Fentanyl Deaths

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i agree, find something else to cut. live the special olympics
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why is the federal government funding special Olympics? I'm going to ask this question again, which has not been answered the several times I asked it before, ARE STATES NECESSARY?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Why is the federal government funding special Olympics? I'm going to ask this question again, which has not been answered the several times I asked it before, ARE STATES NECESSARY?

I totally get what you're saying, and I agree with you 100% in principle. But I have no issue with paying federal income tax to fund the Special Olympics. Sometimes decency can prevail over constitutional technicalities. Maybe that can lead to a slippery slope over what different folks define as "decency".

Cut the National Endowment for the Arts. Manhattan stock brokers don't need my money to subsidize their opera tickets.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I totally get what you're saying, and I agree with you 100% in principle. But I have no issue with paying federal income tax to fund the Special Olympics. Sometimes decency can prevail over constitutional technicalities. Maybe that can lead to a slippery slope over what different folks define as "decency".

Cut the National Endowment for the Arts. Manhattan stock brokers don't need my money to subsidize their opera tickets.

Jim, no matter how much your sympathy desires the federal government to overreach its powers in order to do what you consider compassionate, you are not going to be allowed to pick and choose which compassionate unconstitutional measures will be allowed. None of the goodies that the left want to fund nationally will be cut in order to appease your desire to fund just the ones you prefer.

In the meantime, as you perfectly well know, the national debt rises. And is never paid down. But just continues to grow as we add new and wonderfully compassionate and nice sounding schemes to the federal roster of caring things it will do "for the people."

This has to stop. Reign the federal government back to within its constitutionally prescribed limitations and miraculously there will be wealth left to the private sector to do wonderful things "for the people". And the people will actually have a say in what those things will be.

When compassion is left to "the people," it will be humane. When it is a function of bureaucracies, it will be as humane as tasks delivered by robots. And the robots will be programmed by a few selected people who have their own interests.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Jim, no matter how much your sympathy desires the federal government to overreach its powers in order to do what you consider compassionate, you are not going to be allowed to pick and choose which compassionate unconstitutional measures will be allowed. None of the goodies that the left want to fund nationally will be cut in order to appease your desire to fund just the ones you prefer.

In the meantime, as you perfectly well know, the national debt rises. And is never paid down. But just continues to grow as we add new and wonderfully compassionate and nice sounding schemes to the federal roster of caring things it will do "for the people."

This has to stop. Reign the federal government back to within its constitutionally prescribed limitations and miraculously there will be wealth left to the private sector to do wonderful things "for the people". And the people will actually have a say in what those things will be.

When compassion is left to "the people," it will be humane. When it is a function of bureaucracies, it will be as humane as tasks delivered by robots. And the robots will be programmed by a few selected people who have their own interests.

I freely concede that I have no logical response to your constitutionally-based argument. I just don't like it. That also makes me a bit of a hypocrite, as I regularly use your logic to make the point that we're supposed to play by the rules, and the rulebook is the Constitution.

[wdmso]

Reign the federal government back to within its constitutionally prescribed limitations

Says the guy who Has no issues with Trump's end around Congress on wall funding LOL

Pentagon Takes $1 Billion From Military Personnel Account To Build Border Fence Conservatives are all Giddy



Education Secretary Betsy DeVos proposed massive cuts in the budget request for fiscal 2020, including eliminating $17.6 million to support the Special Olympics.

"We are not doing our children any favors when we borrow from their future in order to invest in systems and policies that are not yielding better results," (is she talking about Military programs like the Osprey and others )


FYI one F-35A in 2019 cost $85 million


and Conservatives are all Giddy and making excuse with twisted Rational how this is Justifiable but again since we AKA (republicans) cut off the country's funding sources with are giant tax cut .... now need to cut spending all over .... Cause and effect

[scottw]

quick quiz for wayne....which is a constitutionally mandated role of the federal government... national defense or special olympics?

I love the special olympics...just following your genius here..

also...did federal revenue increase or decrease last year? is it expected to increase or decrease this year?....is it projected to increase or decrease next year?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by scottw

just following your genius here..

Good luck with that....

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Jim, no matter how much your sympathy desires the federal government to overreach its powers in order to do what you consider compassionate, you are not going to be allowed to pick and choose which compassionate unconstitutional measures will be allowed..

So is funding for the Special Olympics and some of the other thing that were mentioned earlier unconstitutional? Things like the education department and scholarships for the children of vets who died in action.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So is funding for the Special Olympics and some of the other thing that were mentioned earlier unconstitutional? Things like the education department and scholarships for the children of vets who died in action.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

should the federal government give millions of dollars to every private charity organization out there and shouldn't they all get the same funding in the interest of fairness?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So is funding for the Special Olympics and some of the other thing that were mentioned earlier unconstitutional? Things like the education department and scholarships for the children of vets who died in action.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Article one Section eight of the Constitution lists all the categories on which the Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes (ergo to fund). Funding for the Special Olympics would not fall under any of those categories. Therefor, Congress doing so would be exercising a spending authority which it constitutionally does not have. That is, it would be unconstitutional.

Perhaps you could read Article one Section eight and point out how funding the Special Olympics falls within any category of spending that the Constitution gives the Congress power.