SEMINOLE / ACRS -- It really is amazing how the vast majority of today’s most prominent political commentators and talk show hosts assists folks in government [either knowingly or unknowingly] in an ongoing subjugation of our constitutional limited Republic, a typical example being, the current debate concerning government funding of stem cell research.

Read from several recent editorials covering the stem cell issue or the views of your favorite political pundits and you’ll witness a continual pounding into the American people‘s minds that there are but two primary issues involved regarding such government funding___ the issue of human life and the issue of scientific advancement. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of people have predictably accepted the two argument Hobson’s choice, which diverts their attention from the truth.

The truth is, the status quo conservatives and liberals in the media have failed to alarm the citizens that Congress has been granted power to promote the; “Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries“; that there is no mention in the constitution granting power to Congress to promote the Progress of Science by funding projects which Congress shall think proper___ an exception being, “necessary and proper” research and development “to provide and maintain a Navy” [national defense see Art. 1, sec. 8 ].

In general, the founding fathers agreed free enterprise to be the best depository in the advancement of science, and intentionally sought to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts by granting a limited power to Congress to protect the work of authors and inventors by issuing patents and copyrights only!

Madison's Notes on the convention of 1787 reveals that Charles Pickney, on August 18th, of the federal convention, proposed a power to be vested in Congress "To establish seminaries for the promotion of literature and the arts and sciences", but this proposal, as many other proposals, was rejected by the Convention, and the only power agreed upon by the Framers and Ratifiers relating to the advancement of science, was the limited power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, [How?] by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

And why not give power to Congress to award taxpayer money to private individuals in the promotion of science and useful Arts? The answer to this question was eloquently stated on the floor of the House on February 7th, 1792 by Representative John Page:

"The framers of the Constitution guarded so much against a possibility of such partial preferences as might be given, if Congress had the right to grant them, that, even to encourage learning and useful arts, the granting of patents is the extent of their power. And surely nothing could be less dangerous to the sovereignty or interest of the individual States than the encouragement which might be given to ingenious inventors or promoters of valuable inventions in the arts and sciences. The encouragement which the General Government might give to the fine arts, to commerce, to manufactures, and agriculture, might, if judiciously applied, redound to the honor of Congress, and the splendor, magnificence, and real advantage of the United States; but the wise framers of our Constitution saw that, if Congress had the power of exerting what has been called a royal munificence for these purposes, Congress might, like many royal benefactors, misplace their munificence; might elevate ! sycophants, and be inattentive to men unfriendly to the views of Government; might reward the ingenuity of the citizens of one State, and neglect a much greater genius of another. A citizen of a powerful State it might be said, was attended to, whilst that of one of less weight in the Federal scale was totally neglected. It is not sufficient, to remove these objections, to say, as some gentlemen have said, that Congress in incapable of partiality or absurdities, and that they are as far from committing them as my colleagues or myself. I tell them the Constitution was formed on a supposition of human frailty, and to restrain abuses of mistaken powers.” Annals of Congress Feb 1792 Rep Page.

So, here we have a record of the Founders of our great country, which addresses the question of whether Congress shall have power to subsidize and grant preferences in the advancement of science, and the record shows, in crystal clear language, the advancement of science was intentionally left to the free enterprise system without Congress being authorized to determine the winners and losers of taxpayer revenue grants.

In conclusion, the practice of today's Congress subsidizing and granting financial preferences to selected individuals and groups of individuals [including faith based institutions], is not only un-constitutional and a misappropriation of federal revenue, which happens to be a criminal offense, but such a power, when exercised by folks in government, is a total violation of personal property rights which our Constitution was designed to protect. The importance of personal property rights was pointed out on February 3, 1792, by Rep. Giles, speaking before the House of Representatives:

"Under a just and equal Government, every individual is entitled to protection in the enjoyment of the whole product of his labor, except such portion of it as is necessary to enable Government to protect the rest; this is given only in consideration of the protection offered. In every bounty, exclusive right, or monopoly, Government violates the stipulation on her part; for, by such a regulation, the product of one man's labor is transferred to the use and enjoyment of another. The exercise of such a right on the part of Government can be justified on no other principle, than that the whole product of the labor or every individual is the real property of Government, and may be distributed among the several parts of the community by government discretion; such a supposition would directly involve the idea, that every individual in the community is merely a slave and bondman to Government, who, although he may labor, is not to expect protection in the product of his labor. An! authority given to any Government to exercise such a principle, would lead to a complete system of tyranny." Annals of Congress, Feb 3 1792 Rep Giles

Article Courtesy of: American Constitutional Research Service 727 391-1187 P.O. Box 4474 Seminole, FL 33775

Published by permission.