The General Welfare Clause - Why the current use of it is unconstitutional

Discussion in 'Politics' started by PLYMCO_PILGRIM, Mar 26, 2010.

  1. PLYMCO_PILGRIM
    Offline

    PLYMCO_PILGRIM Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,416
    Thanks Received:
    2,855
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    America's Home Town
    Ratings:
    +2,863
    Read what it says in the constitution people...here is a quote of it

    Preamble: 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.

    Article 1, section 8, clause 1: 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;


    In the preamble there is clearly a difference between common defense and general welfare. That difference being that one is to be provided for and the other is to be promoted, not provided.

    In article 1 it says the government can lay taxes to provide for both the defense and welfare of american citizens. However, these taxes must be uniform throughout the country. By having our progressive tax system, only taxing people with cadillac plans, or only increasing the taxes on the rich to pay for health care this legislation directily violates article 1, section 8, clause 1 by having the duties, imposts, and excises being applied non-uniformly for health care in the legislation.

    EDIT: Taxes on cadillac plans have been removed. This is no longer an issue
    EDIT2: If the taxes on employers and employees who have employer provided health plans is still in then this is an issue. It is not being implimented uniformly as american's who either purchase it on their own, are on a government program already, or dont choose to have it have don't have to pay the tax but those who get it from their employer do. not uniform
    EDIT3: The special tax break deals for states like florida and nebraska are also a direct violation of the constitution as those are not being applied uniformly.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2010
  2. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,619
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,214
    Doesn't matter.
    "General welfare" is the purpose of the entire constitution, not a power of government enumerated by it. If it were it would be in Article I.
    If that were the case there would be no limit whatsoever on what government could do. Justice Thomas made that exact comment about use of the commerce clause.

    But since when did the Constitution become a consideration in the health care debate? As Nancy said, is that a serious question? Are you serious?
     
  3. PLYMCO_PILGRIM
    Offline

    PLYMCO_PILGRIM Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,416
    Thanks Received:
    2,855
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    America's Home Town
    Ratings:
    +2,863
    What?

    The specific legislation imposes taxes that are not uniform in an attempt to fund the providing of general welfare. That in itself violates the very clause being used to justify the government's funding of the health care bill according to the bill's language. By violating that clause this bill violates the constitutional restrictions put upon the federal government.
     
  4. Claudette
    Offline

    Claudette Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    19,558
    Thanks Received:
    3,009
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +7,625
    Judge Naplitano said much the same.

    I would dearly love to hear what the SC has to say on this. Would be interesting reading.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2010
  5. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,318
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,753
    I'm pretty sure the cadillac plans were taken out of the bill. They aren't increasing tax on the rich but on income level. Subtle, but different, and uniform.

    Fail.
     
  6. PLYMCO_PILGRIM
    Offline

    PLYMCO_PILGRIM Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,416
    Thanks Received:
    2,855
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    America's Home Town
    Ratings:
    +2,863
    You just said "they aren't increasing the tax on the rich but (increasing it) on income level. Are you saying some income level will have to pay more taxes than another income level? If so how is that uniform?
     
  7. The Rabbi
    Offline

    The Rabbi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Messages:
    67,619
    Thanks Received:
    7,821
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Nashville
    Ratings:
    +18,214
    You missed my point.
    "General welfare" is the purpose of the entire constitution, not a power of government under it. So any legislation justified solely as "for the general welfare" fails the test of being a power of government. Because if the only constitutional test of a piece of legislation were "general welfare" they would all pass. There would be no limit on government. And the Founders did not intend that.
    But the constitutionality of the measure is the last thing that will get considered.
     
  8. Mr Clean
    Online

    Mr Clean Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    10,051
    Thanks Received:
    2,248
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Ratings:
    +3,813
    The truth is, since they're not around to explain themselves, it's speculation of what they meant by "General Welfare".

    And all the shit house lawyers in the world can debate this point until the end of time and we'll never really know what was the Founders real intent.
     
  9. manu1959
    Offline

    manu1959 Left Coast Isolationist

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2004
    Messages:
    13,761
    Thanks Received:
    1,625
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    california
    Ratings:
    +1,626
    income tax is the only tax that taxes one group of people at a higher rate than another.....

    if i am good at something the government takes more from me.....and gives it to people that aren't so good at it.....
     
  10. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,318
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,753
    Or you could be bad at everything and have investment income.

    Income tax taxes income, not people.
     

Share This Page