Comment: The Real Issue: Authority "Not Delegated" to Federal Government

Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788:
http://www.pacificwestcom.com/americanpatriotpartynewsletter

James Madison: "...If that "latitude" of "CONSTRUCTION" which he contends for were to take place with respect to the "sweeping clause", there "would" be room for those "HORRORS".

But it gives NO SUPPLEMENTARY power. It "ONLY" enables them to execute the "DELEGATED powers". "If" the "DELEGATION" of their powers be "safe", no possible inconvenience can arise from this clause. It is at most "BUT" explanatory."

Mr. GEORGE MASON. "Mr. Chairman, gentlemen say there is no new power given by this clause. Is there any thing in this Constitution which secures to the states the powers which are said to be retained? Will powers remain to the states which are not expressly guarded and reserved? I will suppose a case. Gentlemen may call it an impossible case, and "suppose" that Congress will act with wisdom and integrity. Among the enumerated powers, Congress are to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, and to pay the debts, and to provide for the general welfare and common defence; and by that clause (so often called the sweeping clause) they are to make all laws necessary to execute those laws. Now, suppose oppressions {442} should arise under "THIS" government, and any writer should dare to stand forth, and expose to the community at large the abuses of "THOSE" powers; could not Congress, under the "idea" of providing for the "GENERAL WELFARE",

and under their >>>"OWN" >>>"CONSTRUCTION", say that this was destroying the "general peace", encouraging sedition, and poisoning the minds of the people? And could they not, in order to provide against this, lay a dangerous restriction On the press? Might they not even bring the trial of this restriction within the ten miles square, when there is no prohibition against it? Might they not thus destroy the trial by jury?

Would they not "extend" their implication? It appears to me that they MAY and >>>"WILL".

And shall the support of our rights depend on the bounty of men "whose interest it may be to oppress us"? That Congress should have power to provide for the general welfare (APP Note: Defense against "Foreign" aggression) of the Union, I grant. But I wish a clause in the Constitution, with respect to ALL powers which are NOT granted, that they are retained by the states.

Otherwise, the power of providing for the "GENERAL WELFARE" may be "PERVERTED TO ITS DESTRUCTION"."

Mr. GEORGE NICHOLAS, in reply to the gentlemen opposed to the clause under debate, went over the same grounds, and developed the same principles, which Mr. Pendleton and Mr. Madison had done. The opposers of the {443} clause, which gave the power of providing for the GENERAL WELFARE, supposed its dangers to result from its connection with, and extension of, the powers granted in the other clauses. He endeavored to show the committee that it ONLY EMPOWERED CONGRESS TO MAKE SUCH LAWS as would be necessary to enable them to pay the public DEBTS and provide for the common defence; > that this "GENERAL WELFARE" was united, >>>"NOT" to "the general power of legislation", but to the >PARTICULAR power> of laying and collecting taxes, imposts, and excises, >>>FOR THE "PURPOSE" of paying the "DEBTS" and providing for the "COMMON DEFENCE", that is, that they could raise (APP: ONLY) AS MUCH MONEY as would pay the "DEBTS" and provide for the "COMMON DEFENCE", in >>>"CONSEQUENCE OF THIS POWER" .

He then proceeded thus: But, says he, who is to determine the extent of such powers? I say, the same power which, in all well-regulated communities, determines the "extent" of "legislative" powers. If they exceed these powers, the "JUDICIARY" WILL DECLARE it "VOID", or else "the PEOPLE" will have a "RIGHT" to declare it "VOID"...

If I understand it right, NO "new" power can be exercised."

----------

When you understand the federal government CANNOT (any part), NOR the states THEMSELVES, ARROGATE "ANY" NEW power upon the federal government for them to exercise, outside the very "LIMITED" delegated powers granted them;

...and that includes ratifying (created to make changes ONLY WITHIN THE DELEGATED POWERS) and amendment process (created ONLY to make changes in which to PROTECT your rights);

Then you will understand the issues at hand.

Unenumerated taxation is an "arrogated" power; Undelegated powers NOT granted in the "ORIGINAL COMPACT" are "arrogated" powers.

American Patriot Party
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc