- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Debate: "Small Gov Conservatives are not really small Gov"
Posted on 9/20/24 at 2:14 am to BCreed1
Posted on 9/20/24 at 2:14 am to BCreed1
quote:
What gives you that impression?
As AllbyMyRelf said, "The 10th amendment".
The founders didn't think they should, or needed to address every conceivable thing someone might suggest the general (now-a-days inaccurately referred to as the "federal" government) would have legitimate authority to be involved with. Thus the 10th amendment, which was to make explicit what was the first operable article of the Articles of Confederation (the first constitution).
The 10th amendment is quite simple and quite clear, and has been a thorn in the side of the statists since the beginning.
But look at what the founders actually had to say. One of the first major debates (after adoption of the current constitution) was over the first national bank. Jefferson, allied with the anti-federalists, and Randolph, allied with the so-called federalists (actually nationalists) argued against the national bank as an unconstitutional power grab while Hamilton (a monarchist) saw it as a first step in his plan for unlimited central government. (Hamilton's statements in the "federalist" papers about limitations on government were nothing but an attempt to convince the public, that the so-called "anti-federalists" (the true federalists) were wrong in their suspicions about this new general government being a national rather than federal government which would grow to destroy their liberty.)
This was debated in 1791, during Washington's first term. References to the twelfth amendment are references to what was not yet ratified as, but now known as, the tenth amendment. Jefferson and Randolph laid out why congress did not have the power to create a national bank. They also predicted, correctly, what would be the long-term effect on the government if the bank bill were adopted. Hamilton with circular illogic and arrogant disregard of constitutional limits on government asserts the opposite.
After summarizing what the bank bill is to do, Jefferson said,
quote:
I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That " all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people." [XIIth amendment.] To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.
Randolph ends his first opinion (referring to Hamilton's abuse of the "necessary and proper" clause) with,
quote:
However, let it be propounded as an eternal question to those, who build new powers on this clause, whether the latitude of construction which they arrogate, will not terminate in an unlimitted power in Congress?
In every aspect therefore under which the attorney general can view the act, so far as it incorporates the bank, he is bound to declare his opinion to be against its constitutionality.
These are just a couple of quotes. The full references should be read to really understand what they were saying.
Jefferson
Randolph
Posted on 9/20/24 at 2:28 am to BCreed1
I think there is a societal axiom: small population = small government. Large population = big government. It is easy to unite a small group but not so much for a larger group. Unity is everything in a society. Disunity and competition for power is the current order and driving force of our society, as politics has become the dominant factor on our socioeconomic mechanisms which support both basic life goods and services and access to relative affluence. It’s Capitalism vs Marxism plain and simple, and no matter what we end up with, big time CONTROL will be the bottom line.
Posted on 9/20/24 at 3:59 am to BCreed1
quote:00-06 "small government" conservatives ran the White House, both houses of Congress, and the USSC.
Debate: "Small Gov Conservatives are not really small Gov"
No major conservative policies were enacted, we got the Patriot Act, War on Terror, Iraq invasion, and Warrantless wiretapping. The size of government exploded and we even added a new fascist wing called Homeland Security.
/debate
This post was edited on 9/20/24 at 4:00 am
Popular
Back to top

0





