by Smitty

The Tenth Amendment Center reprints a fine overview of the Social Security disaster:

If the words “general welfare” and “United States” are put in their proper context, then the general welfare provision grants Congress the power “[t]o lay and collect Taxes… to provide for the… group well being of all the United States.” The “entire group” being referenced is not the people, as comprising a single nation, but the several States in their united capacity. Since the Constitution is a compact or contract between the several States, and the States are only united within the scope of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, this composition of the general welfare provision is in totally harmony with the intent and construction of that document.

Alexander Hamilton sustained this fact in his writings on the Constitution. In Federalist No. 83, he reduced this principle to a single sentence:

“The United States, in their united or collective capacity, are the OBJECT to which all general provisions in the Constitution must necessarily be construed to refer.” [Emphasis not added]

The general welfare clause, being but a part of a general provision of the Constitution, applies solely to the States “in their united or collective capacity.” If the Constitution had established a social compact or union between the American people, and they were the object of the general powers delegated to the federal government, then it would have been an absurdity to reference the States, in their united capacity, as the object of the general welfare phrase. In addition, if the Constitution had been established for the well being of the American people, then that same people would have been the “whole group” referenced in the general welfare phrase.

Based on the above definitions, Social Security should have been struck down because Congress used a provision of the Constitution that applied to the States, in their united capacity, and unconstitutionally applied it to the people. When Congress inserted the words “[a]n Act to Provide for the General Welfare” at the beginning of the Social Security Act, that body took a clause that granted Congress the power “[t]o lay and collect Taxes… to provide for the… group well being of all the United States” and twisted it into a power that granted Congress the power to tax and appropriate money for the general welfare generally. This was a gross usurpation of power.

RTWT for a short overview of how diabolical the notion of Social Security was and remains.

FDR’s infamous Second Bill of Rights enjoyed none of the thought and debate that went into the first round, have been implement piecemeal through Federal over-reach while blowing off Article Five, and, ultimately, cannot be supported other than by loads of pixie dust delivered by golden hover ponies.

The real question is the path to restoring the proper, Constitutional Federal role for dealing with individual citizens. Rep. Paul Ryan’s Roadmap tacitly accepts the current situation. This may be a crucial compromise in terms of Doing Something, but, let’s face it: Socialism is the opiate of the bureaucracy, and leaving a lot of dope laying around will result in it being used.

What Smith Would Do is announce a gala 100 year anniversary celebration of the 16th & 17th Amendments, plus the Federal Reserve Act, and publicly set them on fire. Whoever is President in 2012 should announce a three year preparation period, so that in 01 January 2015, the States pick up the tab for caring for such social services as they’re inclined to fund.

Congress would invoice the States for remaining Federal tasking, letting these United States tax farm their citizens to fund the Federal budget, which is not allowed to run a deficit with the exception of an actual, formal, documented, Constitutional, proper declaration of war.

States missing their funding goals have a simple VAT applied to handle the delta.

Past the vomiting from opiate withdrawal, the wisdom of such a system would be the negative feedback loop. Forced to deal with budgetary realities, Pete Stark’s head would ‘splode, and we’d quickly stop funding absurd, non-essential noise. Returning the Senators to State appointees, while probably not decreasing the net corruption in the Senate, would return a voice in Federal affairs to the States.

With the Federal opium fields not yielding so much, incumbency might not be such a big win for those Ruling Class Clowns currently mooching from the future via Federal largesse.

Of course, if I was elected and could carry off such a plan, something odd and final could likely happen. Addiction therapies which are fatal to the patient are sub-optimal. But now you sunny beaches know how I feel. Having marked out the edge of the debate, let’s see what others can do in the way of a workable compromise.