John P. Krill / Jr. Fedzilla vs. the Constitution

1. Auflage 2014
ISBN: 978-1-4835-4854-8
Verlag: BookBaby
Format: EPUB
Kopierschutz: Adobe DRM (»Systemvoraussetzungen)

E-Book, Englisch, 272 Seiten

Fedzilla vs. the Constitution traces the largely successful effort to turn a federal government given limited, enumerated tasks by the Constitution into a large and powerful monolith. Issue by issue, the book shows how it was done, starting with the administration of George Washington and continuing through the Obama Administration. The book argues that Washington's Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, was disingenuous in supporting ratification of the Constitution as setting limits on federal power, then turning around once in office to expand the federal government. Hamilton is called the Father of Crony Capitalism for creating the first Bank of the United States and the Father of Bailouts for his role in the Panic of 1792. The author challenges prevailing legal thinking with criticisms of venerable Supreme Court decisions, starting with those of Chief Justice John Marshall, and continuing up to those of Chief Justice John Roberts. After tracing the 'tricks of the trade' that federal power players have used to expand the government, the book offers arguments for why we need to put Fedzilla on a constitutional weight-loss diet. Its remoteness from the people and undemocratic composition, as compared to the states, and its ability to damage the entire nation with its bungling, as compared to initiatives by only one state, are among the reasons for shrinking Fedzilla back into its constitutional britches. The third part of the book offers 'recipes' for a constitutional weight-loss diet.

Autoren/Hrsg.

John P. Krill, Jr.

Jr.,

Leseproben

Introduction In 1788 the Constitution of the United States created a federal government of limited powers. Everyone agreed that anything not on the Constitution’s list of 18 “enumerated” powers was retained solely by the states or the people. Yet, two and a quarter centuries later, federal bureaucrats decide what our children should eat for lunch at school, the pajamas they wear to bed, the bulbs we screw into lamps, the water our toilets can flush and much, much more. Most importantly, Washington decides how much of our hard-earned money we deserve to keep and how much it thinks it can put to better use. The Constitution has been turned upside down. The federal government has practically all the power and the states seem to have only the bones that are thrown to them. Our government mutated and grew far beyond its constitutional limits, to become Fedzilla. Wiktionary defines “Fedzilla” as “US federal government regarded as a rapacious monster with an appetite for power, money, etc.” The shoe fits, although it is a giant shoe on a huge claw. The federal government has become a behemoth to be feared, not just because of its size, but because of the damage it does when it heaves its gigantic bulk around, even while trying to do good. This book explains how the United States Government slipped the constraints of the Constitution to grow into the Fedzilla of today. The book then argues for why limited government at the federal level is still needed and is still what the Constitution requires. It concludes with some ideas about how we can start to shrink Fedzilla back to its constitutional dimensions. A Brief History of Federal Government Growth As you will see, there have been forces at work since the Administration of George Washington to get around the Constitution in order to expand federal reach. The very first Congress that assembled in 1789 started the tradition of pork-barrel spending. Washington’s Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, worked to grow federal power almost from the day he took office. Even though the national capital was Philadelphia, Hamilton was the prototype of a “Washington power player.” He certainly had President Washington’s ear. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison lost critical fights with Hamilton over the Constitution’s limits on federal power. We will examine these battles in detail in subsequent chapters. Madison later used his veto as President to curb spending he saw as unconstitutional. Presidents from Andrew Jackson to James Buchanan vetoed spending they thought was unconstitutional, although Congress kept trying to get bloated appropriations bills past them. In contrast, Abraham Lincoln was a proponent of large federal projects for internal improvements. Lincoln, however, did not believe in expansively interpreting the Constitution to abolish slavery. Instead, he favored, and got, its abolition through the 13th Amendment. Under Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft and Woodrow Wilson, the Progressive Era ushered in new federal regulation of businesses in interstate commerce. It also added the 16th and 17th Amendments to the Constitution, which, respectively, expanded Congress’s power to tax income and provided for popular election of senators, changing the balance of power between the states and the federal government. In the 1920s, Presidents Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge strove to reduce federal spending, the national debt and taxes. Their efforts slowed, but did not stop, federal expansion, which was pushed by congressional Democrats as well as progressive Republicans. For example, spending by the new Veterans’ Bureau ballooned and its first director went to prison for corruption. President Coolidge was succeeded by Herbert Hoover, a progressive Republican, who reacted to the crash of the stock market in 1929 by increasing federal spending and embarking the government on new public works. The phenomenal growth of the federal government, in both spending and bureaucracy, started during the New Deal under President Franklin D. Roosevelt. FDR got Congress and an ultimately receptive Supreme Court to read the Constitution’s Interstate Commerce Clause in a way that allowed federal regulation of practically anything. Federal growth slowed during the Truman Administration, as the country demobilized after World War II. President Truman, however, launched the Marshall Plan, which gave aid to Western European nations for the reconstruction of their economies. Although the Marshall Plan was important for European post-war recovery, nobody asked whether the plan was authorized by the Constitution. It set a precedent for a flood of foreign-aid programs that shipped dollars overseas willy-nilly to any dictator or kleptocrat who claimed to be anti-communist. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, a Republican, left the New Deal largely intact. He also expanded the federal government. He signed the National Defense Highway Act, which launched the interstate highway system, and the National Defense Education Act. A five-star general in World War II, Ike could be persuaded to approve things that had “defense” in the title. Both those programs would have enormous consequences for society, some good, some bad. Federal growth slowed in the short Kennedy Administration, then took off again under Lyndon Johnson, who launched massive domestic programs as part of his Great Society initiative. The federal government expanded its reach under his successor, Richard Nixon, who imposed wage and price controls, in an effort to control inflation. The policy was a national failure. Nixon tried and failed to slow spending through presidential “impoundment” of appropriations. The government’s growth slowed again during the interregnum of Gerald Ford. President Jimmy Carter launched a big new program that became known as “Superfund,” to spend money on largely local environmental issues at waste-disposal sites. However, in 1978 he signed the Airline Deregulation Act and in 1979 he signed a bill deregulating the beer industry. Carter tried to introduce some discipline into the budget process in 1977 with what he called “zero-based budgeting,” but he did not curb the growth in federal spending, which rose 44% during his single term. Carter also approved the creation of the Department of Education, which led to the enlargement of the federal role in elementary, secondary and college education. In the 1980 election, the country experienced a change in the political dialogue. For the first time since the 1850s, there was strong voice for halting the sprawl of federal programs. The struggle over the role of government that emerged in the election of 1980 and that continues today deserves a more detailed treatment. In fact, what led me to write this book was thinking about the see-saw contest between opposing views of the federal government’s role that started then. Carter’s successor, Ronald Reagan, was the greatest advocate of limited government since President James K. Polk. Although Reagan believed in smaller government, he was unable to muster enough congressional support for his vision. President Reagan was able to lower taxes and to increase defense spending, but there was little taste on either side of the aisle in Congress for curbing domestic spending. During his two terms spending rose 57%. Reagan also signed the Social Security Reform Act of 1983, which allowed the government to spend the surplus cash from payroll taxes and, in return, to give the Social Security Trust Fund non-negotiable Treasury bonds. This pried open the “lockbox” to let Congress clean out the trust fund, which it did, down to the last penny. Reagan was unable to shrink the scope of federal functions much if any. He tried but failed to abolish the Department of Education, which he did not believe performed a proper federal role. His legacy rests on the principles he espoused, his optimistic vision of American exceptionalism, the prosperity his tax cuts fostered and his bold offensive against Communism, but not on success in making government smaller. Reagan’s Vice-President and successor, George H. W. Bush, did an about-face on many of Reagan’s principles of government. He declared that he wanted to be “the Education President,” as well as “the Environment President.” He had no interest in being the Limited-Government President. He had achievements in foreign affairs, particularly in managing the effects of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, but domestically the federal government grew. At the start of his presidency, William J. Clinton tried to expand the role of government in health care, but failed. After a Republican majority took control of the House in his first mid-term election, Clinton pirouetted, declaring that “the era of big government is over.” But it wasn’t.1 During the Clinton Administration expenditures increased 27% and the total federal debt increased 31.6%.2 In his presidency the government indeed came close to having a year without a deficit: in Fiscal Year 2000, when Republicans controlled Congress, the deficit was merely $17.9 billion, although it is a common misperception that there was a balanced budget that year.3 Congress and President Clinton, using accounting techniques that would be illegal for private business, called this deficit a surplus. They congratulated themselves and launched a fresh spending binge. Moreover, throughout the Clinton Administration, Congress and the President continued to drain from the Social Security Trust Fund...