From: PA146008@utkvm1.utk.edu  (David L. Veal)
Subject: Re: Presidential Line-Item Veto Power
Organization: The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 02:08:38 GMT

In article <Bs5yyF.923@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
gt38091@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Greg ) writes:

>
>veal@utkvm1.utk.edu (David L. Veal) writes:
>
>>     What is the case for all practical purposes and what *should* be the
>>case are two different things.  Everything the government can do legally
>>*is* spelled out in the Constitution.  That is the idea behind a limited
>>government.  The Constitution has an amendment process in order to deal with
>>things that "come up."
>>     What you fail to realize is that most of the things people say have
>>"come up" and the Constitution needs to deal with were never intended to
>>be a function of the Federal Government.  Those things that have come up
>>that do need to be done nationally (like, say, the environment) need to
>>be amended.
>>     There is no point in writing your government down if you don't follow
>>what's on the paper.
>
>well, that's true to a certain extent, but you are forgetting one important
>point that our Constitution is great because it is flexible to a certain
>extent.
>
     The Constitution allows the government certain lee-way in carrying
out its function.   The Constitution itself, and the boundries, are not
"flexible" except in the minds of the legislators and in the text books
of our sorry educational system.
>
>>     Whatever *is* in the Constitution is law.  The Supreme Court, using
>>their own set of implied powers that are not listed in the Constitution,
>>interpret that law.
>
>i never disputed that fact, yet our Founding Fathers had the foresight to
>allow for the fact that times change, since we can not reasonably expect to
>advance as a nation if we are limited to an explicit, never-changing set
>of rules that would get more and more dated as time goes on...
>
     The "rules" may be changed by the amendment process.  This is the *only*
way to alter the Constitution.  "Implying", "extrapolating", and
"interpreting" powers was exactly what the founders sought to avoid by
laying things out in a clear, unambiguous fashion.  The government, though
has started to make its own rules about what is Constitutional and they
aren't based on the Constitution.  This bodes ill for a limited government.
>
>>     Look at the provision for the Supreme Court in the Constitution.
>>Judicial Review is an "implied" power, not an enumerated one.
>
>i never said that judicial review was enumerated in the Constitution...what
>i said is that the Constitution says that there will be a Supreme Court, and
>that it's decisions shall be the "supreme law of the land"
>
     The Supreme Court was intended to be the highest court atop a structure
setup by Congress.  It's decisions are *not* the Supreme Law of the Land.
(Look it up.)  That distinction belongs *only* to the Constitution.

     Judicial review is "implied," and it is dangerous for that reason.
It is an unintended power, and thus has no built in checks.  The result
is some decisions of questional legality, as well as intelligence.
>
>>     The government is their to protect our rights, among other things.
>
>i never said that it wasn't...i was merely listing some things off the top
>of my head.
>
>
>>     The "necessary and proper" clause give the Congress the power to make
>>all laws "which shall be necessary and proper to carry into execution the
>>foregoing powers."  Which means that the Congress may make laws relating to
>>those powers, and only those powers, which are specifically granted it
>>in Article I, Section 8.
>>     It does not grant any unlimited ability to make laws they deem
>>appropriate.
>
>yes!...that's precisely my point...our Founding Fathers could not have
>possibly written a document that would SPECIFICALLY tell the government what
>it could do in EVERY situation that could arise...that's what is so beautiful
>about the Constitution...it has endured for 200 years because of it's ability
>to accomadate changing times!
>
     The ability to accomodate changing times occurs *only* in the ability
to amend the Constitution.