Not Yours to Give
As the political sideshow regarding the debt ceiling continues, we should remind the corrupt politicians of the words of statesman Davy Crockett
“The time will and must come, when honesty will receive its reward, and when the people of this nation will be brought to a sense of their duty, and will pause and reflect how much it cost us to redeem ourselves from the government.”—Davy Crockett
As the political clowns put on a show regarding the debt ceiling, we the people will suffer from their plunder.
According to the Chicago Tribune, a deal has been struck between Democrat crime family boss Joe Biden and Republican crime family boss Kevin McCarthy. It will have to pass both houses of Congress.
The lies have been astounding, as they are every debt ceiling circus, by the mainstream narrative media trying to scare we the people that the government might shut down. And the people fall for the lies. A government shutdown, a true one, would be fantastic.
But alas, the political thieves must steal from us. That’s their job. Just a little reminder, our country is now $31.8 trillion in debt, according to usdebtclock.org. And what was the “disagreement” between the crime families? Just how much more they’re going to steal from us to hand out to their friends. There were no plans to cut spending, just plans on how much more to spend.
Before I go further, Federico Lines and I will be discussing this issue tonight on our Restoring the Constitution series at the States Rights Radio Podcast. It starts at 7:30 p.m. central time.
Last night, I was watching the 1960 movie The Alamo with John Wayne playing Davy Crockett. One scene stuck out to me:
Crockett (Wayne) said:
“Republic… I like the sound of the word. It means people can live free, talk free, go or come, buy or sell, be drunk or sober, however they choose. Some words give you a feeling. Republic’s one of those words that makes me tight in the throat…. Some words can give you a feeling that make your heart warm. Republic is one of those words.”
Of course, I don’t know if Crockett ever said that, but I love the sentiment. However, it reminds me of what we’ve lost.
Today, we have both political crime families clamoring for democracy, or tyranny of the majority. The desire for a republic where liberty is the foundation is gone in America. And we the people continue to put up with it.
Now, we have both crime families battling over which corrupt agencies and programs favored by their respective sides. There’s not even a recognition that the funds they are stealing from us are not theirs to give.
That brings me to the speech on the floor of the House of Representative by Crockett, the real Crockett.
Crockett was a U.S. Congressman from Tennessee between 1827-183 and again from 1833-1835.
During his time in Congress, Crockett was presented with a bill to appropriate money to the widow of a distinguished naval officer. The bill was expected to pass unanimously. Crockett, instead, reminded his colleagues that the money was not theirs to give.
Published by the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), Crockett’s speech:
“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.
Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”
The bill, that again was expected to pass unanimously, failed after Crockett’s speech.
Crockett was later asked why he opposed the bill, according to FEE, and Crockett explained a conversation with a constituent.
In a previous year, Crockett had voted to approve $20,000 in funding for relief after a fire in Georgetown.
The constituent:
“Though I live here in the backwoods and seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully all the proceedings of Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a bill to appropriate $20,000 to some sufferers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that true?”
Crocket responded:
“Well, my friend; I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly, nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children, particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had been there, you would have done just as I did.”
The constituent responded:
“It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most dangerous power that can be entrusted to man, particularly under our system of collecting revenue by a tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his means.
What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much he pays to the government. So, you see, that while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000.
If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper.
You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No, Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief.
There are about two hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the sufferers by contributing each one week’s pay, it would have made over $13,000. There are plenty of wealthy men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000 without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life.
The congressmen chose to keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very creditably; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitution, the power to do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the Constitution.
So, you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country, for when Congress once begins to stretch its power beyond the limits of the Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you.”
That 1800s “backwoods” Tennessee resident had more wisdom than the American public has today. And Crockett had far more integrity than the political criminals of today to admit he was wrong and recommit to principles.