Welfare is only for those who are destitute and near death

Welfare is only for those who are destitute and near death.

By Steven D. Miller

Don’t confuse charity with giving away things. 1st Corinthians 13:3.

Don’t confuse government welfare systems with charity. One is done by forcing your neighbors to give; the other is done with love. It is your duty to love your neighbor and be your brother’s keeper.

Forcing your neighbor to give is not charity -- it is socialism. No form of collectivism can recognize individual rights. If the neighbor cannot give, then their bank account will be seized, their wages garnished, they will be evicted from their home by brutal force and their home sold to collect the tax. This is force, not love.

Paul repeated King David’s warning that government charity would be a snare to trap you. Romans 11:9

In Genesis 3:19 the unchanging Lord of the Bible requires you to earn your bread from the sweat of your face. This principle was still true when Abraham Lincoln gave his second Inaugural Address, March 4, 1865:

“It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces...”

That's right. Forced welfare contributions are just as immoral as slavery. Welfare and slavery are the same thing. It is using laws to force others to provide you with the fruits of another man's labor. If you expect others to provide what you want, then you are as corrupt as a slave owner. Bullies who want to force their will on others (by slavery or by vote) have always ganged up together and used fascism to dominate others.

WELFARE FOR INDIVIDUALS IS NOT CONSTITUTIONAL

When the proposed Constitution was being debated in the State Senates, many people were suspicious that the term “general welfare” would authorize welfare to individuals.

The general welfare clause in Article 1, Section 8 of your Constitution reads:

“The Congress shall have Power to ... provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;...”

It is an introductory phrase that is followed, after the semi-colon, by a list of the 18 specific ways the new government would be authorized to provide for the general welfare. Establish post offices, coin money, make treaties, establish standard weights and measures, provide for a Navy, punish pirates, punish counterfeiting, fund a temporary army, declare war, and exercise exclusive jurisdiction over all cases in the future District of Columbia, etc.

To counter those rumors that the "general welfare" clause in the proposed Constitution would authorize any kind of welfare, James Madison, in Federalist Paper #41, explained its clear intent. He stated that it "is an absurdity" to claim that the General Welfare clause confounds or misleads, because this introductory clause is followed by enumeration of specific particulars that explain and qualify the meaning of phrase "general welfare". That's right! Your Constitution was ratified under the assurance that it would never be interpreted to provide welfare to individuals.

This was true when Samuel Adams told the greedy anti-freedom opportunists to “crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.”

This was still true when Congressman Davy Crockett made his famous "it is not yours to give" speech. It is not their money to give, not even for disaster relief in a federal territory.

This was still true in 1897 when President Grover Cleveland vetoed an appropriation to provide disaster aid to victims of a Texas drought. His veto stated: "I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds... I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution. The lesson should be constantly enforced that though the people should support the government, the government should not support the people."

footnote: 1897 was 2 years after the Supreme Court ruled that income tax was unconstitutional in Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan Co. 157 US 429, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock_v._Farmers%27_Loan_%26_Trust_Co.)

CAN WELFARE EXIST?

Question: So how can welfare be constitutional?

Answer: Anyone can ignore the law and step in to save someone’s life. There is a very narrow exception to the unconstitutionality of welfare. Government can ignore the Constitution to save a life. A welfare safety net is only for saving someone’s life. All other handouts are fraud.

Here is how it works. Welfare, such as for example, Social Security, is only available to a person “who is an applicant for or recipient of any program financed in whole or in part from Federal funds” -- according to section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act. But the only federal funds that are Constitutional are for saving a life. When the SS Act was written the poor laws allowed welfare ONLY to those who are completely destitute to the extent explained by the 1941 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Edwards v. California 314 US 172: "...only persons who are presently destitute of property and without resources to obtain the necessities of life, and who have no relatives or friends able and willing to support them."

There is ONLY one Constitutional loophole to provide welfare, even Social Security, to individual people. Government has a duty (called by various names -- "compelling state interest" or “police power”, “exigent circumstances”, “interests that the state may lawfully protect” or “overriding governmental interest”, or “clear and present danger doctrine”) to prevent an individual's death. Anyone, including government, can break the law to save a life.

This is the only Constitutional loophole that allows welfare to individuals.

You can become a permanent ward of government. All you have to do is request that government save your life by applying for relief under any program funded by federal funds.

And the Supreme Court has never ruled on the constitutionality of Social Security (they left the question open in Steward Machine Co. v. Davis 301 US 548, and Helvering v. Davis 301 US 619). They cannot rule on the constitutionality of a law brought by someone who has availed himself of the law’s benefits. (according to their rules set down in the Ashwander case). And the politics of state courts will never allow a case to reach the Supreme Court. It will be dismissed on other grounds rather than destroy the political machine.

WELFARE IS A CHURCH AND FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY, NOT A GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITY.

Welfare cannot be provided by the US Government and still be Constitutional. Welfare remains a church and family responsibility.

Welfare (including Social Security) is prohibited by the Constitution, except to those who are absolutely destitute and near death. Social Security numbers can only be assigned to those who register to accept federal benefits (according to section 205(c)(2)(B)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act). and to aliens (after 1972).

This is the only one Constitutional way to qualify for welfare. But you must give up your rights when you give up your responsibility to take care of yourself. Since rights only come with responsibilities, once you give up all your rights you are forever considered as a ward of the system.

Those who cannot take care of themselves must "…take the will of him on who he depends…" as Blackstone so eloquently stated. They have no say in how they are treated. There is no remedy for someone who is damaged when he "sees another managing his affairs and does not interfere to prevent it". It is just like in John 21:18: when you are old (cannot take care of yourself) you will stretch out your hand and someone will lead you where you do not want to go.

This welfare-for-wards function will waive all your rights. Rights are “susceptible to restriction only to prevent grave and immediate danger to interests that the state may lawfully protect”. But you waived your rights by applying for benefits funded, in whole or in part, by federal funds.

Getting a Social Security Number waives your religious rights to “overriding governmental interest” according to the Supreme Court in U.S. v. Lee (455 US 252).

If you accepted welfare under any other circumstance other than grave and immediate danger of death, then you were fraudulently induced to participate in unlawful means to raid the Treasury. Proverbs 21:6: "The getting of treasures by a lying tongue is a vanity tossed to and fro of them that seek death."

WELFARE IS ONLY FOR PAUPERS

A pauper is one who is supported by public funds. Paupers cannot have rights. The Articles of Confederation excluded paupers from ANY rights of citizenship. Article IV of the Articles of Confederation requires “... the free inhabitants of each of these States, paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice excepted, shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several States; . . .”

Busser v. Snyder, 37 ALR 1515:

“An Old Age Assistance Law is prohibited by a constitutional provision that no appropriation shall be made for charitable or benevolent purposes to any person.”

People v. Shirley, 92 ALR 2d 413, indexed under the topic Poor Laws:

“The provisions of the welfare code are to be administered fairly, with due consideration not only for the needs of applicants but also for the safeguarding of public funds; if children are not in need, they are not eligible for assistance regardless of who is paying for their support.”

Even Old Age Assistance is prohibited by your Constitution.

Also in the Busser case:

“The term ‘poor,’ as used by lawmakers, describes those who are destitute and helpless, unable to support themselves, and without means of support.”

YOU WAIVE YOUR RIGHTS

If you cannot take care of yourself, how could you expect the rights of citizenship? John Locke’s Second Treatise of Government Chapter 15 asks the question “For what compact can be made with a man that is not master of his own life?”

Once you register for socialism, others will represent you. This maxim of law is known as tacit procuration. This basic law extends much deeper than welfare. You no longer have a right to contract. You are incompetent to represent yourself, and must be represented by a competent attorney.

Christ told his disciples in Luke 22:25 that benefactors exercise authority over us.

Christians will not force others to provide for them. 2ND Thessalonians 3:6-14 prohibits Christians from associating with freeloaders.

But welfare comes at a higher price. You owe allegiance to your benefactors. Jesus Christ said in Luke 22:25: "... they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.” Those who accept benefits do so only by a pledge of allegiance to a worldly master. Perhaps you’ve chosen the wrong provider-lord-master. Christ said that Corban (the Roman system of forced welfare contributions, not the earlier charity system by the same name) nullifies the word of God.

Those who manage themselves will never accept socialist benefits. There is a Maxim of law: "No one can unjustly enrich himself at the expense of others"
“It is not just that any one should be enriched by the detriment of others” æquum est neminem cum alterius detrimento fieri locupletiorem.
(this creates a constructive contract that courts enforce “as arise when the law prescribes the rights and liabilities of persons…similar to the rights and liabilities in cases of express contract”). Also look up “constructive fraud”. For more information see my book The Citizen Cannot Complain.

ALSO RELATED TO THE GENERAL WELFARE ARE SAFETY REGULATIONS.

US Supreme Court in Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co. 295 U.S. 330:

"The catalog of means and actions which might be imposed upon an employer in any business, tending to the satisfaction and comfort of his employees, seems endless. Provision for free medical attendance, nursing, clothing, food, housing, and education of children, and a hundred other matters might with equal propriety by proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. Can it fairly be said that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the prescription of any or all of these things? Is it not apparent that they are really and essentially related solely to the social welfare of the worker, and therefore remote from any regulation of commerce as such? We think the answer is plain. These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power." [May 6, 1935]

Read that again. The welfare of workers cannot be regulated. Benefits for “the social welfare of the worker” cannot be “imposed upon an employer in any business.” No Unemployment Insurance, no Worker’s Compensation, no minimum wage, no mandatory disability insurance, first-aid, health or safety (OSHA) regulation, no health care benefits, no forced Social Security contributions.

SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY FOR YOURSELVES AND YOUR POSTERITY?

In a free country, people manage their own affairs. Just Imagine what life would be like living in a socialist country where you would be forced (by brutal force of tax seizures, if necessary, rather than by the blessing of charitable giving) to provide bread for your neighbors from your labor. You would be no better than a slave. In fact, slaves under Pharaoh only paid 20% of their earnings in tax.

When there was seven years of famine under Pharaoh, people who wanted to survive sold all their land, their cattle and all their possessions to Pharaoh in exchange for food. The next year they had nothing, so they sold themselves into slavery (including all future generations -- until God canceled the contract 400 years later). In Genesis 47:23-26 SLAVES OWNED BY PHARAOH HAD A 20% INCOME TAX and were allowed to keep 80%. This was during a time of economic disaster when they were recovering from a famine. If you pay more than 20% tax, even in times of economic disaster, then you are worse off than a slave. Or stated more correctly, if your living allowance (paycheck) is less than 80% then you are worse off than a slave. Today’s expenditure of federal, state and local governments is 50% of the gross national product. If you think you are below the 50% tax bracket, you didn’t add all the other taxes and don’t forget to count your share of the increase in the national debt and "unfunded liabilities".

In the medieval dark ages, a serf only had to work 14 weeks out of the year (26% of the year) to provide for himself, his family, and his lord or King. The rest of his time could be spent building magnificent cathedrals and Opera houses. Painting fine art or sculpting. Making clocks and discovering science.

Then the U.S. overcame a great depression, won World War 2 in less than 4 years, and rebuilt the rest of the world.

In the 1960s we still needed only one breadwinner per household, until President Johnson’s War On Poverty, then by 1980 we needed two. Then by 1990s daddy government was the head of household. Spot the trend.

* ~ ~ ~ *

True or False Quiz:

• Governments are instituted among men to protect rights, not to destroy rights.
• A right cannot be taxed.
• You have a right to earn wages.
• If you waive your right to earn wages, then your wages can be taxed.