This is equivalent to saying "it is what it is."
In other words, it is a non-statement. Would you ever catch a politician justifying a government program "because it's the wrong thing to do?"
The founding fathers knew this. Their vision was for the federal government to exist in a severely limited fashion, specifically so that it would NOT become a bloated powerful bureaucracy. If it is NOT explicitly written in the constitution, then the federal government has no power. It is instead up to the states. This is what the 10th amendment is all about:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Bureaucracies have the unfortunate habit of taking on a life of their own to justify their existence. It's like marketing where a business wants to become "sticky" to its customers.
Or as the book "Government Beers" points out, a federal program NEVER gives unspent monies back to the treasury, it's always spent in a mad dash at the end of the fiscal year so that no one can accuse them of needing less money. "Government Beers" is a funny read that teaches the intent of the Constitution, and brings awareness of "unintended consequences" that come about with large, top-down driven programs.
I wish that the states had the courage to demand that the federal government obey the constitution. Only then will problems get solved at the intended level.
Unfortunately, any focus on the 10th amendment is met today with arguments that suggest that slavery would have never been abolished if its intended meaning were followed.
I wonder what would have happened if the Confederate States would have had the courage to declare the emancipation proclamation before Lincoln, and truly turn the war into a strict constitutional challenge instead of a human rights battle. Then the 10th amendment might not be so politically charged as it has been of late.
That would have been "the right thing to do."
Unfortunately, any focus on the 10th amendment is met today with arguments that suggest that slavery would have never been abolished if its intended meaning were followed.
I wonder what would have happened if the Confederate States would have had the courage to declare the emancipation proclamation before Lincoln, and truly turn the war into a strict constitutional challenge instead of a human rights battle. Then the 10th amendment might not be so politically charged as it has been of late.
That would have been "the right thing to do."
I'm Roy Obadiah, and these are my rants.
