Enumerating the Power of Congress
By Erick Posted in Arizona | Congress | Enumerated Powers | John Shadegg | Oklahoma | Tom Coburn — Comments (7) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
John Shadegg (R-AZ) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) are at it again on behalf of constitutional principles.
On a blogger call this afternoon, they announced that they are introducing into the House and Senate the Enumerated Powers Act; a worthy piece of legislation that will cause Congress to slow down and think before passing legislation. Nonetheless, the legislation is fatally flawed because of the length of the bill. At only two pages, the rest of the Congress is going to spend the next year looking for the other three thousand pages before considering it.
But should the legislation make its way through the legislative process and get to the President, the nation would be better off.
Introduced several times over the past few years by Congressman Shadegg, but never in the Senate, the Enumerated Powers Act (H.B. 1359) would require Congress specify, in each piece of legislation, which one of its Article I, Section 8 powers the Congress is using to legitimize the law.
Right now, many people think Congress has near plenary power under the "general welfare" clause of Article I. However, as James Madison, the author of the constitution, made clear, "With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of [enumerated] powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
Likewise, even Thomas Jefferson noted that, "Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.
Right now the legislation has 52 co-sponsors in the House and 23 in the Senate, the most it has ever had. No Democrats have signed on.
The GOP would be wise to make this a red meat issue for the base.
You can see an overview of the legislation here. The text is here.
Leaving Arizona — Comments (71) »
Enumerating the Power of Congress 7 Comments (0 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
for a bill to get over, forcing its authors to include the Constitutional authority for the bill. Congress routinely and without apparent concern imposes analogous bookkeeping requirements on the rest of us, everything such as Sarbanes-Oxley, HIPPA, or even the new FISA compromise.
But upon themselves?
--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.
If the Supreme Court was doing there job we wouldn't even need this legislation. I mean really the SCOTUS is there to strike down legislation that goes beyond the enumerated powers of Congress and the Gov't as a whole. But instead the SCOTUS has flipped the script on us and now decides not on what is Constitutional but what they can get away with despite the Constitutionality.
"Land of the Free and Home of da Whopper" Peter Griffin...Family Guy
conform and celebrate diversity....or else!!!
This would also (in theory) provide protection against a Democrat Congress with an Obama Administration just delving into socialism.
I don't know that it would work, but I wholly support the measure and cheer on my Oklahoma Congressman for being a part of it.
Congress ought to be MUCH more mindful of what the Constitution really says when it is deciding what intrusive laws to pass.
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -- James Madison
It might be amusing to see Senator Obama give it a try, though. On second thought, I'd sooner not give him the opportunity.
this would provide very little benefit at all. Because, oh, approximately 100% of the non-tax bills would list Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3:
"The Congress shall have power...To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;"
The Commerce Clause has been interpreted so broadly by SCOTUS that there's almost nothing possible that doesn't qualify.
If I had the chance to put the question to Coborn and Shadegg directly, I'd start by telling them this is brilliant and ask how hard it would be to add language that Article I, Section 8 enumerates these powers to the Legislative branch and the SCOTUS should tread lightly when assuming responsibilities granted to the Legislative branch in the future!
"A political party cannot be all things to all men."--Ronald Wilson Reagan
How sad that Congress has gotten so bad that they need to introduce a bill to require Congress to prove that it has Constitutional Authority with the plethora of OTHER bills that it passes.
Saddly, my confidence is low. Even if this passes, I expect MANY horribly intrusive (and destructive) laws to get passed under the guise of "Public Welfare"
----------------------
Dependence is Slavery.