Always ask the question . . .

The Constitution

A citizen’s view

Always ask the question . . .

When the Founding Fathers created the Declaration of Independence and then the Constitution of the United States, they had progressed through innumerable discussions, arguments, proposals and more. They finally settled on the wording for both documents as we have them today.

While many have been critical of the documents from the moment they were signed, the fact remains that both have withstood the test of time.  No other country, bar none, can make such a claim for their governing documents!

Undoubtedly the question, “why” was a common rejoinder to a delegate’s proposal when another  neither understood or appreciated the reason for it.  The result?  A concise, refined document.

Perhaps most important in all this is that the delegates were not seeking personal aggrandizement or power.  They put their talents to defining a document, The Constitution, that would protect the minority from the majority (thus the fact that “democracy” is never mentioned in either document) and that the laws which would flow from the document would be fair and equitable for each and every citizen.

Two outstanding blemishes in their approach were subsequently resolved.  One, unfortunately, by the bloodiest civil war in which the nation has ever been involved.  The other in confirming a woman’s right to equal standing with men.

Once completed and ratified by the individual states, the Constitution became the supreme law of the land.  All subsequent laws as proposed by Congress and signed by the President were to be consistent with the basic principles and provisions of that document.

Which brings us to the point of our sub-heading, “Always ask the question . . .”

That question: “is what is being proposed constitutional?”  If it is not, or is found wanting in any respect making it unconstitutional, it should not be passed or signed into law, no matter how many legislators promoted it.  It is not a question of personal preference.  It is about abiding by the “ground rules” for the operation of our government.  Once that restriction is breeched, there is no end to the usurpation of power and the corruption that can and will result.

To illustrate the point, let’s examine a specific piece of legislation and apply the constraints of the constitution to it.

Foreign Aid.  The US currently gives money each year to some 150 different countries around the globe.  Many, if not all, are antagonistic toward the US.  Despite accepting the funds and with few exceptions, they consistently vote against the US and its position at UN conferences.

Is it constitutional?  A thorough search of the document does not reveal any authorization for such disbursement of tax payer funds.  It would be an enormous stretch to say that the “general welfare” clause authorizes it.  The fact that so many recipients vote against the US position when the opportunity presents itself, is proof enough that it is not in our “general welfare”.

If we review only the past few years, the situation becomes even worse as the US has become a debtor nation without sufficient funds to balance an operating budget.  Thus, the US now literally borrows the money to support Foreign Aid.  In other words, the US now borrows money on which it pays interest to the creditor (probably China) in order to give it away to a collection of countries opposed to our standards, culture and outlook.

Even a present day high school student will acknowledge that this makes no sense at all.

Thus, the question remains: “is it (foreign aid) constitutional”?  The answer is obviously “no” and should therefore be stopped and defunded as rapidly as possible.

That’s my view.  What’s yours?  Reach me at constitutionviews@gmail.com  © 2012 Hillard W. Welch