Letter: Welfare not a matter for federal government
In order to justify their votes, politicians often quote "to provide for the … general Welfare" found in the Constitution. However, that clause gives the reason for collecting taxes—to protect the well-being (Welfare) of everyone in the populace (general)—to protect, not subsidize.
The Constitution enumerates the exact ways that tax money may be spent and that list does not include welfare checks. Furthermore, the 10th Amendment states that if it isn’t listed, the government can’t do it.
But, you may ask, why shouldn’t welfare checks be authorized? There are some who truly need assistance. Should they not get help? Of course they should. It’s not a question of whether they should be helped, but rather, how is the best way to help them.
We all know that buying at wholesale prices is more economical than shopping in the high-rent district. The major reason for this is there are not nearly so many overhead costs passed on to the buyer.
The same principle applies to the distribution of tax money. At the federal level, there are many layers of overhead, at the state level there are fewer and at the county or city level, even fewer yet. The savings are obvious.
And then there is the option for private donations. When one gives a dollar to someone who needs it, they get one whole dollar.
Furthermore, the closer to the recipient, the better able one is to discern if that person is truly needy. When it is someone you know, you can be much more perceptive as to the actual need. Sometimes giving a handout simply enables the recipient to live off of others when they could provide for themselves. The best way to truly help them is to withhold donations and not be an enabler of dependency on government.
It is time we demand that our legislators understand the restrictions placed on them by the Constitution. They do take a sworn oath to uphold it and are obligated to abide by its rules. Let’s hold them accountable.