I know it's been ruled that way. But can anyone point to the provision of the Constitution that entitles the federal government to set up this enormous retirement and disability insurance system?
In simple terms, how could the courts have held this to be constitutional?
2007-10-07 12:02:44 · 6 answers · asked by Uncle Pennybags 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
To vcxzz.... Read the Constitution. It specifically authorizes certain things the federal gov't is to do, like coin money, regulate interstate commerce, maintain a military, etc. The 9th and 10th amendments also state that whatever the federal gov't isn't authorized to do, is to be reserved for the people or the states. Seems pretty clear cut to me.
2007-10-07 12:11:03 · update #1
When you get a decent answer, let me know. I'm still looking for it myself. Probably had a lot to do with FDR packing the courts in the 1930's to get all of his socialist ideas passed.
2007-10-07 12:06:36 · answer #1 · answered by TheOnlyBeldin 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The sixteenth amendment allows federal taxation on income from whatever source. I don't see anything that prevents the government from handing out money with the exception of section nine. Section nine limits congress by requiring appropriations to be made by law and an accounting of all public money published. I don't see any limits on size per say.
The usual libertarian argument is that some how the government doesn't have any right to tax which is false. Secondly that if the government has money that it can not give it to individuals because this violates capitalist morality which is also not included in the Constitution.
2007-10-07 12:59:36 · answer #2 · answered by Kim O'Brien 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not constitutional. The Social Security act of 1935 made it legal.
Constitutional and legal are different terms.
2007-10-07 12:16:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
ask your president since he has already declared that the "constitution is just a piece of paper"
maybe that's one reason why he tried so hard to get rid of it in favor of fattening the pockets of his rich cuddy buddy investment buddies.
bush is soooooo transparent...
2007-10-07 12:17:22 · answer #4 · answered by rare2findd 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Constitution doesn't say what you CAN do, it tells you what you CAN'T do.
Where does it say you can't?
2007-10-07 12:07:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
ask the libs...
2007-10-07 13:30:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋