Monday, June 17, 2019

Thousands of Illegal Aliens Infected With Contagious Diseases Detained At the US Border

By Capt Joseph R. John, June 17, 2019 Op Ed # 438

At one time mumps, chicken pox, and measles were eradicated in the United States.  Now with hundreds of thousands of Illegal Aliens flooding across the wide open southern border, from every country in the world, those infectious diseases have broken out across the US. 

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement have placed 5,200 immigrants, who are infected with mumps, chicken pox, measles, and other infectious diseases, into quarantine in 39 immigrant detention centers nationwide.  The number of quarantined detainees has jumped dramatically from earlier this year; ICE Health Services reported that on March 7th, there were 2,287 detainees in quarantine for "exposure to contagious diseases".

Acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan urged lawmakers to provide the US Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection with additional funding to assist operations, calling the crisis "unlike anything our country has ever faced." McAleenan told lawmakers this past week that the increasing number of Illegal Aliens has hurt the morale of border officials and exposed them to sicknesses. "Their morale is impacted. They're tired. A lot of them have gotten sick. They've been exposed to flu, chicken pox, measles, mumps --all kinds of challenges in terms of the medical care," McAleenan said. "They're spending time overnight in hospitals instead of patrolling the border."

With no proof to back up unsubstantiated allegations, the left of center liberal media establishment has been trying to blame the new scourge of measles, chicken pox, mumps, and other infectious diseases spreading throughout the United States, on parents.  False media reports stated, parents have suddenly decided to stop inoculating their children to protect them from infectious diseases.

It is a well known fact that many Illegal Aliens have never been inoculated to protect themselves from contagious diseases.   The entering Illegal Aliens infected with contagious disease, who were not quarantined, is the reason why infectious diseases are spreading in the interior of the United States.  American parents are not responsible for the spread of infectious diseases that irresponsible media outlets keep reporting on.     

The US Border Patrol reported that in May 2019, 144,000 Illegal Aliens were interdicted at the wide open southern border.  The US Border Patrol only interdicts 1/3 of the Illegal Aliens crossing the wide open southern border, so in May 2019, 288,000 undetected Illegal Aliens entered the United States, and a percentage of them have been infected with contagious diseases.  

Last week over one hundred Illegal Alien family members and single adults from the Ebola-stricken Democratic Republic of Congo, illegally crossed into the southern border towns of Eagle Pass and Del Rio seeking asylum.  They were not quarantined, instead, they were dumped on the streets of San Antonio, as daily, thousands of Illegal Aliens from all over the world are being dumped on city streets of  many different communities across the United States. 

The Washington Examiner reported that roughly 300 Congolese and Angola citizens who arrived in San Antonio, after they crossed the wide open southern border, quickly departed from San Antonio for unknown destinations throughout the nation.  Christina Higgs, the Catholic Charities Spokesperson, said Africans are spending several months in transit in Brazil, then they head north to enter the US.   Catholic Charities supports the entry of Illegal Aliens for Africa, because they receive federal payments to resettle those Illegal Aliens.

Congress continues to deny that there is a public health and illegal immigration humanity crisis at the wide open southern border.  The dangers posed to the public health of America citizens (especially to public school students), due to infectious diseases being spread by entering Illegal Aliens, has been covered up by the irresponsible left of center liberal media establishment.  
Congress continues to refuse to pass legislation to fund the expansion of detention facilities, the purchase of more beds for infected Illegal Aliens with contagious diseases, or to erect secure barriers to stop hundreds of thousands of Illegal Aliens from entering the United States.  Those refusals have prevented the ability of Customs and Border Protection from screening hundreds of thousands of Illegal Aliens for contagious diseases, and that has also been covered up by the irresponsible left of center liberal media establishment.
Liberal Judges continue to impose injunctions against the Trump administration, the US Border Patrol, and the Customs and Border Protection’s actions to stop the flow of hundreds of thousands of Illegal Aliens from entering the US.  Appeals filed to override those injunctions are winding their way thru the appellant court system, and may take years to mitigate those injunctions.
Epidemics of infectious diseases that normally sweep across Central America are now sweeping across Mexico because of the numerous caravans streaming north across Mexico to the southern border of the US.  Mexican Health Care professionals have been warning their population about the spread of the influenza, measles, mumps, typhus, syphilis, tuberculosis, and chicken pox.  Illegal Aliens who haven’t been inoculated for infectious diseases, have been interdicted and detained with influenza, measles, mumps, typhus, chicken pox, tuberculous, scalia, rubella, smallpox, and even malaria..
Some Illegal Alien children entering the US, transport mosquitos in their clothing, and some of those mosquitos carry infectious diseases.   Some mosquitos transmit yellow fever, and a deadly enterovirus, EV-D68; EV-D68 has been responsible for at least 14 deaths in the US.  Some infectious diseases are also transmitted by insects in clothing, include insects that spread dengue fever. 
The US Nationality Act requires the enforcement of US Federal Quarantine Laws.  Those Quarantine Laws were once enforced meticulously on Ellis Island, where every single immigrant was screened for infectious diseases before they were allowed to enter the US. 
Because of the Catch and Release Court Decision imposed by liberal judges, the massive influx of thousands of Illegal Aliens daily, normal law enforcement duties, the need to carefully deal with small children and babies, delivery of sick and pregnant Illegal Aliens to hospitals,  the shipment of thousands of Illegal Aliens by busses and planes to the interior of the US, etc., US Quarantine Laws are not being uniformly enforced to determine if Illegal Aliens have infectious diseases. 
Therefore an unknown number of interdicted Illegal Aliens, who should have been quarantined, but were not, enter the US daily, and 2/3rd of Illegal Aliens aren’t even being interdicted to determine if they have infectious diseases.  US Border Patrol Agents are being infected by Illegal Aliens with contagious diseases, such as influenza, scalia, tuberculosis, chicken pox, measles, and mumps, and according to recent news reports, many of those infectious diseases are spreading to the general population of the US.  
DHS officials have stated that the sheer volume of Illegal Aliens coming across the border has overwhelmed health facilities, and that they are losing control at the border.   Unfortunately, the Democrat controlled Congress refuses take any action at all, to stop the massive influx of Illegal Aliens, and to prevent the very serious Public Health crisis that is developing within the United States. 

Copyright by Capt Joseph R. John.  All Rights Reserved.  The material can only posted on another Web site or distributed on the Internet by giving full credit to the author.  It may not be published, broadcast, or rewritten without the permission from the author

Joseph R. John, USNA ‘62
Capt    USN(Ret)/Former FBI
Chairman, Combat Veterans For Congress PAC
2307 Fenton Parkway, Suite 107-184
San Diego, CA 92108



Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, “Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?” Then I said, “Here am I. Send me!”
-Isaiah 6:8


The Federalist Papers
June 14, 2019

Thousands Detained At Border Carrying Contagious Diseases Into US
Written by Carmine Sabia


Everyone is concerned about the outbreaks of mumps, chicken pox and measles, diseases that we thought were eradicated.
And they were eradicated, in the United States. But now that Democrats have opened the gates and allowed everyone in, the diseases are back.
They have attempted to blame the trend to not get your children vaccinated but now it appears the diseases are coming from Central America, CNN reported.
US Immigration and Customs Enforcement has placed 5,200 adult immigrants in quarantine after being exposed to mumps or chicken pox, a dramatic jump from just a few months ago, the agency says.
ICE has recorded cases of either mumps or chicken pox in 39 immigrant detention centres nationwide, an ICE official tells CNN.
Of the 5,200 detainees in quarantine across those centres, around 4,200 are for exposure to mumps. Around 800 were exposed to chicken pox and 100 have been exposed to both.
The Department of Homeland Security has repeatedly warned of the toll the increasing number of migrants at the border has taken on the department. This week, Acting DHS Secretary Kevin McAleenan urged lawmakers for additional funding to assist operations, calling the crisis “unlike anything our country has ever faced.”
In May, nearly 144,000 migrants were apprehended by Customs and Border Protection — the majority of whom were families and unaccompanied children. Many of them turn themselves in to Border Patrol.
Should the border be closed? Yes/No Completing this poll entitles you to our news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 0% (0 Votes) 0% (0 Votes)
Just because individuals are quarantined doesn’t mean they have the mumps, but they’ve at least been exposed to it. From September 2018 to June 13, 297 people in ICE custody had confirmed cases of mumps, proven by blood test…
The agency has previously dealt with contagious diseases, like the measles, the flu and chicken pox, but last September was the first time the agency recorded mumps cases. It’s not clear where the disease derived from or how it spread. Seventy-five percent of the immigrants coming into ICE custody come from the border, though immigrants might also interact with inmates at jails, some of which also hold immigrants.
“I think there is heightened interest in this situation because it’s the mumps, which is a new occurrence in custody, but preventing the spread of communicable disease in ICE custody is something we have demonstrated success doing,” , ICE executive associate director for enforcement and removal operations, Nathalie Asher said.
“From an operational perspective, the impact is significant in the short and long term and will result in an increase in cohered detainees’ length of stay in detention, an inability to effect removal of eligible cohered detainees, and postponing scheduled consular interviews for quarantined detainees,” Asher said.

Constitution Study TV: Martial Law

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host




-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Sunday, June 16, 2019

First world misandrists and third world testosterone

Opinion by Allan McNew

Recently I saw a segment on a regional news program that cut straight to newer left feminist loony-ism: poaching of elephant and rhino tusks is entirely an expression of male testosterone and woke women are going to put an end to it.

I have some obvious information for the herein un-named animal activist / feminist on that program – it’s a very old tale about poverty, money, greed and power, and women figure into it too. I haven’t met a woman yet that was adverse to money (how else are they going to buy all those shoes), and there is an old saying, “no money, no honey”. The amount of money required for honey is dependent on personal wealth. Much, much less is required for threadbare subsistence communities as opposed to fat cat social activists who have the police chase the homeless they profess to champion away from their gated communities.

Figure in third world poverty at the bottom being exploited by insurgencies of all types scrounging cash for military weapons and/or unscrupulous middle men of illegal trade of any sort, artisans who carve ivory for a pittance and the money men who exploit them, and the extremely well heeled end market which will pay exorbitant prices for ivory trinkets.

If there wasn’t money in the game, there wouldn’t be all that poaching of endangered wild life. Testosterone only goes so far when it comes to working for nothing while there are other things to do to scratch a living when it’s hot outside the circle of shade around a tree. So, instead of embarking on yet another first world crusade to emasculate American men, why not brainstorm a way to take the profit out of third world poaching of ivory?

That might be too much work and not near the sadistic fun for that humorless pack of miserable, misandrist scolds with wildly inflated first world problems.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Saturday, June 15, 2019

Constitution Radio: Crossroads

America is on a collision course with socialism, destruction, and death.

If we knew the future, would you try to change it if you saw the destruction coming?

If we knew the past, would we try to learn from it so that our future is not one of destruction?

Or would we march willingly towards our demise?

Doug addresses these issues on today's program.

Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs
KMET 1490-AM
Saturdays, 1:00 pm Pacific
www.kmet1490am.com
https://soundcloud.com/kmet-1490-am/sets/constitution-radio

Friday, June 14, 2019

War with Iran?

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

It seems we may be inching closer to war with Iran as the war of words regarding two oil tankers has increased to a deafening scream. The tankers, one Japanese, the other Norwegian, were attacked on Thursday, and the Trump administration immediately blamed Iran, claiming intelligence supporting the assertion.

According to Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, the Pentagon is preparing for a possible military action in case of more attacks or efforts to close the Strait of Hormuz.

“We obviously need to make contingency plans should the situation deteriorate,” Shanahan told reporters.

Sanctions against Iran earlier in the year have had Iranian official threatening war.

While war with Iran may not be imminent, the reality is that moves are being made to prepare for such a reality should it emerge.  U.S. intelligence is currently working to convince U.S. allies that Iran was indeed behind the attacks against the oilers.

Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo was first to blame Iran for the tanker explosions Thursday. On Friday, Trump echoed the charge in a TV interview, saying a limpet mine attached to one of the ship’s hulls had “probably got essentially Iran written all over it,” although U.S. forces or allies did not recover the munition.

A tanker was reportedly was hit midship with projectiles above the waterline after sunrise.

"We received reports that something flew towards the ship," Yutaka Katada, president of Kokaku Sangyo Co., which owns the ship, told a news conference in Tokyo. "The place where the projectile landed was significantly higher than the water level, so we are absolutely sure that this wasn’t a torpedo.”

Crews abandoned both the Kokura Courageous and the Norwegian-owned Front Altair, which was attacked less than an hour later

Iranian officials deny any involvement in the explosions.

This attack follows attacks against four tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates a month ago.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Thursday, June 13, 2019

Basic Understanding of the Border Wall

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

I was recently told by a Democrat that the wall Trump is building is evil, like the Berlin Wall was.

I responded, "They may have both been walls, but there is a key difference.  One was built to keep good people in, while the other is being built to keep bad people out."

Of course they then accused me of calling every person trying to come into the United States "bad people."

"Not at all," I responded, "but we know that element exists among the people trying to come into this country.  At home you lock your door. Do you do that because you think every person who might stand on your front porch is evil?  Of course not. But you realize that element exists out there, so you lock your front door, not because you hate everyone on the outside, but because you love everyone on the inside.  Even if you're home, and someone knocks, you peer around the door first to vet them before you let whoever it is at your door in.  America is our home, and the border is the front door."

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Wednesday, June 12, 2019

Temecula Constitution Class: Legislative Authorities

Temecula Constitution Class, Wednesdays 6:00 pm
28120 Jefferson Avenue, Temecula, CA
Riverside County Republican Party Headquarters

Constitution Class Handout
Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs
douglasvgibbs@reagan.com
 
 
 
 
 
Constitution Class Handout
Instructor: Douglas V. Gibbs
douglasvgibbs@reagan.com
 
 
 
 
 
 
Lesson 03
 
Legislative Authorities
Making Law, and Enumerated Powers
 
Making Law
 
As covered when we studied Article I, Section 1, all legislative powers belong to the Legislative Branch. According to Article I, Section 7, Clause 2, all bills must be approved by both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate before they can be presented to the President for signature. Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 indicates that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.
 
The structure for making law was established by the Founding Fathers in the way that it was in order to ensure that all parts of the system had a voice in the approval, or disapproval, of the law. The people through their representatives in the House of Representatives voted their approval or disapproval of the bill, the States did the same through their voice in the United States Senate, and the federal government's voice through the executive was the final approval. If the executive did not like the proposed law, he could veto it. However, all did not stop there. If Congress felt strongly enough about the bill, and had enough votes, they could override the veto with two-thirds vote in each House and make the bill a law without the signature of approval from the President.
 
In 1913, the 17th Amendment changed the process in which United States Senators are chosen. Originally, the State Legislatures appointed the U.S. Senators, making the U.S. Senate quite literally the voice of the States. The Senators at that time voted with the interests of the States, and more specifically with the intent of protecting their State's sovereignty, in mind. With the House of Representatives acting as the voice of the people, and the Senate acting as the voice of the States, the dynamics of making law was quite different from what it is today.
 
The process of making a law as originally intended ensured that the people, the States, and the federal government, all each had the opportunity to approve or disapprove the piece of legislation. If either the people or the States did not like the bill, its journey to become a law stopped. If the federal government, via the President, felt the bill was unconstitutional, or that its passage is not in the best interest of the nation, he could veto the bill. The veto by the President in turn could be overturned with a two thirds vote from each house of Congress. The reason for this system was for the purpose of checks and balances, and to keep the States involved in monitoring the federal government through advise and consent authorities. This gave the people through the House of Representatives, and the States through the U.S. Senate, the ability to check each other, and the ability of them together to check the federal government.   The people and the States together, if in agreement, served as a united check against the federal government, or more specifically in the case of making law, the executive branch.
 
We The People hold original authority in the process of making law. The members of the United States House of Representatives and U.S. Senate are voted into office by direct election of the people. All of the officials involved with appointing or electing members of the branches of the federal government (as well as the U.S. Senate prior to 1913) were also originally voted into office by the general population. Our original authority also reaches even farther back than the descriptions above, because it was the people, as the sovereign states of the union, who originally held all of the authorities prior to the writing and ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Under British rule, original authority belonged to the monarchy, as per Royal Prerogative; but in the United States, original authority belonged to the people.
 
By Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 establishing that all bills for raising revenue originate in the House of Representatives, the Constitution grants to the voice of the people the power to fund, or defund, any function of government affected by legislative action. The power of the purse-strings gives the House of Representatives the ultimate check against the other parts of government, and ultimately gives the House of Representatives a significant amount of power. Should the House of Representatives, for example, disapprove of a military action being carried out by the Commander in Chief, the action can be stopped by the House of Representatives simply defunding the military operation by not including funding for that action in a budget proposal. Refusal to accept the proposal by the Senate, or the Executive, places at risk the funding for other parts of government as well. The Senate, though unable to originate bills raising revenue, may propose amendments to be added to such a bill that originated in the House of Representatives, but no bill raising revenue may originate in the Senate. Upon approval by the Senate, if the Senate made changes, the bill would still need to go back to the House of Representatives for approval. The approval by both houses of Congress must be for an identical bill.
 
If the President approves the bill, and signs it after it has been approved with a majority vote in each of the two houses of Congress, the bill becomes law. If the President does not approve of the bill, he may refuse to sign it, or veto the bill, and return it with a written explanation of his disapproval.
 
Should the Houses of the United States Congress determine with a two-thirds vote in each house to reconsider the bill, the bill will still become law despite the executive objection.
 
All votes in the two houses of Congress shall be determined by yeas and nays, which will be entered into the respective house's journal. The journal entry will include the names and votes of the members voting for, or against, the bill.
 
If the President refuses to sign the bill presented to him, but does not return the bill with his written objection within ten days (excluding Sundays) the bill becomes law as if the President signed it. The exception to this clause is if Congress does anything to prevent the bill's return, such as through their adjournment. In that case, the bill remains to be only a bill, and only becomes law should any of the afore mentioned processes be met.
 
Terms:
 
Original Authority: Principal agent holding legal authority; initial power to make or enforce laws; the root authority in government.
 
Veto: The power of a chief executive to reject a bill passed by the legislature and thus prevent or delay its enactment into law.
 
Questions for Discussion:
 
1. Why did the Founding Fathers decide to give the power of the purse to the House of Representatives?
 
2. How did the Senators being appointed by the State Legislatures enable State involvement in the federal government?
 
3. If the people have original authority, how does that affect the relationship between the people through their States, and the Federal Government?
 
Resources:
 
Joseph Andrews, A Guide for Learning and Teaching The Declaration of Independence and The U.S. Constitution - Learning from the Original Texts Using Classical Learning Methods of the Founders; San Marcos: The Center for Teaching the Constitution (2010).
 
Madison's Notes Constitutional Convention, Avalon Project, Yale University: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/debcont.asp
 
 
Enumerated Powers
 
The powers granted to the federal government in relation to legislative powers are listed in Article I, Section 8. These authorities are also known as "Express Powers."
 
Implied Powers is a concept invented by Alexander Hamilton while he served as treasury secretary in 1791. He wrote in a report titled, "Opinion on the Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States" that "there are implied, as well as express powers, in the Constitution, and that the former are as effectually delegated as the latter. Implied powers are to be considered as delegated to the federal government equally with the express ones."
 
Hamilton, in his report, went on to argue that a nationalized bank was one of these implied powers. Hamilton's argument stated that his power to create a nationalized bank was implied as "necessary and proper" for the federal government to carry out its enumerated powers, such as borrowing money, regulating currency, and providing for the general welfare of the country.
 
Thomas Jefferson disagreed, arguing that the express powers delegated to the federal government by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution were expressly stated because they were the only powers granted to the federal government by the sovereign States when they ratified the Constitution. New authorities could only be granted by the amendment process, which includes the requirement of ratification by three-quarters of the States.
 
The Concept of Implied Powers remained, and the statists of history have used Implied Powers to rewrite the Constitution through regulatory actions, and liberal judicial activism.
 
From the emergence of Implied Powers came the theory that the Constitution is a living document that can be modified at will through interpretation and the use of Implied Law. Hamilton's concept of Implied Powers laid the groundwork for generations of lawyers and judges using the courts, rather than the amendment process, to alter the Constitution, and render the limiting principals powerless. The concept of Implied Powers is one of the concepts that have fed the false idea that the courts "interpret" the Constitution.
 
Alexander Hamilton also argued that there were "resulting powers" as well, which are powers that exist as a result of any action the government takes. These "resulting powers" are de facto constitutional by virtue of the fact that the action by the federal government occurred in the first place.
 
With the use of the concepts of Implied Powers and resulting powers, Hamilton believed the central government had unlimited powers to act as any member of the federal government deemed necessary.
 
 
General Welfare Clause
 
"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." --James Madison
 
The General Welfare Clause is one of the most misunderstood clauses in the U.S. Constitution - and it was not even supposed to be a clause.
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 includes "General Welfare" not as an authority to the federal government, but as a description of the Republic should the laws of the land be made in accordance with the authorities granted by the Constitution.
 
If we go back to the Preamble, we read that one of the reasons the Founding Fathers created this new government with the writing of the Constitution was to "insure domestic Tranquility." One must ask, "Why was there a need for domestic tranquility?"
 
The States were much like siblings. The States fought over just about everything. They argued over commerce, borders, legal jurisdictions, currency, weights and measures, communication, religion, and a number of other issues. Yet, despite their disagreements, when it came to the American Revolution, they united against a common enemy. After the war, the quarrels resumed. The fighting between the States became such a problem that many worried it would tear apart the union. One of the many reasons for the need of a new government, as provided by the U.S. Constitution, was so that the central government would have enough authorities to act as a mediator between the States.
 
Acting as a referee in matters that caused disputes between the States would help the federal government provide for the General Welfare of the republic.
 
Another reason for the writing of the new constitution was to give the federal government enough power to defend the union from invasion and domestic insurrection. Under the Articles of Confederation, the central government was unable to provide for the common defense because the government did not have the authority, nor the financial means, to field a military. With the ability to field a fighting force, the federal government would be able to protect the States from foreign invasion, while also keeping internal conflict at bay as well.
 
By providing for the common defense, the federal government would also be ensuring the General Welfare of the Republic.
 
In other words, if the federal government was doing what it was supposed to do, as a mediator between the States, and as a protector of the States by providing for the common defense, the States would enjoy a general welfare of the republic. The Founding Fathers wanted to make sure that squabbles, internal conflict, or foreign intrusion did not place the welfare of the union in jeopardy.
 
General Welfare is an adjective, not an authority.
 
The General Welfare of the republic was the goal, which would be achieved if the federal government abided by the limiting principles of the U.S. Constitution.
 
Taxes and Debt
 
Article I, Section 8 grants Congress the power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises.
 
The authority to tax was for the express purpose of protecting, preserving, and promoting the union. The federal government could tax the States only if the taxes were uniform throughout the United States. The federal government could not originally tax the individual citizens directly.
 
The stated purposes for giving the Congress the power to tax are to "provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States."
 
The need for the central government to be able to defend the union militarily was one of the initial reasons the Founding Fathers planned the Constitutional Convention at the Annapolis Convention in 1786. Shays' Rebellion proved to the founders that the government under the Articles of Confederation was too weak to defend the union.
 
Some of the members of the Constitutional Convention were concerned that a military may be used by the federal government against the States, but the reality of the world they lived in was that the union would not survive without the ability to defend itself. It was argued that the independent militias needed to be joined under a single federal army, and for the protection of the trade routes a United States Navy also needed to be established. In order to have a military, however, the federal government would need the power to tax in order to pay for the military it would be afforded.
 
The second clause of Article I, Section 8 grants the authority to the U.S. Congress to borrow money on the credit of the United States. If the federal government ever found the necessity to enter into military operations on the battlefield, to help pay for the expensive endeavor of warfare, the federal government would need to be able to borrow money for the war effort. Therefore, the States through the new Constitution granted to the federal government the authority to create a national debt. The founders did not recognize any reason other than for war that the United States would need to borrow money. Alexander Hamilton, however, suggested that a continuous national debt was necessary to hold together the union, for if the States all felt they were responsible for the repayment of the deficit, they would be less likely to break away from the union.
 
Commerce Clause
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 grants to the Congress the authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes.
 
Remember, the States did not get along too well. Like siblings, they argued over just about everything. The individual States bickered over the borders between the states, turf, and interstate trade. As sovereign entities, the States continually tried to gain the upper hand on the other States in regard to commerce across State lines. Recognizing that the squabbles between the States were actually hindering commerce across State lines, the federal government in this clause was given the authority to do what was necessary to enable the flow of commerce to be more regular.
 
When you turn on a faucet full blast you are regulating the flow, just as you are regulating the flow when you restrict it by turning the faucet off. Likewise, the federal government was expected to act as a mechanism that ensured that the flow of commerce between the States was more regular.
 
The 1828 Webster Dictionary defines regulate in its second definition: "To put in good order." Some historians state that regulate in the 18th Century meant "To make regular." The word "restrict" was not used in the 1828 definition until the third and final definition of the word. In today's dictionary "restrict" appears in the first definition of regulate.
 
Today, the Commerce Clause has been interpreted to mean the opposite of its original intent. The Commerce Clause in today's political atmosphere is used as a means to restrict and heavily control commerce between the States. If one was to adopt the progressive definition of the Commerce Clause, one could then surmise that the Founders wrote this clause because commerce was flowing too easily, and needed to be controlled by the federal government. Such a notion is not only untrue, but outside the normal tendencies of the Founding Fathers. The Founders believed in limiting the powers of the Federal Government, so why would they allow the Federal Government the kind of unlimited powers over interstate commerce as suggested by today's progressive?
 
The federal government's role according to the Commerce Clause was to act as a referee, or mediator, whenever the flow of commerce was hindered by disagreements between the States, while with foreign nations and the Indian Tribes the federal government was expected to take a more active role.
 
Naturalization
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 gives the Congress the authority to establish a uniform rule of Naturalization. What this means is that all naturalization rules must be identical in all States. One State cannot decide to have rules for naturalization that are different than what the federal government has established. This is an example of an "exclusive jurisdiction." However, realize that immigration is not mentioned here. Immigration is a concurrent issue, with authorities held by both federal government and the States.
 
Bankruptcies
 
In Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 the federal government is also given the authority to establish uniform rules on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States.
 
Prior to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, each State had its own rules on bankruptcy. Citizens would simply cross state lines to start over financially. The clause bringing bankruptcy under federal jurisdiction was for the purpose to stop the abuses, and to establish uniform rules nationwide.
 
Money, Weights, and Measures
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 establishes that the duty of coining money belonged to Congress. Note that the Constitution called for coining money, rather than printing federal reserve notes (bills of credit). The coins produced by Congress were expected to be made of metals that reflected the worth of the coins. In other words, the gold in a coin, if taken to a goldsmith, would be worth the same as the value of the coin. Later, the banks realized they could loan on the gold in their vaults backing the currency, leaving less gold as a reserve. They did this by issuing receipts, or bills of credit. When this happened, if there was a bank run, where everyone brought their receipts in to cash it in for gold all at once, the bank would be left in a situation where they did not have enough gold to cover all of the notes.
 
If one goes back to the Articles of Confederation, it is important to note that under the confederation, there had been no power given to the central government to regulate the value of foreign coin, an omission, which in a great measure would destroy any uniformity in the value of the current coin, since the respective states might, by different regulations, create a different value in each. As a result, the States were prohibited in Article I, Section 10 from coining their own money, thus taking away their ability to manipulate the value of currency as a means of effecting the economies of the other states.
 
The authority to coin money was given specifically to Congress so that no outside interest could manipulate the value of American money. This included private banks. Nonetheless, we have seen three nationalized banks run by private bankers in the United States issuing the currency. The third is the currently existing Federal Reserve Bank.
 
Thomas Jefferson was against national banks. Alexander Hamilton created the "Bank of the United States" in 1791 for the purpose of acting as a depository of government funds, issuing paper currency backed by gold and silver, and creating a system of mercantilism in America. The bank's charter lapsed in 1811. The Second Bank of the United States was formed in 1817, and lasted until President Andrew Jackson vetoed the renewal of its charter in 1836. The bank existed for 5 more years as an ordinary bank before going bankrupt in 1841. In a letter to John Taylor in 1816, Thomas Jefferson wrote, "I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale."
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 also establishes that Congress shall have the power to fix the Standard of Weights and Measures. Fixing a standard of weights and measures was important for the reason of uniformity, and the ease of commerce. This clause suggests that before the Constitutional Convention the States were able to independently fix their own weights and measures, which not only added confusion to commerce, but enabled the States of use unsavory trading tactics against each other.
 
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 6 establishes that the U.S. Congress will provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States. This power would naturally flow, as an incident, from the antecedent powers to borrow money, and regulate the coinage. Indeed, without the ability to provide for the punishment of counterfeiting, the powers of coining money or creating securities would be without any adequate sanction. The word "securities," in this clause, means: a contract that can be assigned a value so that it may be traded, like a "bond."
 
Post Offices and Roadways
 
In Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 the Congress is granted the authority to establish post offices and post roads.
 
As with the other clauses in Article I, Section 8, this clause is designed to promote the Union. In this case, it ensures that communication remains intact. The clause gives the federal government the authority to establish post offices, but nowhere in the Constitution does the federal government have the authority to partially privatize the post office as we have seen in the modern era.
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 gives the federal government the authority to "establish" post roads, but not create or maintain them. The Constitution does not give the federal government any other authority over roadways. In fact, this is the only reference to roadways to the federal government in the entire Constitution. This clause makes the federal highway and Interstate highway system, as well as the other workings of the federal transportation department, unconstitutional. It was up to the States to create and maintain their roadways. If the States desired to remain connected, and receive their mail, they would keep up their roads.
 
In 1817, Congress proposed a bill that would provide federal funding for boatways and roadways, claiming it was for the "general welfare" of the nation. President James Madison vetoed the bill, claiming it to be unconstitutional, because the federal government was not given the authority to fund transportation routes.
 
Patents and Copyrights
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 authorizes Congress to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.
 
This clause is the basis for the creation of the U.S. Patent Office, and Copyright Office. Patent and copyright protections already existed in the British Empire, and for the protection of American inventions and writings, the Founding Fathers saw the need to establish such a power under the federal government as well, expecting that by being under federal authority, the rules would be uniform.
 
Federal Inferior Courts
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 9 authorizes Congress to constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court. This means that the legislative branch was tasked with the duty to establish the lower federal courts. However, by enabling Congress to establish new courts whenever necessary, this has given some administrations an opportunity to abuse this power in the hopes of stacking the courts. John Adams was the first example of this abuse, when he appointed many midnight judges in order to help retain federalist power in the courts as Jefferson's Republicans gained the White House, and the majority in Congress. Some may argue that Adams' decision to expand the court was not as sinister as Thomas Jefferson made it out to be, for John Adams had been requesting an expansion of the judiciary for years.
 
President Franklin D. Roosevelt also sought to "pack" the court with justices favorable to his social policies. His animosity toward the Supreme Court emerged when his New Deal of social and economic reform via government intrusion was struck down as unconstitutional by justices that had been largely appointed by his rival Republicans.
 
The high court invalidated the Railroad Retirement Act of 1934, a law that had established pensions for railway workers, and the National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933. Roosevelt's anger against the justices for their rulings led him to hold contempt for the conservative-minded court of "Nine Old Men." In January 1936, the court ruled the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 unconstitutional, as well.
 
In 1937, Roosevelt disclosed to his aides a bill he was going to propose that was designed to reorganize the federal judiciary. The measure called for all federal judges to retire by age 70. If they failed to do so, the president could appoint another judge to serve in tandem with each one older than 70. If the bill passed, it would enable Roosevelt to appoint six more Supreme Court justices immediately, increasing the size of the court to 15 members. The Democrat dominated Congress, he believed, would undoubtedly approve the appointment of judges friendly to Roosevelt and his New Deal agenda.
 
The proposal never got off the ground, as Roosevelt's explanation regarding why the proposal was necessary fell flat.
 
Both the federal government, and the States, have court systems. The shared power by both the federal government and the State governments to establish a judiciary is a concurrent power.
 
With the ability to establish the inferior courts also comes the authority to eliminate them. Congress, in addition to the authority to establish federal inferior courts, can also shut them down. When in the 2012 Republican Campaign Newt Gingrich stated that Congress should use the federal marshall to bring unconstitutional judges to face members of Congress and answer for their actions, he was accurate that Congress can do that.
 
Trade Routes and Offenses Against The Law of Nations
 
Article I Section 8, Clause 10 authorizes Congress to define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the Law of Nations.
 
One of the factors in having this included was the problem with piracy in the Caribbean, as well as difficulties the new nation was having with the Barbary Pirates (Muslims). Though the United States was careful to create a system of justice that included due process for the citizens of the nation, the Constitution gave the federal government the power to punish offenses by foreign forces on the high seas without having to worry about habeas corpus, while still providing a courtroom setting for the offenders. In Federalist 42, Madison carefully explains that this provision "extends no further than to the establishment of courts for the trial of these offenses," such as military courts, or international courts for international war crimes.
 
This clause is the only place where the Law of Nations is mentioned. Some historians claim that the capitalization of the "Law of Nations" suggests that the founders were specifically referring to Vatell's volumes of which the founders often used for definitions and the clarification of concepts like Natural Born Citizen.
 
War, Army, and Navy
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 gives Congress the power to declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.
 
During the debates, according to Madison's Notes on the Constitutional Convention, the delegates debated over whether or not to give the legislative branch the power to make war. After intense debate, it was decided to grant the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States, the authority to "wage" war, and Congress the power to declare war. A declaration of war is a formal declaration that warns those not involved to stay out of the conflict. If those entities become involved, they become open targets. The president, as per the debates, may wage war without prior approval by Congress, or without a declaration of war being issued.
 
The ability to wage war, however, is checked by the fact that the House of Representatives are able to refuse to fund any military conflict. This keeps the president from abusing his position as Commander in Chief by giving Congress a way to limit executive wartime authorities. If the President continues to act upon his war powers in a manner not approved of by Congress, and the President does so despite the lack of funding for the military operations, Congress also has the authority to impeach the President in order to stop the executive's objectionable actions.
 
A Letter of Marque and Reprisal was a government license authorizing a private vessel to attack and capture enemy vessels, and bring them before admiralty courts for condemnation and sale. Cruising for prizes with a Letter of Marque was considered an honorable calling combining patriotism and profit, in contrast to unlicensed piracy which was universally reviled. These mercenaries was also known as "privateers."
 
Congress was also given the power to make rules regarding captures on land and water. This is the clause used when the Bush administration, with the blessings of Congress, decided to hold prisoners captured during the war on terrorism at Guantanamo Bay, and to use military tribunals as the vessel of their trials.
 
Article I, Section 8, Clauses 12-16 authorizes Congress:
 
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;
 
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
 
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
 
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
 
Remember that one of the primary reasons for deciding to hold the Constitutional Convention in the first place was to defend the union with a uniformed military. Note that the fear of an army being used by a centralized government, and a potentially tyrannical government for that matter, as had been in the case with the British Empire, influenced the writings of this document, and encouraged the founders to limit the existence and funding of an army to two years at a time. A navy, however, was deemed as much more important, particularly because of the need to protect trade routes, and America's immediate waterways and inlets. Therefore, the authority to provide and maintain a navy was granted in perpetuity. The United States Marine Corps, from the beginning, falls under the umbrella of the United States Navy.
 
The rules for the governance of the armed forces do not fall under the purview of the Constitution. It is up to Congress to provide the governing rules. Any claim that rules regarding the military are unconstitutional is a bad argument. According to Article I, Section 8, Clause 14, it is up to Congress to set the rules, regardless of the Constitution. Military training in order for the armed forces to be well disciplined may not benefit from same social rules of the civilian world. Therefore, the basis of governance over the armed forces is not the Constitution, but instead the Uniform Code of Military Justice. However, it is the military's duty to protect and preserve the U.S. Constitution, and in a manner of tradition, Constitutional Principles have an unofficial influence on military politics.
 
Congress also has the authority to call forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union (Constitutional federal laws), suppress insurrections (inserted in response to Shays' Rebellion), and repel invasions (one may consider the illegal entry into the United States an invasion, therefore this clause gives the federal government the authority to use the militia to guard the national borders). Currently, in this country, we have an organized militia (National Guard, State Militias), and an unorganized militia (you and I). U.S. Code Title 10 still defines these militias as such.
 
Federal Properties
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 calls for the Congress to exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.
 
This clause was for the creation of Washington DC, giving the United States Congress exclusive legislative powers over the District of Columbia and other federal properties, and to allow the federal government to erect military bases, and other necessary federal facilities by consent of the Legislatures of the States in which those properties are obtained, and for the federal government to purchase those properties. This makes land seized for conservation, and National Parks, unconstitutional, for those were not approved by the States, nor purchased by the federal government, and finally it is not being utilized for the purpose of the erection of "needful buildings."
 
Necessary and Proper Clause
 
Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 is also known as the "necessary and proper" clause. It reads:
 
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
 
Today's government officials misuse this clause greatly. Notice the emphasis on carrying into execution the "foregoing powers" (authorities herein granted). What that means is that the Congress may make laws that fall within the authorities granted by the U.S. Constitution that the Congress recognizes to be "necessary and proper." Today's federal government has taken this clause to mean they can make "any" law they feel to be necessary and proper.
 
"The plain import of the clause is, that congress shall have all the incidental and instrumental powers, necessary and proper to carry into execution all the express powers. It neither enlarges any power specifically granted; nor is it a grant of any new power to congress. But it is merely a declaration for the removal of all uncertainty, that the means of carrying into execution those, otherwise granted, are included in the grant." --Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833
 
In order to carry out some express powers of the Constitution sometimes certain actions by the government are necessary and proper. For example, when establishing a post office, as expressly authorized by this article and section, the federal government will have to grade the land, hire construction crews, purchase the equipment for carrying out the services of the post office, and so forth. All of these things are necessary and proper in order to carry out the "foregoing power" of establishing a post office.
 
This clause is also sometimes referred to as the "Elastic Clause."
 
Terms:
 
Concurrent Powers: Powers that are shared by the state and the federal government. The power to enforce immigration is also a concurrent power.
 
Duties: A tax levied by a government on the import or export of goods.
 
Excise: Tax on the manufacture, sale, or consumption of goods, or upon licenses to pursue certain occupations, or upon corporate privileges.
 
Exclusive Powers: Sole authority over a particular power, be it for the States within their own territorial boundaries, or sole federal powers. Also known as Reserved Powers.
 
Express Powers: Authorities explicitly authorized to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution.
 
Implied Powers: Legal or governmental authority not expressly stated by the U.S. Constitution, but considered to be logical extensions or implications of the other powers delegated in the Constitution. The concept of Implied Powers is often defended by the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18). Implied Powers is an unconstitutional concept.
 
Imposts: A tax, especially an import duty; Import Duty is a tariff paid at a border or port of entry to the relevant government to allow a good to pass into that government's territory.
 
Questions for Discussion:
 
1. True power of government is the ability to make law. Is listing the authorities in Article I the founders way of telling us that?
 
2. How has the unconstitutional concept of Implied Powers been used in today's political atmosphere?
 
3. How has the war powers been misused in recent years?
 
4. Name examples of how the Commerce Clause has been misused?
 
5. If post roads are the only mention of roadways in the Constitution, then what does that say about recent attempts by the federal government to fund public works projects?
 
6. The Necessary and Proper Clause depends upon the laws being within Constitutional Authority. Are there other clauses requiring this as well?
 
Resources:
 
Andrew M. Allison, Mr. Richard Maxfield, K. Delynn Cook, and W. Cleon Skousen, The Real Thomas Jefferson; New York: National Center for Constitutional Studies (2009).
 
Articles of Confederation, March 1, 1781; http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/artconf.asp
 
David McCullough, John Adams; New York: Simon and Schuster (2001).
 
Donald Porter Geddes, Franklin Delano Roosevelt - A Memorial; New York: Pitman Publishing Corporation (1945).
 
Ethan Pope, America's Financial Demise; Dallas: Intersect Press (2010).
 
James Madison, Federalist No. 41: General View of the Powers Conferred by The Constitution (addresses General Welfare Clause as well), http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa41.htm
 
James Madison, Federalist No. 42: The Powers Conferred by the Constitution, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed42.asp
 
James Madison, Veto of Federal Public Works Bill 1817; Constitution dot org: http://www.constitution.org/jm/18170303_veto.htm
 
Jay A. Parry, Andrew M. Allison, and W. Cleon Skousen, The Real George Washington; New York: National Center for Constitutional Studies (2010).
 
K. Daniel Glover, FDR's Court-Packing Fiasco; Enter Stage Right: http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0799fdrcourt.htm (1999).
 
Larry Schweikart and Michael Allen, A Patriot's History of the United States; New York: Sentinel (2004).
 
Madison's Notes on the Constitutional Convention, Avalon Project, Yale University: http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_menus/debcont.asp
 
Robert Brown, Gold and Silver Coin or Paper Money?; The John Birch Society: http://www.jbs.org/blog/gold-and-silver-coin-or-paper-money.html (2010)
 
Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Hamilton's Curse; New York: Three Rivers Press (2008).
 
U.S. Code, Title 10, Subtitle A, Part 1, Chapter 13, § 311: Militia: composition and classes; http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html
 
 
Copyright: Douglas V. Gibbs, 2014