Listening
Gold Member
- Aug 27, 2011
- 14,989
- 1,650
- 260
Well, this is the core of our disagreement. The power to spend (if not limited to the scope of an enumerated power) amounts to a broad general power and that's exactly how its been used. You've made the case yourself: by applying the necessary and proper clause recursively onto the supposed "implied power to spend" you can justify passing any and all laws required to effect that spending. As nonsensical as this sounds (to me), it's the prevailing precedent, and just as the anti-federalists feared it's resulted in a radical expansion of federal power.
Which is amazing to think about in the grand scheme of things.
We've gone so far down that road, we might never get back. And of course, some of what we want....we never had.
Look at Federal Coercion of the states using Federal Highway dollars. It is a crime.