Texas Governor and Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry makes a dramatic assertion: Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional. In a recent interview with the Daily Beast, Perry stated,
“I don’t think our founding fathers when they were putting the term ‘general welfare’ in there were thinking about a federally operated program of pensions nor a federally operated program of health care. What they clearly said was that those were issues that the states need to address. Not the federal government. I stand very clear on that. From my perspective, the states could substantially better operate those programs if that’s what those states decided to do.”
In this statement Governor Perry is making two claims about the constitutionality of Social Security and Medicare:
1. The founders of the United States of America were not thinking about a pension program such as Social Security, or a federal health care program such as Medicare when they wrote and approved the Constitution of the United States.
2. The founders of the United States of America stated very clearly that the states need to take care of pension programs and health care, rather than the federal government.
It just so happens that we have a copy of the Constitution handy, and so we can check on these claims.
Rick Perry’s first claim is rather ambiguous, an assertion of what thoughts were in the minds of the founders of the United States as they were crafting the Constitution. It’s impossible to ask the founders what they were thinking, as they’ve all been dead for many generations. Besides, what matters in terms of law is not what Rick Perry, or any other individual, speculates about the state of mind of the founders of the nation. What matters is what the words of the Constitution itself communicate.
Fortunately, the words of the Constitution are easy to understand. Congress was given authority to provide for the “general welfare” of the people of the United States of America. But what was meant by that phrase, “general welfare”? Welfare refers to well being, and general is a word that refers to a broad, expansive understanding of a subject. So, the Constitution authorizes Congress to act through legislation to take care of the well being of the American people in a broad sense. Health is certainly a part of well being, and so is having money in old age.
Rick Perry’s first assertion about the unconstitutionality of Social Security and Medicare doesn’t hold water. It might be true that the founders of the USA were not thinking specifically about health care and pensions, but even if that’s true, it doesn’t matter, because the Constitution provides Congress with general authority to legislate, not just with a few specific areas of authority.
Rick Perry’s second assertion, that the Constitution specifically assigns the power to manage health care and pensions to state governments rather than to the federal government, is also plainly false. Search the Constitution up and down, and you won’t find any language that assigns the power over pensions and health care to state governments. Section 4 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, however, asserts the contrary when it comes to pensions: That the federal government cannot refuse to pay pensions.
Rick Perry misrepresents the Constitution in order to attack Social Security and Medicare. But, he claims, state governments would be able to do a better job than the federal government can in operating health care programs.
The facts are, however that under Rick Perry, Texas has some of the worst health care in the country. America’s Health Rankings places Texas in 40th place out of all 50 states. Texas ranks dead last in terms of the number of residents who have health insurance, and in last place in terms of access to prenatal care.
The Commonwealth Fund places Texas in 46th place out of the 50 states in terms of delivery of medical care. Their survey of health statistics found that Texas ranked in absolute last place in terms of access for children to medical care.
Rick Perry’s own record as Governor of Texas proves his assertion wrong. He thinks that state governments would do a better job than Medicare in delivering medical care, but in fact, Texas is downright rotten at ensuring that its residents have adequate access to medical care.
On issues of health care and Social Security, Rick Perry has proved himself to be both ignorant and inept. The last thing we need is for Perry to bring those weaknesses to the White House.
If ever a face needed a pie, this would be the one. Gah, politicians are such shit!
Be prepared with 10cc of glitter in case the pie doesn’t work.
It’s my understanding, although I could be wrong, that Perry’s I.Q. and age are the same.
Pingback: TEXAS GOVERNOR RICK PERRY | The Progressive Playbook
It is not as impossible to ask the framers what they think,as you think, since they recorded their reasoning for prosperity in the Federalist Papers and what they wrote there is considered by the courts when it comes to understanding what the framers intended.
There is a very good discussion of this subject, examining what the framers wrote at the time of ratification at http://www.asmainegoes.com/content/rick-perry-correct-social-security-unconstitutional#comment-601933
The Federalist Papers is SOME of what SOME of the people who approved the Constitution WROTE. Even for this small subset, it isn’t what they THOUGHT.
The Constitution is what they approved into law, not the Federalist Papers.
“It’s impossible to ask the founders what they were thinking, as they’ve all been dead for many generations.”
Not true, as Mackenzie points out: read both the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers. Documents Illustrative of the Formation of the Union of the American States [Government Printing Office, 1927. House Document No. 398. Selected, Arranged and Indexed by Charles C. Tansill] has many notes recorded of the debates of the Constitutional Convention.
These debates were secret for fifty years as the Framers did not want to be constantly badgered about what they meant by this, and that, clause of the Constitution.
Courts are supposed to examine the debates of the framers of laws only when the text of the statute is vague and ambiguous, subject to two or more conflicting interpretations by reasonable men.
Bob, your “not true”-ing has become absurd. The founders indeed have all been dead for generations.
“… the Constitution provides Congress with general authority to legislate, not just with a few specific areas of authority.”
Not true. The Constitution is an instrument (legal document) of limited, specifically enumerated (itemized) powers.
Congress is granted all legislative powers, which generally are listed in Article I, section 8, and scattered elsewhere in the Constitution. The Tenth Amendment forbids the Congress from exercising any powers not specifically granted within the Constitution.
State constitutions generally grant all legislative powers to their legislatures, subject only to superior law (federal) and to specific restrictions in their respective constitutions.
This is often confusing to neophytes to American constitutions and those superficially acquainted with them, as the designs of federal and state constitutions are somewhat opposite.
Bob, please read the entire Constitution. The Constitution specifically grants Congress the power to legislate in order to provide for the general welfare! It also clearly provides, though you seem to be ignoring it, the power over public pensions.
Your kneejerk reaction to any public good from the federal government seems to be to want to ban it by slapping the 10th Amendment over it, when the 10th Amendment only applies in a very few cases, as the Constitution is an document that provides for a strong federal government, and weaker state governments. Neo-confederates like Rick Perry may wish that were not so, but the document is plain to read.
“… the Constitution specifically assigns the power to manage health care and pensions to state governments rather than to the federal government, is also plainly false. Search the Constitution up and down, and you won’t find any language that assigns the power over pensions and health care to state governments.”
Not true. Amendment 10:
“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.” As the power to manage health care and pensions (other than for federal officers, employees and agents) is not granted to Congress, it is thereby denied to Congress. If a state’s own constitution does not forbid its legislature to manage pensions and health care, it has that power due to its constitutional grant of “all” legislative power to its legislature. The Tenth Amendment is pretty specific. Perhaps it might have been more understandable if it had read: “ALL OF the powers not delegated …” Unfortunately for some persons today, the Framers ordered the Constitution to be as short as practical, and assumed a high degree of literacy by those reading it. It is not written as a court brief, in which it is wise to state everything twice (or three times) and avoid pronouns, just to try to make sure it is not misconstrued.
“Rick Perry’s own record as Governor of Texas proves his assertion wrong. He thinks that state governments would do a better job than Medicare in delivering medical care, but in fact, Texas is downright rotten at ensuring that its residents have adequate access to medical care.
“On issues of health care and Social Security, Rick Perry has proved himself to be both ignorant and inept. The last thing we need is for Perry to bring those weaknesses to the White House.”
Apparently “Truman” thinks the governor of a state is His Excellency, the Dictator. “Governor” is just a traditional title of the chief executive officer of a state. It is his/her primary job to carry out the laws that the LEGISLATURE has passed, not to dictate what is to be or not to be done by the executive department.
The governor of Texas has less power than the governors of some other states. In no state is the governor granted legislative power. If the legislature of Texas does not choose to establish state health care or a state pension system, the governor has no power to overrule the legislature.
(S)he may recommend legislation to the legislature but (s)he cannot rule by decree.
So, then, you’re saying that Rick Perry has no record of effective executive leadership.
Rick Perry claims credit for what he thinks is a great Texas economy. He can’t have it both ways. This article assesses Rick Perry according to his own standard.
Either Rick Perry is, as you suggest, an empty suit, or he is an incompetent executive.
“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of 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.” –James Madison
The commonly heard excuse given by congressmen when asked under what Constitutional authority they think they have to promote this health care takeover is; “general welfare.” The Father of our Constitution, who was most responsible for the words within it said otherwise.
By: Geronimo
Source: http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=7240
Why don’t you cite Hamilton, another of the founding fathers?
And why don’t you cite the Supreme Court, which long, long ago went with the Hamiltonian interpretation?
Cite the Supreme Court? Why not also cite Thomas Eliot and Edwin Witte? These men helped craft Social Security and both believed the only reason it was deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court was due to FDR’s court packing threat. It’s interesting that the Court deemed a more restricted version of Social Security for railroad employees to be unconstitutional but suddenly reversed course a couple years later on the much more expanded entitlement. Why not cite Article I Section 8 of the Constitution, which states “general Welfare of the United States”? Will you argue that “United States” is the same as saying individuals even though the Constitution and its amendments clearly differentiates between the federal government, the united states, and the people? Even if one applies general welfare in the loose sense and taking the words as-is without understanding the contemporary meaning of those words, it’s hard for me to make the leap that the entire clause “general welfare of the United States” applies to individuals.
The States are not required to have Social Security programs, but they are not prohibited from it by the Constitution:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” Federalist 45
For REAL hope & change—support Ron Paul. Anti-war; anti-corruption; anti-Federal Reserve and gov’t-bailouts.