Government’s brazen trampling of citizens’ rights during Covid has the nation reeling. Government lies, law breaking, undermining constitutional rights and its incompetent and pornographic schooling have citizens in shock.
It has divided families, friends and neighbors. In many ways government is now the enemy of the people. Government misdeeds are surfacing daily.
A recent example is when the non-profit Yuba-Sutter Arts Council posted its rules for event admittance. A photo ID is now needed along with a Covid shot passport, or a negative PCR test procured in the previous 72 hours. In addition, a mask must be worn and directions are offered indicating the style and the appropriate installation of the mask.
After the arts center published its rules there was push-back. People asked why the center had the strictest Covid rules in town. Since it is supported by private donations and public tax dollars how can they discriminate or establish arbitrary rules?
Picketers appeared at four events over the past two weeks. Signs questioned the receiving of tax dollars and then stopping certain taxpayers from attending. Some private donors decided they would not support an organization they could not access.
The center receives various streams of tax dollars. Locally, they tap into tax monies authorized by Yuba and Sutter County Supervisors and Marysville and Yuba City Councils. Coincidently, the art center board lists Don Blaser, Karm Bains, Stuart Gilchrist and Shon Harris representing the entities above.
Without arguing the efficacy of the arts center’s nonsensical Covid rules, there are many opinions about the legality and ethics of what the center is doing. Here are a few thoughts.
In a truly free America a business or nonprofit should be able to make up their own rules for admittance and membership based on – ethnicity, gender, circumcision, sexual preference, religion, age, politics, occupation, and on and on. Or, an establishment could be open to anyone. Then people are free to support and attend if they wish or are allowed – no harm no foul. If they don’t care for the group or the rules they can support some other effort.
The art council has defined its entry rules in the past and has now added Covid mandates. That is their decision to make. Some believe though that the center cannot discriminate.
However, it really gets toxic when a nonprofit is taking tax dollars from politicians that are charitable with taxpayers’ money. In the center’s case, politicians actually sit on the nonprofit board and unethically self-deal taxpayers’ money.
It brings to mind the visiting church speaker that announced the offering. He then told the audience to reach into their neighbor’s pocket and give like they always wanted. Of course, the speaker was the beneficiary of the spike in generosity. He knew people are always more generous with someone else’s money.
Politicians are notoriously cheap with their own charitable giving but lavish with the public’s cash. These “charitable gifts” also work to buy the next election. Yes, the candidate touts that he / she “fights for the arts.” The dishing out of the people’s money for charity is unconstitutional.
Economist Walter Williams explained that Presidents James Madison, Franklin Pierce and Grover Cleveland quoted the Constitution to turn away congressional attempts to spend money where the federal government is not authorized to do so.
James Madison, known as the "Father of the Constitution," opposed a 1792 bill that would give $15,000 for French refugees. Madison said, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
Some argue that the Constitution allows for benevolent spending under the general-welfare clause. Not so, said Madison: "With respect to the words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers (enumerated in the Constitution) connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
Later presidents understood this. President Pierce, in 1854, vetoed a bill meant to help the mentally ill, saying, "I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity." To approve such spending, he said, "Would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."
In 1887, President Cleveland vetoed a bill to send money to drought-stricken counties in Texas, saying: "I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds. ... I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution."
The Founding Fathers never intended that government provide charity. That was the people’s business.
The government’s transfer of wealth through taxation for entitlement programs and the like is not charity. Government giving is done by force, and is used as a tool to garner votes.
Americans are the most generous people in the world both at home and abroad. Government needs to constitutionally mind its own business and quit misappropriating the public’s funds.
(Lou Binninger can be heard on No Hostages Radio podcast, live on KMYC 1410AM 10-1 Saturdays, read at Live with Lou on Facebook and at Nohostagesradio.com)
###