by Clay Barham

The American Constitution is missing a word.  There was a word left out that our Founders failed to recognize as important.  The word is "Bailout."  There is nothing in that document that allows the government to bailout someone whose house burned down, or a car company, or someone with medical problems, or someone who spent too much on a house they could not afford, or a bank that made bad loans. 

Why did the founders overlook that crucial word?  After all, we use it all the time now.

Because it is popular with the crying and compassionate crowd, government is supposed to take care of anyone who stumbles.  Of course, everyone knows people will take risks that lead to stumbles, since they know taxpayers are going to pull their chestnuts out of the fire.

If government's role is to take care of its people, help those who crash their cars to get a new replacement, or those who gobble up too much fats and sugars to buy clothes that fit and ramps for their wheel chairs, what responsibility do the governed have for their own lives?  If none, how did America ever become so free and prosperous.

Where, in our Constitution should we insert the word "Bailout?" Perhaps we could use that word in the Preamble to follow "General Welfare," not that the Preamble is anything other than an introductory statement, rather than law.  Maybe it could be in Section 1 that describes the legislative powers vested in a Senate and House, and add, "Who shall then be in charge of bailouts."

I would be interested in knowing what the constitutional scholars think of this word "bailout," and where it should be placed in the Constitution.  Judging only from all the run-up documents preceding the Constitution, and the statements of those founders, other than Hamilton, I can find no source for interest in inserting that word. 

Oh well, no one really pays attention to the Constitution anyway, so who cares?

Write a Blog Response to this post, or Make a Contribution to support the Populist Party.