Federal Disaster Relief is Unconstitutional

[TNHarley]

I know it sounds harsh but its true. Giving an inch here and there is why our COTUS is basically null.
I do believe, however, relief can be Constitutional by applying equal amounts to all states
Article IV, Section 2 states: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states."

Among the powers granted by the Constitution to the federal government are:

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts... (Patents & Copyrights);

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

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…;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States…;

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof

In 1822, James MOnroe vetoed a bill that would was to repair and preserve Cumberland Road. He said "Congress’s power to spend was restricted “to purposes of common defence, and of general, national, not local, or state, benefit"

In 1796, Savannah Georgia had a massive fire that damaged the entire city. The fourth congress decided the fed govt didnt have the power to provide relief. They did receive over 40K in donations.

Now look at us. FEMA, ATF, NSA, judicial review, warrantless wiretapping, SS, gun control, no fly lists, political spying, federal school regulations.. Hek, a MAJORITY of what our Fed Govt does is unconstitutional.
I dont do shit about it. You dont do shit about it. Very few even make our voice publically known. All we do is scream at each other anonymously on the internet.
This is our fault.

You left out the first clause, did you forget or was it intentional anld thus a lie by omission?

lol go ahead and post it cause it will change every thing

I know it sounds harsh but its true. Giving an inch here and there is why our COTUS is basically null.
I do believe, however, relief can be Constitutional by applying equal amounts to all states
Article IV, Section 2 states: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states."

Among the powers granted by the Constitution to the federal government are:

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts... (Patents & Copyrights);

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

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…;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States…;

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof

In 1822, James MOnroe vetoed a bill that would was to repair and preserve Cumberland Road. He said "Congress’s power to spend was restricted “to purposes of common defence, and of general, national, not local, or state, benefit"

In 1796, Savannah Georgia had a massive fire that damaged the entire city. The fourth congress decided the fed govt didnt have the power to provide relief. They did receive over 40K in donations.

Now look at us. FEMA, ATF, NSA, judicial review, warrantless wiretapping, SS, gun control, no fly lists, political spying, federal school regulations.. Hek, a MAJORITY of what our Fed Govt does is unconstitutional.
I dont do shit about it. You dont do shit about it. Very few even make our voice publically known. All we do is scream at each other anonymously on the internet.
This is our fault.

You left out the first clause, did you forget or was it intentional anld thus a lie by omission?

lol go ahead and post it cause it will change every thing

Clause 1, Art. I, section 8

"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; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

If a wall is being proposed for the common Defense, why aren't dams, canals and shelters for natural disasters, protections from infectious disease and repairing and replacing our nation infrastructure for the general Welfare?

I covered that in the OP

 

[TNHarley]

Federal aid promotes the general welfare, ensures domestic tranquility and provides for the common defense.

Thanks for the rebuttal

 

[TNHarley]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

 

[TNHarley]

Federal ald went directly to the states and to people during the Great Depression sent by both Hoover and FDR. FDR and his New Deal sent more aid and worked on programs to keep a Great Depression from happening again.

And he shouldn't have. If he did, you would have refuted the OP, yes?

 

[TNHarley]

Federal aid promotes the general welfare, ensures domestic tranquility and provides for the common defense.

Trump, trumpanzees, neo Nazis, the KKK and the White supremacy movement ensures domestic discord.

Why can't they amend the constitution?
Your stupid, ignorant argument ensures the govt can do whatever in the hell they want

 

[NYcarbineer]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

It's easier than that. You pass federal aid legislation and then survive any court challenges to its constitutionality.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sweet.

What does the Constitution say about giving taxpayer money to squatters?

What do you think? General welfare doesnt mean individuals.

What DOES it mean then?

 

[TNHarley]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

It's easier than that. You pass federal aid legislation and then survive any court challenges to its constitutionality.

Yes, we all know the Court system is a bunch of bullshit.

 

[TNHarley]

Sweet.

What does the Constitution say about giving taxpayer money to squatters?

What do you think? General welfare doesnt mean individuals.

What DOES it mean then?

sigh Its in the OP

 

[NYcarbineer]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

It's easier than that. You pass federal aid legislation and then survive any court challenges to its constitutionality.

Yes, we all know the Court system is a bunch of bullshit.

Are you talking nonsense just to troll, or don't you know any better?

 

[TNHarley]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

It's easier than that. You pass federal aid legislation and then survive any court challenges to its constitutionality.

Yes, we all know the Court system is a bunch of bullshit.

Are you talking nonsense just to troll, or don't you know any better?

Its not nonsense. I understand they are the top court, but that doesnt make them right.
If you can refute the OP, i wish you would. Saying "supreme court" doesnt do it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sweet.

What does the Constitution say about giving taxpayer money to squatters?

What do you think? General welfare doesnt mean individuals.

What DOES it mean then?

sigh Its in the OP

IOW you have no idea what it means.

 

[TNHarley]

Sweet.

What does the Constitution say about giving taxpayer money to squatters?

What do you think? General welfare doesnt mean individuals.

What DOES it mean then?

sigh Its in the OP

IOW you have no idea what it means.

General means National. Not individual, local, regional or to the state. Unless ALL individuals, local areas, regional areas and states get equal treatment
Article IV, Section 2 states: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states."
As i said, its in the OP

 

[Timmy]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Every state is disaster prone in some way .

 

[norwegen]

Even in the beginning of the 20th century, the government did not aid specific people or regions. Calvin Coolidge, for one, understood constitutional limitations. And yet, people recovered from disasters.

But then the Progressive Era, when the snowflakes began to distort constitutional interpretations because they had no faith to believe that people could take care of themselves and each other.

 

[Timmy]

Sweet.

What does the Constitution say about giving taxpayer money to squatters?

What do you think? General welfare doesnt mean individuals.

What DOES it mean then?

sigh Its in the OP

IOW you have no idea what it means.

General means National. Not individual, local, regional or to the state. Unless ALL individuals, local areas, regional areas and states get equal treatment
Article IV, Section 2 states: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states."
As i said, its in the OP

They do . It's not like Fema has exempted states on who they would help .

 

[TNHarley]

What do you think? General welfare doesnt mean individuals.

What DOES it mean then?

sigh Its in the OP

IOW you have no idea what it means.

General means National. Not individual, local, regional or to the state. Unless ALL individuals, local areas, regional areas and states get equal treatment
Article IV, Section 2 states: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states."
As i said, its in the OP

They do . It's not like Fema has exempted states on who they would help .

It doesnt surprise me you dont understand that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

On principle I agree with you. States like Texas that are susceptible to these sorts of disasters should have money saved to deal with it. However government doesn't save shit. It spends money faster than it can take it in.

This is my state, and I am grateful the feds stepped in to help our people out.

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

It's easier than that. You pass federal aid legislation and then survive any court challenges to its constitutionality.

Yes, we all know the Court system is a bunch of bullshit.

Are you talking nonsense just to troll, or don't you know any better?

Its not nonsense. I understand they are the top court, but that doesnt make them right.
If you can refute the OP, i wish you would. Saying "supreme court" doesnt do it.

There's nothing to refute. You are expressing an opinion as if you were ON the Court.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I know it sounds harsh but its true. Giving an inch here and there is why our COTUS is basically null.
I do believe, however, relief can be Constitutional by applying equal amounts to all states
Article IV, Section 2 states: "The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states."

Since the availability of federal disaster aid is effectively a form of insurance, and since all states are covered by it with no specific distinctions state by state to the amounts or eligibility,

it is applied in 'equal amounts'.

 

[TNHarley]

Federal aid could easily be constitutional with an amendment.
Stay safe Pete!

It's easier than that. You pass federal aid legislation and then survive any court challenges to its constitutionality.

Yes, we all know the Court system is a bunch of bullshit.

Are you talking nonsense just to troll, or don't you know any better?

Its not nonsense. I understand they are the top court, but that doesnt make them right.
If you can refute the OP, i wish you would. Saying "supreme court" doesnt do it.

There's nothing to refute. You are expressing an opinion as if you were ON the Court.

So going by actual words and previous cases doesnt deserve refuting? Changing the definitions of words by activists is all that matters!
I guess if a republican majority SC said it was for general welfare to get rid of all gays because of AIDs or something, you would be OK with that?