Voluntary association, as guaranteed by the 1st amendment? Government exists to do SOME things together that we can’t do for ourselves or which we don’t want done by voluntary associations, like defending the country from foreign threats or policing. Government was never intended to build houses or finance solar powered cars. Those are the kinds of things that voluntary associations of people already do together.
The main problem I have with that characterization of government though is that in the real world government tends to have its own agenda, and most modern governments have professional bureaucrats who are neither accountable to voters nor accountable to elected officials. In theory they are supposed to serve the public, but in reality they are people, and very few people get jobs where they aren’t also looking out for their own interests. And as we’ve seen, there are more than a few bad apples who think the people are their subjects, not their employers.
Liberals are often fond of saying, “Self-regulation doesn’t work”. They are right. But it applies to the government as well as to corporations. A bureaucracy that is not tightly regulated and overseen by elected officials will go rogue, as has happened several times during this administration.
As in “promote the general welfare”? Sure it was, you can find it right at the top of your pocket copy. If you don’t have one, I’m sure Hannity would be happy to send you one.
So the purpose of government isn’t to do things we can’t do for ourselves, it’s to do basically anything it puts its collective mind to? Interesting. It would be more believable if it did its core job better.
Perhaps you could point to some case law where that part of the constitution was use in a determinative fashion? Or, you might refer to Jacobson v. Massachusetts
[QUOTE=Article I§8.1]
The Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
[/QUOTE]
Was that point based on the “general welfare” statement in the preamble? If not, then it’s not pertinent to the point be addressed. Hint: It’s not. From the link:
Emphasis added. If the Feds were empowered to do anything that could be said to “promote the general welfare”, then there would be no need to enumerate the powers granted to them.
Now, if Elvis would like to actually argue that that phrase empowers the feds to “build houses or finance solar powered cars”, I’d be interested in hearing his case, backed up by legal precedent and not just personal opinion.
The blank check* the feds have comes for the commerce clause (as interpreted in modern times) and the power to tax, not the preamble.