The principal author of the Constitution, James Madison, certainly thought that this "general welfare clause" allowed the expenditure of federal funds only for purposes specifically described and outlined. This includes the power to coin money, establish rules for naturalization, regulate interstate commerce, conduct a census, establish post offices, support the military, establish copyright laws and a few other purposes.Charity is beautiful. It is not, however, a power delegated to the federal government of the United States of America.
Economist and columnist Walter Williams points out that other presidents vetoed "humanitarian" bills, finding no allowance for them in the Constitution. In 1854, President Franklin Pierce vetoed a bill to provide monies for the mentally ill: "I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity. ... [It] would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded." In 1887, President Grover Cleveland vetoed an appropriation to help drought-stricken Texas counties, saying, "I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds ... I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution."
If this were a territory outside the boundaries of the incorporated US, I might go along with Spenser and say the residents are on their own. But, it is inside the country, and not only that, the city of NO is vital to the commerce of the country. In the interest of the welfare of the country the city and the port must in some form be restored.