewise unenumerated.

"And why reserve powers not granted to the federal government for the states when there are no such powers?"

If only there were no such powers, then I might have to agree with you, but that's not the case.

The Supreme Court held that slavery was not encroached upon by the general welfare clause due to states rights in Dred Scott.

Likewise, it took a Constitutional Amendment to ban alcohol over state opposition.

Of course, gambling was also ruled to be unencroached by the general welfare clause.

The Tenth Amendment clearly conveyed the right to secede to states, as well, so one would be hard-pressed to claim that the "general welfare" clause conveyed UNLIMITED power to the federal government.

But one can easily see that the general welfare clause conveys some power, contrary to your views...