This_person
Well-Known Member
I don't really care what it is, but it is always a need for government involvement.
Now, I'm a SMALL government person, not a NO government person. Do we need a military? "provide for the common defense...of the United States." That's right there in Article One, Section 8. we can talk about a standing army (Article One, Section 8 also says "The Congress shall have the power to raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; to provide and maintain a Navy;") which is clearly not intended to be a federal thing, but still we have to be able to defend ourselves. Do we need a State Dept? Well, it is Article 2 Section 2 that talks about the president appointing ambassadors, so a uniform voice from the USA to those ambassadors seems reasonable.
What about Dept of Education? Where is the constitutional authority? Any change to their funding and liberals will tell you about how conservatives are trying to rob an education from kids - but, really, the states should do that. I find no authorization for a Dept of Education.
What about a Dept of Housing and Urban Development? I mean, seriously, where is there even a hint of this in the constitution? Again, change the amount and liberals will tell you how conservatives want to put people out on the streets. Why can't we turn all of it over to the states in which these places exist, and close down this dept too?
Liberal will always tell you about how someone may or may not be affected by a reduction in funding to some program, but they always - always - forget that there is no constitutional authority for any of it. Why do they think the federal government should take care of so many things, when those things almost exclusively belong to the state, or to people themselves?
Yes, I know a common answer from conservatives will be "because they pay for votes". True or not, they must think there's something reasonable about doing even that. What is it, liberals?
Now, I'm a SMALL government person, not a NO government person. Do we need a military? "provide for the common defense...of the United States." That's right there in Article One, Section 8. we can talk about a standing army (Article One, Section 8 also says "The Congress shall have the power to raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; to provide and maintain a Navy;") which is clearly not intended to be a federal thing, but still we have to be able to defend ourselves. Do we need a State Dept? Well, it is Article 2 Section 2 that talks about the president appointing ambassadors, so a uniform voice from the USA to those ambassadors seems reasonable.
What about Dept of Education? Where is the constitutional authority? Any change to their funding and liberals will tell you about how conservatives are trying to rob an education from kids - but, really, the states should do that. I find no authorization for a Dept of Education.
What about a Dept of Housing and Urban Development? I mean, seriously, where is there even a hint of this in the constitution? Again, change the amount and liberals will tell you how conservatives want to put people out on the streets. Why can't we turn all of it over to the states in which these places exist, and close down this dept too?
Liberal will always tell you about how someone may or may not be affected by a reduction in funding to some program, but they always - always - forget that there is no constitutional authority for any of it. Why do they think the federal government should take care of so many things, when those things almost exclusively belong to the state, or to people themselves?
Yes, I know a common answer from conservatives will be "because they pay for votes". True or not, they must think there's something reasonable about doing even that. What is it, liberals?