Federal Katrina Spending

[MODU]

Definitely not.

Congress has power to tax and spend only for the general welfare.

Last time I checked, making sure that we don't have a regional economic collapse as well as trying to keep thousands if not millions from living in shelters and being unemployed qualifies as falling under "general welfare."  Otherwise, the rest of the country will suffer from our non-action.

[MODU]

The welfare concerned here is local, not general.

No, it's regional, spanning 5 states. 

[MODU]

Right. So local, not general.

No, that's regional with a lasting national impact.  Therefore, being more of a single state issue, it is constitutional.  Hell, if it was just New Orleans alone, shutting down the Mississippi river to ocean-going trade, it would still be a national issue due to the economic impact upon the nation.

General welfare means national welfare.  If something is threatening our national economy, then it falls under the general welfare.

The only way it wouldn't would be if the storm wiped out an area in Texas which was not heavily populated, did not have any form of major commerce, nor interrupted the national flow of business and defense.  In that case, state, local, and private groups would take the burden of rebuilding, and not the federal.

[MODU]

How can you say 5 states is "local?"  Hell, you don't even need to use the commerce clause to show that 5 states is a national issue.

[MODU]

The general welfare clause allows the federal government to pursue interests that are firmly outside the natural sphere of the states, as the Supreme Court correctly held in United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936).

Exactly.  That is why this falls under it.  There is no way the states alone can shoulder the burden of recover and rebuilding without federal funding.  And since this is a multi-state disaster, effecting the nation as a whole, the federal government has to be involved.  Therefore, it's Constitutional.

[MODU]

The interest is only general if it is, by its nature, national, and not local.

Exactly.  And you cannot prove that the disaster reconstruction effort of the Gulf Coast area is a "local" issue, since it's not.  That's why it's not "unConstitutional."

[MODU]

The interest is only general if it is, by its nature, national, and not local.

Exactly.

I'm glad you agree with me that this is unconstitutional, then.

hahaha . . . nice try.