Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution

I would also like to state that the Elastic Clause, a. k. a. the Necessary and Proper Clause, Basket Clause, the Coefficient Clause, and the Sweeping Clause applies to my argument of a loose interpretation of the U. S. Constitution. Also involved is the General Welfare Clause which is part of the Taxing and Spending Clause in Article 1 Section 8 of the U. S. Constitution. The creation of the National Bank- Alexander Hamilton argued the Necessary and Proper Clause during debate of the bank bill that was sent to George Washington during the Washington administration. Hamilton claimed that the Bank was necessary to execute the power of collecting taxes and duties and borrowing. Washington took Hamilton's side by signing the bill. . http://en.wikipedia.org.... The Supreme Court took Hamilton's side as well in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland 17 U. S. 4 Wheat. 316 316 (1819) . http://supreme.justia.com... Court Chief Justice John Marshall agreed stating, "We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the Government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended. But we think the sound construction of the Constitution must allow to the national legislature that discretion with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in the manner most beneficial to the people. Let the end be legitimate, let it be within the scope of the Constitution, and all means which are appropriate, which are plainly adapted to that end, which are not prohibited, but consistent with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, are constitutional. " . http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com... this case, the Necessary and Proper Clause was linked to the General Welfare clause as involving taxation and borrowing. The clause was also linked to the Commerce Clause where New Deal reforms were found necessary and proper to regulating interstate commerce (Gardbaum, Steven (1996). "Rethinking Constitutional Federalism". ) The Supreme Court upheld a federal statute making it a crime for a farmer to produce more wheat than was allowed under price controls and production controls, even if the excess production was for the farmer's own personal consumption. The Necessary and Proper Clause was used to justify the regulation of production and consumption (Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U. S. 111 (1942)] The Necessary and Proper Clause was also argued in the case of Lambert v. Yellowley, 272 U. S. 581 (1926), where the Supreme Court rule the 18th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution necessary and proper therefore establishing Prohibition. . http://supreme.justia.com... So as we can see, the Elastic Clause has been more supportive to my argument that the Constitution is a broadly interpreted document. In terms of your argument on the Health Care Law, a. k. a. H R 4872, the federal mandate would, in my opinion, be ruled constitutional. Jack M. Balkin, Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment and Director of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School, thinks it will be ruled constitutional as well . http://healthpolicyandreform.nejm.org... Balkin received his Ph. D in philosophy from Cambridge University, and his A. B. and J. D. degrees from Harvard University . http://www.yale.edu... the mandate is in the form of a tax, the U. S. Government can argue the mandate necessary and proper to execute the tax. Source that the mandate is a tax . http://www.factcheck.org.... It is very unlike that the Supreme Court will undo a tradition of loose interpretation on the bill. So, my argument is that Congress shall make laws necessary and proper to execute enumerated powers. I do not want to make it look like a rant so if my opponent and hopeful voters read my sources they will find more than enough information to support my argument.