Obama inadvertently presented us with his view of the role of government: We all want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we need to pay for as a country -- things like new roads and bridges; weather satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical research. --- Obama is a socialist and needs to be removed from our government asap by any means necessary.
On Aug 1, 3:00 pm, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > President Obama on the Role of Governmentby Laurence M. Vance, August 1, 2011 > In hisspeechlast week from the East Room of the White House to the American > people on deficit reduction and debt-ceiling negotiations, President Obama > inadvertently presented us with his view of the role of government:We all > want a government that lives within its means, but there are still things we > need to pay for as a country -- things like new roads and bridges; weather > satellites and food inspection; services to veterans and medical > research.Many times when someone, and especially a politician, says “we” he > really means “I,” and is just trying to make it look like many others share > his particular point of view. But I believe that when the president said that > “we all want” a government that will do these things he was correct. The view > that the federal government should build new roads and bridges, design, > build, and launch weather satellites, perform food inspections, provide > services to veterans, and undertake or fund medical research is widely held > by most members of Congress, government bureaucrats, politicians of both > parties, Americans of all political persuasions, and federal contractors who > benefit from these things. > Philosophical arguments against the federal government’s doing these things > because they violate the principle of limited government have always been > made by libertarians and occasionally been made by conservatives. > Although not discounting the importance of these philosophical arguments, > there is a simple way to show that role of the federal government is a > limited one that does not extend to paying for roads and bridges, weather > satellites, food inspection, medical research, and most services to veterans > as envisioned by the president. > Often blatantly violated or quietly ignored, even as it is held up as the > authority in all matters relating to the government, the Constitution -- > certainly neither a perfect nor a libertarian document -- is nevertheless > central to the president’s assertions of the proper role of the federal > government. > All members of Congress, the ones who appropriate taxpayer money to pay for > every new federally funded road and bridge, weather satellite, food > inspection, service to veterans, and medical research, take the following > oath of office:I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support > and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign > and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I > take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of > evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the > office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.The president, the one > who signs into law all congressional appropriations bills, takes the > following oath of office:I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will > faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to > the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the > United States.So, what does the Constitution say about roads, bridges, > weather satellites, food inspection, services to veterans, and medical > research? Very little if it says anything at all. Article I, section 8 of the > Constitution grants power to the federal government to do certain things in > eighteen very brief paragraphs. > On food inspection and medical research the Constitution is silent. Clearly, > then, the federal government is not constitutionally authorized to perform or > fund food inspections or undertake or fund medical research. The federal > government shouldn’t have anything to do with food inspections or medical > research for the simple reason that the government shouldn’t have anything to > do with any inspections or research. But this prohibition goes even deeper > than this. The federal government has no authority to subsidize farmers, > issue nutrition guidelines, make food pyramids, promote or demonize certain > foods, ban unpasteurized dairy products, regulate food production and > labeling, or encourage healthy eating. And neither does the federal > government have the authority to require medical licensing, regulate medical > schools, restrict organ sales or donations, mandate and/or provide > vaccinations, fund HIV/AIDS prevention initiatives, monitor the manufacture > and sale of medical devices, regulate the medical insurance industry, or fund > anyone’s health care or medical treatment. > The closest thing in the Constitution to the federal government’s having the > authority to build new roads and bridges is the power of Congress in Article > I, section 8, paragraph 7, to “establish post offices and post roads.” This > is certainly not what President Obama meant by “new roads and bridges.” The > president was referring to what used to be called “internal improvements.” In > the early years of the country, there was great debate between the advocates > of centralized government and supporters of decentralized government. > Centralizers favored Henry Clay’s “American System” of protectionist tariffs > (mercantilism), centralized banking (inflation), and internal improvements > (corporate welfare, subsidies to politically favored businesses, and wasteful > and inefficient federal public-works boondoggles). > President James Madison vetoed an “internal improvements” bill in 1817 > because he considered it unconstitutional:I am not unaware of the great > importance of roads and canals and the improved navigation of water courses, > and that a power in the National Legislature to provide for them might be > exercised with signal advantage to the general prosperity. But seeing that > such a power is not expressly given by the Constitution, and believing that > it can not be deduced from any part of it without an inadmissible latitude of > construction and reliance on insufficient precedents; believing also that the > permanent success of the Constitution depends on a definite partition of > powers between the General and the State Governments, and that no adequate > landmarks would be left by the constructive extension of the powers of > Congress as proposed in the bill, I have no option but to withhold my > signature from it, and to cherishing the hope that its beneficial objects may > be attained by a resort for the necessary powers to the same wisdom and > virtue in the nation which established the Constitution in its actual form > and providently marked out in the instrument itself a safe and practicable > mode of improving it as experience might suggest.Obviously, weather > satellites weren’t in existence when the Constitution was written, but if the > Constitution doesn’t even authorize the federal government to make important > internal improvements like constructing canals, roads, and bridges, then it > certainly doesn’t sanction government weather satellites. > That federal government should provide services to the nation’s veterans on > the surface seems reasonable. After all, there are six paragraphs in Article > I, section 8, of the Constitution that relate in some way to the military:To > declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning > captures on land and water;To raise and support armies, but no appropriation > of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;To provide and > maintain a navy;To make rules for the government and regulation of the land > and naval forces;To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws > of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;To provide for > organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such > part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, > reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and > the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed > by Congress;The problem with most of the services provided by the government > to veterans is that there shouldn’t be the need for such services in the > first place. Nowhere does the Constitution authorize the United States to go > abroad searching for monsters to destroy or otherwise fight foreign wars. And > certainly not undeclared, immoral, and senseless military adventures like the > wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We shouldn’t have tens of thousands of veterans > with PTSD, traumatic brain injuries, missing limbs, severed spinal cords, or > third-degree burns. We shouldn’t have veterans killing themselves and others. > We shouldn’t have veterans who can’t hold down a job. We should have veterans > who can’t function in society. We shouldn’t have veterans with broken > families. The services required by veterans would be greatly diminished if > the military were used strictly in the defense of the United States. > Although President Obama was right, the fact that “we” want the federal > government to build our roads, keep us informed about the weather, inspect > our food, service our veterans, and fund our medical research doesn’t mean > that it is proper or constitutional for the government to do so. And as > President Gerald Ford said in an address to a joint session of Congress: “A > government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big > enough to take from you everything you > have.”http://www.fff.org/comment/com1108b.asp -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
