[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

That's not the test set forth by the article you claimed "nails why American government policies are overwhelmingly leftist and have been so since the New Deal."

Your doing it again, morphing from one argument into another as if they were the same. The two questions you posed to me were constitutional in nature: "So are laws that expand the scope of constitutionally mandated federal behaviors conservative or liberal?"

And: "How is the size of the government relative to defense spending not a subjective interpretation of the Constitution?"

The test for my responses was not set forth by the article. The article never mentioned the Constitution. The test for them is strictly a constitutional one, and I stand by my answers in regards to that test.

The author clearly states that "conservative" legislation "contracted the scope of government funding, regulation or responsibility."

But he doesn't clearly state what he means by "conservative". The closest he comes is "stiffer sentencing" and "traditional values" and smaller government. Those might involve constitutional questions depending on what the sentencing is for and who is doing it, and what the traditional values are and if they are guaranteed by the Constitution.

If government funding, regulation or responsibility are outside the scope of powers enumerated in the Constitution, then the government has, in toto, enlarged its scope of power. Conservative legislation can constitutionally contract the "scope" of government funding if it eliminates spending on items for which there is no enumerated power given to spend. Likewise, as well for regulations or responsibility. But the scope of federal power as enumerated in the Constitution is not reduced when the use of that power is curtailed or eliminated. The power still exists if needed, and the quantity of that power is unlimited, even if not used or fiscally reduced. So if the funding, regulation, or responsibility are within the "scope" of constitutional enumerations, there is no contraction of the "scope" of federal power, only a reduction in the size, use, and cost of it.

The author isn't specifically discussing constitutionality when he refers to "conservative" or "liberal" legislation Constitutionality can certainly be inferred in matters of "government funding, regulation or responsibility." But the "scope" of his definition of "conservative" legislation apparently expands beyond its constitutionality. He seems to be covering all notions of conservatism as well as liberalism in the current political sense. So the "scope" he refers to is general rather than constitutional in nature. Even so, his thesis is spot on as to why government has continuously shifted to the left. I do not disagree with him even if he leaves out the constitutional equation.



Beyond protecting our borders or providing for a common defense many military actions are a matter of policy, most expand the scope of government funding and as we've recently witnessed and add tremendously the government's responsibility.

-spence

OK, but, unlike the two questions to which I responded, you left out the constitutional connection this time. That's another story, and doesn't contradict what the author wrote.