What did our founders really mean when they said “general welfare”?

[Ame®icano]

If we could imagine that those who established the U.S. government were intelligent, educated people, we would be able to reason that they understood the language they were using. They used specific words here and non-specific words there, depending upon how they saw how things might evolve/develop. "Promote" and "general" and "welfare" are terms quite open to various views. Unless they were short sighted, blind or stupid, they fully understood this.

The constitutional convention took place in Philadelphia, and it took almost four months to write it. It took another year for nine states to ratify it, because some states opposed the Constitution for not including freedom of speech, religion, press, etc, and when Bill of Rights was added, they ratified it.

What that tells me, even the Constitution was written by very intelligent people, with great wisdom, the people running the states were not stupid neither. The Constitution was written to be understandable to pretty much anyone, and when States were ratifying it, they didn't just accept it, but put more thoughts in it. One thing is certain, regardless of the meaning of words at the time, from Founders to the States, they were all for protecting individual freedoms, and limiting the powers of central big government.

And THAT is the purpose of the Constitution.

 

[rightwinger]

What did our founders say regarding what government is allowed to do to fight Coronavirus?

 

[TNHarley]

If we could imagine that those who established the U.S. government were intelligent, educated people, we would be able to reason that they understood the language they were using. They used specific words here and non-specific words there, depending upon how they saw how things might evolve/develop. "Promote" and "general" and "welfare" are terms quite open to various views. Unless they were short sighted, blind or stupid, they fully understood this.

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

 

[rightwinger]

If we could imagine that those who established the U.S. government were intelligent, educated people, we would be able to reason that they understood the language they were using. They used specific words here and non-specific words there, depending upon how they saw how things might evolve/develop. "Promote" and "general" and "welfare" are terms quite open to various views. Unless they were short sighted, blind or stupid, they fully understood this.

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

 

[TNHarley]

If we could imagine that those who established the U.S. government were intelligent, educated people, we would be able to reason that they understood the language they were using. They used specific words here and non-specific words there, depending upon how they saw how things might evolve/develop. "Promote" and "general" and "welfare" are terms quite open to various views. Unless they were short sighted, blind or stupid, they fully understood this.

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

 

[rightwinger]

If we could imagine that those who established the U.S. government were intelligent, educated people, we would be able to reason that they understood the language they were using. They used specific words here and non-specific words there, depending upon how they saw how things might evolve/develop. "Promote" and "general" and "welfare" are terms quite open to various views. Unless they were short sighted, blind or stupid, they fully understood this.

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

 

[TNHarley]

If we could imagine that those who established the U.S. government were intelligent, educated people, we would be able to reason that they understood the language they were using. They used specific words here and non-specific words there, depending upon how they saw how things might evolve/develop. "Promote" and "general" and "welfare" are terms quite open to various views. Unless they were short sighted, blind or stupid, they fully understood this.

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

I am referring to you implying the govt has unlimited power and then whining about something being unconstitutional.

 

[there4eyeM]

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

I am referring to you implying the govt has unlimited power and then whining about something being unconstitutional.

The government (in the U.S.) has all the power that the people allow it to have. To my mind, the Congress misuses its enormous power.

 

[TNHarley]

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

I am referring to you implying the govt has unlimited power and then whining about something being unconstitutional.

The government (in the U.S.) has all the power that the people allow it to have. To my mind, the Congress misuses its enormous power.

Oh yea. Theor abuse of power is our fault. We let it happen.

 

[rightwinger]

The Constitution was not meant to be a cook book telling you what ingredients you are allowed to use.

They provided a broad framework of government and left it to future generations to decide what it wanted from that government.

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

I am referring to you implying the govt has unlimited power and then whining about something being unconstitutional.

They never had unlimited power

Our Constitutional government has always been subject to the most powerful check on their power......THE VOTE

If We the People think they are exceeding their responsibilities as our representative, we VOTE them out and replace them with someone who doesn’t.

 

[danielpalos]

Welfare is unconstitutional

Explain.

What do you think the framers meant when they said “GENERAL WELFARE”?
What do you think the definition of “GENERAL” is?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

You're struggling bud...

general

gen·er·al | \ ˈjen-rəl , ˈje-nə- \
Definition of general
(Entry 1 of 2)

1: involving, applicable to, or affecting the whole
2: involving, relating to, or applicable to every member of a class, kind, or groupthe general equation of a straight line
3: not confined by specialization or careful limitationa general outline
4: belonging to the common nature of a group of like individuals : GENERICthe general characteristics of a species
5a: applicable to or characteristic of the majority of individuals involved : PREVALENTthe general opinion
b: concerned or dealing with universal rather than particular aspects

All of the definitions can be used in context with what I wrote. Our welfare clause is General and must cover any given contingency.

 

[danielpalos]

Welfare is unconstitutional

Explain.

What do you think the framers meant when they said “GENERAL WELFARE”?
What do you think the definition of “GENERAL” is?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

It doesn't. Why would there be enumerated powers listed in Article I, Section 8, if general welfare clause covers everything imaginable?

Yes, it must be able to respond to any given contingency. Only right wingers believe our Common Defense clause is more General than our general welfare clause.

 

[danielpalos]

What did our founders say regarding what government is allowed to do to fight Coronavirus?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any given contingency.

 

[Ame®icano]

Welfare is unconstitutional

Explain.

What do you think the framers meant when they said “GENERAL WELFARE”?
What do you think the definition of “GENERAL” is?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

It doesn't. Why would there be enumerated powers listed in Article I, Section 8, if general welfare clause covers everything imaginable?

Yes, it must be able to respond to any given contingency. Only right wingers believe our Common Defense clause is more General than our general welfare clause.

There are enumerated powers listed as "raising and support armies", and "providing and maintaining Navy".

Coin the money, establishing post offices, regulate commerce, etc. would go under "general welfare".

 

[danielpalos]

Explain.

What do you think the framers meant when they said “GENERAL WELFARE”?
What do you think the definition of “GENERAL” is?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

It doesn't. Why would there be enumerated powers listed in Article I, Section 8, if general welfare clause covers everything imaginable?

Yes, it must be able to respond to any given contingency. Only right wingers believe our Common Defense clause is more General than our general welfare clause.

There are enumerated powers listed as "raising and support armies", and "providing and maintaining Navy".

Coin the money, establishing post offices, regulate commerce, etc. would go under "general welfare".

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;

 

[Ame®icano]

What do you think the framers meant when they said “GENERAL WELFARE”?
What do you think the definition of “GENERAL” is?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

It doesn't. Why would there be enumerated powers listed in Article I, Section 8, if general welfare clause covers everything imaginable?

Yes, it must be able to respond to any given contingency. Only right wingers believe our Common Defense clause is more General than our general welfare clause.

There are enumerated powers listed as "raising and support armies", and "providing and maintaining Navy".

Coin the money, establishing post offices, regulate commerce, etc. would go under "general welfare".

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;

Exactly.

Powers are specific and listed right after.

By the way, while we're at it, do you think that duties, imposts and excises are uniform throughout the United States?

 

[danielpalos]

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

It doesn't. Why would there be enumerated powers listed in Article I, Section 8, if general welfare clause covers everything imaginable?

Yes, it must be able to respond to any given contingency. Only right wingers believe our Common Defense clause is more General than our general welfare clause.

There are enumerated powers listed as "raising and support armies", and "providing and maintaining Navy".

Coin the money, establishing post offices, regulate commerce, etc. would go under "general welfare".

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;

Exactly.

Powers are specific and listed right after.

By the way, while we're at it, do you think that duties, imposts and excises are uniform throughout the United States?

The Point is, our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency not our common defense clause. And, any solutions must be "filtered" through the specific powers. Our Commerce Clause for example, implies market friendly solutions to any general welfare issues.

I haven't really looked into it since the States have a vested interest to keep on top of that.

 

[Pogo]

Welfare is unconstitutional

Explain.

What do you think the framers meant when they said “GENERAL WELFARE”?
What do you think the definition of “GENERAL” is?

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency.

It doesn't. Why would there be enumerated powers listed in Article I, Section 8, if general welfare clause covers everything imaginable?

Yes, it must be able to respond to any given contingency. Only right wingers believe our Common Defense clause is more General than our general welfare clause.

Indeed, "common" and "general" mean the same thing, don't they.

 

[rightwinger]

Its called an amendment process, mr. Magoo

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

I am referring to you implying the govt has unlimited power and then whining about something being unconstitutional.

They never had unlimited power

Our Constitutional government has always been subject to the most powerful check on their power......THE VOTE

If We the People think they are exceeding their responsibilities as our representative, we VOTE them out and replace them with someone who doesn’t.

I encourage anyone who disagrees with the powers used by Congress to vote them out


What are you waiting for?
Why not elect those who say they will limit their powers to a strict Constitutional interpretation ?

 

[dblack]

No need to amend.

The courts, Congress, We the People and even the states have decided we don’t need one.

Until something happens that you dont like.
All you illogical statists are the same.

Give me an example where I ever demanded a change to the Constitution?

You are the one whining

I am referring to you implying the govt has unlimited power and then whining about something being unconstitutional.

They never had unlimited power

Our Constitutional government has always been subject to the most powerful check on their power......THE VOTE

If We the People think they are exceeding their responsibilities as our representative, we VOTE them out and replace them with someone who doesn’t.

I encourage anyone who disagrees with the powers used by Congress to vote them out

"Voting them out" is not a valid remedy.

Why not elect those who say they will limit their powers to a strict Constitutional interpretation ?

Because the Constitutional limits are designed to protect the minority from the majority. In most cases where the government is overstepping its bounds, it has the support of the majority. A vote on the matter won't change things.