• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the US Constitution Say "Provide for the General Welfare""?

Does the US Constitution say Provide, Promote (or both) for the General Welfare

  • Total voters
    44
People in the entertainment industry often promote their venues then provide the entertainers.
 
Edward_L._Sin said:
The general welfare quote seems to be the most controversial line for all Constitutional discussions with respect to contemporary politics, but whether the line was actually to provide or to promote actually seems to be quite irrelevant, because I don't believe that either one would give the Federal Government more or less authority from the original Constitution. People forget that the general welfare quote was made in the Preamble. The Preamble says that the Federal Government must establish Justice, but it can't just overrule a decision by a State Supreme Court just because it felt that it wasn't establishing Justice. The Federal Government must try to meet the prospects of the Preamble, but it should only do so in the manner allowed by the enumerated powers in the Constitution or by Amendments, if they should get passed. That is the reason that James Madison, the Father of the Constitution I believe, said the following:

"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
Click to expand...


"On every question of construction carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." --Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823. ME 15:449

"The true key for the construction of everything doubtful in a law is the intention of the law-makers. This is most safely gathered from the words, but may be sought also in extraneous circumstances provided they do not contradict the express words of the law." --Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin, 1808. ME 12:59

"In every event, I would rather construe so narrowly as to oblige the nation to amend, and thus declare what powers they would agree to yield, than too broadly, and indeed, so broadly as to enable the executive and the Senate to do things which the Constitution forbids." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793. ME 1:408

"One single object... [will merit] the endless gratitude of society: that of restraining the judges from usurping legislation." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Livingston, 1825. ME 16:113
Click to expand...
Supported by another Founder.
 
It says both, "promote" in the Preamble and "provide" in Article I Section 8, I remember having this arguement before.
 
Last edited:
Your Star said:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Click to expand...

the big problem is that this does not authorize or empower the federal government to pass stuff that most americans call "welfare" (what is called "the dole" in England)

income redistribution as "general welfare" is a dishonest creation by the left
 
pro-bipartisan said:
It says both, "promote" in the Preamble and "provide" in Article I Section 8, I remember having this arguement before.
Click to expand...
The power to is lay taxes with the intent to create revenue and the power to spend that revenue in and of itself confers no power to create the legislation through which that revenue is spent.
Thats what the rest of the enumerated powers do. If the 'general welfare clause' argument were sound, there'd then be no Powers of Congress save the first and last.
 
TurtleDude said:
the big problem is that this does not authorize or empower the federal government to pass stuff that most americans call "welfare" (what is called "the dole" in England)

income redistribution as "general welfare" is a dishonest creation by the left
Click to expand...

The left, the left. I am sick of hearing about the left. Them, them, them, them, them. They did it. It's all their fault. Can't you come up with something original for a change?

How about the boogey man or the easter bunny for christ's sake.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
How about the boogey man or the easter bunny for christ's sake.
Click to expand...

I say, I resemble that remark!

It's so much easier to seperate in Turtles case "US" from "THEM" so that way they can pretend you're not part of "THEIR" country (Well they're gonna "take it back" soon aren't they?).
 
Jetboogieman said:
I say, I resemble that remark!

It's so much easier to seperate in Turtles case "US" from "THEM" so that way they can pretend you're not part of "THEIR" country (Well they're gonna "take it back" soon aren't they?).
Click to expand...

Yeah and keep doing the same thing that they did over and over and expect to get different results.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
The left, the left. I am sick of hearing about the left. Them, them, them, them, them. They did it. It's all their fault. Can't you come up with something original for a change?
Click to expand...
However bad the truth may hurt. it is still the truth.
 
Joe Steel said:
Nonsense. Providing for the welfare of individuals promotes the general welfare.
Click to expand...

wrong-it spreads and increases parasitic behavior

but income redistribution is not authorized by the constitution. Its a myth foisted on us by FDR and his castrated judiciary
 
LiberalAvenger said:
The left, the left. I am sick of hearing about the left. Them, them, them, them, them. They did it. It's all their fault. Can't you come up with something original for a change?

How about the boogey man or the easter bunny for christ's sake.
Click to expand...

when the right starts pushing socialism and the expansion of the parasite class then I will

you protest too much good sir
 
Goobieman said:
The context of the conversation does a pretty good job of that, which is whyt LA's statement was absurdly laughable.
There's no way to argue that if you want to promote something that you -must- then provide the means for that something.
Click to expand...

I was not trying to prove we must promote the general welfare by providing it, only that we can.
 
Goobieman said:
The power to is lay taxes with the intent to create revenue and the power to spend that revenue in and of itself confers no power to create the legislation through which that revenue is spent.
Thats what the rest of the enumerated powers do. If the 'general welfare clause' argument were sound, there'd then be no Powers of Congress save the first and last.
Click to expand...

If the arguement about enumerated powers were sound there would not be any need for the general welfare clause.
 
TurtleDude said:
wrong-it spreads and increases parasitic behavior

but income redistribution is not authorized by the constitution. Its a myth foisted on us by FDR and his castrated judiciary
Click to expand...

Why does it violate the constitution?

WTF is parastic behavior?
 
Goobieman said:
However bad the truth may hurt. it is still the truth.
Click to expand...

Truth is you have no idea what the left is. People are "surprised" everyday when I tell them I am a liberal, I guess because they often agree with me...
 
TurtleDude said:
when the right starts pushing socialism and the expansion of the parasite class then I will

you protest too much good sir
Click to expand...

A lot of your beliefs are expressed in "Mein Kampf" and nazi propaganda such as people, "unworthy of life" or the "mud people".

Until you learn how to define clearly and without prejudice what and who you are talking about I can not take you seriously.
 
drz-400 said:
If the arguement about enumerated powers were sound there would not be any need for the general welfare clause.
Click to expand...
Aside from the the fact that you arent actually adressing my argument, which remains sound...

You mean Article I sec 8:1, where the federal government is given the power to tax and spend the revenue created by that tax? How, if my argument is correct, does this suddenly become unnecssary?

James Madison disagrees explains the "general welfare clause" quite well - that the power to is lay taxes with the intent to create revenue and the power to spend that revenue in and of itself confers no power to create the legislation through which that revenue is spent
 
drz-400 said:
I was not trying to prove we must promote the general welfare by providing it, only that we can.
Click to expand...
Only where the specific power to do so is granted to Congress.
For that, we have the enumerated powers.
 
Why do we have an unconstitutional interstate system?
 
Goobieman said:
Only where the specific power to do so is granted to Congress.
For that, we have the enumerated powers.
Click to expand...
I was speaking of the general welfare clause:
"to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;"
Not the taxing a spending clause:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises"
No matter, we can look at the whole thing.

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;"

Why would it say "...and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;" if all they wanted the congress to do was the list below?

"Alexander Hamilton disagrees and explains the..." general welfare clause "...quite well - that the power to lay taxes with the intent to create revenue and the power to spend that revenue..." "And the objects to which it may be appropriated are no less comprehensive, than the payment of the public debts and the providing for the common defence and "general Welfare."

Man it stinks when your arguement can go both ways.
 
drz-400 said:
Why does it violate the constitution?

WTF is parastic behavior?
Click to expand...

because nothing in the constitution authorized it
check out the tenth amendment

expecting others to have their wealth taken to pay for your own poor life choices or failures

Pandering to such people to gain power
 
LiberalAvenger said:
A lot of your beliefs are expressed in "Mein Kampf" and nazi propaganda such as people, "unworthy of life" or the "mud people".

Until you learn how to define clearly and without prejudice what and who you are talking about I can not take you seriously.
Click to expand...

the refuge of the beaten lib is to scream nazi

only a brain dead moonbat would claim that saying people shouldn't have their wealth taken to buy the votes and encourage the spread of the welfare class with Nazis. I beleive in governmental benign neglect but I fully support private charity. Like most conservatives I give far more than similarly situated (economically) liberals who think that if they vote for welfare socialists they have done their charitable duty or when they give money its usually to advocacy or "think tanks" groups that suggest more taxation and more government.

The nazis murdered some of the most productive people in Germany such as the well educated jews, intellectuals, etc. I oppose government oppression be it genocide or socialism. That you cannot tell the difference is pathetic
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom