MONTHLY NEWSLETTER

Casualties of State Inaction

By Vickie Deppe

Last month, we discussed the power the states have to lower the temperature of our national political discourse. This month, we have the sad opportunity to reflect on the tragic deaths of Renée Good and Alex Pretti. The purpose of this piece is not to play Monday-morning quarterback, speculate on motives, or perform a second-by-second analysis of video culled from every possible angle; nor is it to critique immigration law. Instead, we will look at our constitutional framework and how adherence to it could have prevented these deaths, as well as the opportunities available to the states going forward. Instead of starting in the moments before each encounter with federal law enforcement, we’re going to zoom out to examine federal spending, which is what put Minneapolis on the federal radar in the first place.

There are just over 50 million immigrants residing in the US, representing approximately 15% of our population. Approximately 62,000 Somali immigrants live in Minneapolis…about 14% of the population. Minnesota is home to about 1% of our national immigrant population. If you think these figures don’t seem to justify the level of attention Minneapolis is receiving from the federal government, you’d be right. It’s not the head count: it’s allegations of high-dollar institutional fraud via a panoply of federally-funded social welfare programs including child care, nutrition, support for seniors and the disabled, and housing.

CBS News reports that investigations into this corruption have been underway since 2021. As allegations continue to pile up, Governor Tim Walz has ended his campaign for re-election, but not before accusing the Trump administration of racism—in spite of the fact that these investigations were initiated during the Biden Administration. Prosecutors have secured dozens and dozens of convictions, and estimate losses to American taxpayers to reach as high as $9 billion. This is enough money to fund SNAP benefits for New Mexico for almost an entire year. It is these staggering levels of fraud—not racism or politics—that put Minneapolis in the crosshairs of federal law enforcement.

It is our contention that the vehicles for that fraud (federally-funded social welfare programs) find no constitutional basis for support at the federal level. The federal government is limited by the Constitution to about two dozen specific functions (the “Enumerated Powers”), most of which are found in Article I, Section 8. This paragraph opens with the General Welfare Clause (also referred to as the “Spending Clause”): “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States…” Advocates for federally-funded social safety net programs point to the General Welfare Clause to support their constitutionality.

In Federalist 41, however, James Madison argues against an expansive understanding of what is meant by “general welfare.” Article I, Section 8(1) is not “an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare,” but rather, serves as a kind of mission statement justifying and directing the use of the subsequently delineated powers. Were the virtually unlimited powers imagined by his opponents in view, it would have been unnecessary—even nonsensical—to provide the detailed list that follows. Moreover, members of the founding generation rushed to clarify their intent by including the 10th Amendment in the first wave of constitutional amendments now known as the Bill of Rights: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The 10th Amendment makes no sense if Article I, Section 8(1) were, in fact, intended as an open-ended grant of power to a beneficent governing body. Though Alexander Hamilton was a proponent of government “investment,” he didn’t think this position was important enough to advocate for in The Federalist Papers; and while there is no evidence that he ever abandoned the belief that Enumerated Powers should not be understood to constrain federal spending, he later acknowledged that “general welfare” means that those investments had to benefit all Americans equally, and not just some specific subset of us. Federal spending was a key issue in antebellum presidential elections; and all but one president from 1800 through the Civil War rejected the expansive interpretation of “general welfare” and vetoed funding for projects including roads, canals, and public education.

The kinds of federally-funded social welfare programs being abused in Minneapolis (and elsewhere) can be traced to the Great Depression. UCLA Professor of Economics Lee Ohanian posits that “well-intended but misguided policies” on the part of Presidents Herbert Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt (neither of whom had any real-world business or economics experience) prolonged the Great Depression by 7 long years. The Framers probably didn’t anticipate the economic havoc these two men would wreak on the nation, but they knew no one should wield that much power.

The widespread hardship spawned by the unconstitutional interference of Hoover and Roosevelt resulted in an ever-expanding menu of federally-funded social safety net programs that has subsumed charitable efforts funded and administered by families, faith communities, fraternal organizations, private charities, volunteers, and state and local governments. According to the Foundation for Economic Education, 70% of the funds budgeted for federal assistance go to administrative staff salaries, while only 30% directly benefits struggling Americans. For private charities, these figures are flipped: more than 70% of the monies donated go to beneficiaries. This is just one of several metrics that commend local and private charity over federal programs.

Control of social welfare programs should be returned to states, localities, and the private sector, where large-scale fraud is far more difficult to pull off. And if federal monies aren’t being spent, the federal government will have no reason—or jurisdiction—to scrutinize the flow of those dollars. As a donor state, Minnesota would be in a better fiscal position by funding its own social welfare programs. And from an immigration enforcement standpoint, the community Renée Good and Alex Pretti called home would have been a low priority for the federal government.

States can—and should—assert their right to check the federal government using Article V. In this case, they can do so with a constitutional amendment that clarifies the General Welfare Clause and limits congressional spending to the enumerated powers.

Article V News 

An opinion piece in the Daily Kos argues that the 14th Amendment requires that delegates to an Article V Convention must be elected by the people, and votes taken there must pass with a 2/3 majority.

The Dakota Free Press published a piece on SJR 502 (cited as SJR 2 in the article) purporting to fix the number of Supreme Court Justices at 9. Though the author stands in opposition to this proposed amendment, it concludes with a good synopsis of the many hurdles that prevent an amendment from being ratified absent significant nationwide support.

The Iowa Standard published a piece recognizing the passage of the Convention of States Project’s application for a convention to propose term limits, spending controls, and limits on federal power. This is the first application of its kind to pass since 2022 and brings the total to 20.

County 17 has published a letter confronting common objections to an Article V Convention.

Congressman James Comer (R-KY) penned an op-ed for the Lexington Herald Leaderadvocating for a Balanced Budget Amendment and calling on states that have not yet submitted an application for a convention to propose one to do so. He also opines that reaching 33 states will likely prompt Congress to propose a BBA of its own. As he was just a young boy at the time, he can be forgiven for not realizing that there were 40 applications for a convention to draft a BBA when Congress passed the toothless Gramm-Rudmann-Hollings Balanced Budget Act.

Similarly, during a visit to Idaho, Governor Ron DeSantis hypothesized that the accumulation of applications for a convention would prompt Congress to draft a BBA. He, too, can be forgiven, as he was just a toddler when Congress refused to do its duty to call a convention and instead passed an ineffective law.

Article V Legislative Activity

Convention of States Project

  • Delaware: SCR 114 was filed and failed in a floor vote.
  • Illinois: SJR 27 and HJR 15 remain pending in their respective committees. The House version has bipartisan support.
  • Kansas: SCR 1604 passed, making Kansas the 20th state to pass a Convention of States Project application.
  • Kentucky: SJR 51 has been introduced and assigned to the Senate Committee on Committees.
  • Massachusetts: H 3888 remains pending in the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs.
  • Nebraska: LR 14 has been carried over. The measure rescinds and replaces a previous rendition that contains a sunset clause.
  • New Jersey: SCR 32 has been introduced and referred to the Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism, and Historic Preservation Committee. The measure has bipartisan support.
  • Ohio: SJR 3 and HJR 2 remain pending in their respective committees.
  • Pennsylvania: HR 125 remains pending in the House State Government Committee. The measure includes delegate selection and oversight language and has bipartisan support.
  • Rhode Island: HJR 7009 has been filed and referred to the House State Government & Elections Committee.
  • South Dakota: SJR 503 has passed in the Senate and awaits a committee assignment in the House.
  • Washington: SJM 8011 has been reintroduced and assigned to the State Government, Tribal Affairs, and Elections Committee.

Countermand

  • Pennsylvania: SR 118 remains pending in the State Government Committee. The legislation also contains language pertinent to delegates, so it is also included in the DSO list below.

Equal Rights Amendment

  • Florida: S 82 has been introduced and is pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  • North Carolina: S 438 and H 500 remain pending in their respective committees.

Fiscal Responsibility

  • United States: HCR 15 remains pending in the House Judiciary Committee.
  • Georgia: SR 262 has been taken from the table and recommitted.
  • South Carolina: H 3007 has been adopted by the Senate and returned to the House with concurrence.

Free and Fair Elections (Wolf Pack)

  • Massachusetts: S 2463 has been referred to the Rules Committee for further investigation and study. H 3842 and H 3843 remain pending in the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs. H 3843 has bipartisan support.
  • Washington: HJM 4011 has had a first reading and awaits a hearing in the State Government & Tribal Affairs Committee.

Term Limits

  • United States Congress: HJR 12 and SJR 1 remain pending in their respective committees. The House rendition has bipartisan support.
  • United States Congress: HJR 29, allowing the president to serve a third term under certain circumstances, remains pending in Judiciary.
  • Arizona: SCR 1011 has had a second reading and remains pending in the Regulatory Affairs and Government Efficiency Committee. HCR 2043 is pending in the House Judiciary Committee. The House version has bipartisan support.
  • Georgia: SR 23 continues to await action in the House Rules Committee.
  • Kansas: HCR 5022 has been introduced and awaits a hearing in the House Federal and State Affairs Committee.
  • Kentucky: SJR 17 has been introduced and assigned to the Senate Committee on Committees.
  • Mississippi: SC 513 has been introduced and assigned to the Rules Committee.
  • Nebraska: LR 21 has been carried over.
  • New Hampshire: HCR 13 and HCR 16 have been introduced and await action in their respective committees.
  • Pennsylvania: HR 21 continues to await a hearing in the State Government Committee. The measure covers Supreme Court justices as well as members of Congress and has bipartisan support.
  • Utah: SJR 4 was reported favorably out of the Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee and awaits a second reading.

Delegate Selection and Oversight

  • Indiana: SB 210, a compact to ensure that an Article V Convention is conducted on a one-state, one-vote basis and that subject-matter limitations expressed in the applications will be observed, has passed third reading in the Senate.
  • Kansas: HB 2065 passed in the House and has been referred to the Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs.
  • Michigan: HCR 2 and HB 5151 have been filed and assigned to the House Government Operations Committee. The measures stipulate appointment by legislative leadership and define delegate misbehavior or tampering with a delegate as a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison.
  • Missouri: HB 1811 has had a first and second reading and awaits committee assignment. SB 1119 has had its first and second reading and has been assigned to the Senate Rules, Joint Rules, Resolutions and Ethics Committee.
  • Nebraska: LB 259 has been carried over and awaits a committee assignment.
  • New Jersey: S 832 has been introduced and referred to the Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism, and Historic Preservation Committee.
  • New York: A 8935 and S 8166 remain pending in their respective committees.
  • North Carolina: H 214 remains pending in the Committee on Rules and Operations of the Senate.
  • Ohio: HB 67 and SB112 continue to await action in their respective committees.
  • Pennsylvania: SR 117 remains pending in the State Government Committee (see also Countermand legislation, above).
  • Tennessee: HB 1499, revising the existing statute, has been filed and awaits committee assignment. SB 1567 has been introduced and awaits a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  • Virginia: HB 8 and SB 549 have been introduced and assigned to their respective Rules Committee. Fiscal impact statements have been filed by the Criminal Sentencing Division and the Department of Planning and Budget.

Rescission

  • Missouri: HCR 26 has had a second reading and awaits a committee assignment.
  • Oklahoma: SCR 14 has had its first reading and awaits a committee assignment.
  • Washington: HJM 4005 has been reintroduced and assigned to the State Government, Tribal Affairs, and Elections Committee.

Other

  • New Jersey: SCR 22, applying for a convention to propose a balanced budget amendment, a term limits amendment, and unspecified changes to the allocation of Electoral College votes, has been referred to the Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism, and Historic Preservation Committee
  • Oklahoma: HJR 1036 has had its first reading and awaits a committee assignment. The measure calls for a convention to propose an amendment to prohibit the President or any member of the House, Senate, or Supreme Court from being paid during a government shutdown. It further defines a shutdown to include any period in which Congress has failed to pass a balanced budget (defined as expenditures not to exceed the prior year’s tax receipts) and stipulates that the aforementioned elected officials will be ineligible to stand for reelection.
  • South Dakota: SJR 502, purporting to fix the number of Supreme Court Justices at 9, has been assigned to and awaits a hearing in the Senate State Affairs Committee.
  • West Virginia: HCR 9, purporting to repeal the 17th Amendment (direct election of senators) and HCR 10, purporting to repeal the 16th Amendment (income tax) have been filed and referred to the Judiciary Committee.
  • West Virginia: HCR 11, purporting to require that certain federal officials be natural-born citizens with sole and exclusive citizenship in the United States, has been filed and referred to the Judiciary Committee.
  • West Virginia: HCR 12, purporting to fix the number of Supreme Court Justices at 9, has been assigned to the House Judiciary Committee.

Constitutional Education

If you haven’t seen the PBS documentary A More or Less Perfect Union—or if you haven’t seen it lately—it’s well worth a watch…or a listen, if you’d like something for while you’re driving back and forth to session.

Who Said it?

Today’s party system increasingly [persuades] Americans that their political opponents are much more radical than they really are.

Yuval Levin