bacchys wrote:
To amend the constitution.

But the powers delegated were written in general terms for a reason: so that Congress (and the government generally) could use those powers as needed with the changing times.

The National Guard isn't unconstitutional because it's formed, organized, and regulated differently than the militias of the 1790s.
I agree that the powers in many cases are not absolutely specific, they are a framework after all, and that A1S8C18 is what gives the Congress the power to flesh out those powers by passing laws.

This isn't what happened with Social Security and Medicare. There was no enumerated power to "flesh out" to create Social Security and Medicare.

But my question still stands. If the Congress can legislate new powers into existence as long as they claim popular acceptance of those powers, and this is perfectly constitutional, what purpose does Article V have in the 21st century?


"Higher taxes never reduce the deficit. Governments spend whatever they take in and then whatever they can get away with." -- Milton Friedman