A favorite tactic of those attempting to justify their particular entitlement whim is to purposely misconstrue the original intent of specific phrases found in our Constitution. This willing suspension of honesty is quite often directed toward the “general welfare” clause found in Article 1, section 8.

The word “welfare” is found twice in the entire Constitution; once in the preamble, and once in the Article mentioned above.

“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” – preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America.

The preamble is not a delegation of power to the federal government; instead it is simply a stated purpose.

“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; - Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States of America.

The 1828 edition of Noah Webster's American Dictionary of the English Language defines welfare thusly:

 WEL/FARE, n.   [well and fare, a food going; G. wohlfahrt; D. welvaart; Sw. valfart; Dan. Velferd.]

1. Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life/ prosperity; happiness; applied to persons.
2. Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government; applied to states.

A clear distinction is made with respect to welfare as applied to persons and states. In the Constitution the word "welfare" is used in the context of states and not persons. The "welfare of the United States" is not congruous with the welfare of individuals, people, or citizens.

James Madison, considered by many to be, the father of our Constitution, had this to say in regards to the “welfare clause” of our Constitution:

"If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions." - James Madison, Letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792 _Madison_ 1865, I, page 546

"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." - James Madison, regarding an appropriations bill for French refugees, 1794

"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers 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." - James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831 _Madison_ 1865, IV, pages 171-172

It is imperative that we take note of the fact that Madison was a believer in a strong federal government, yet he clearly saw, as did his fellow framers, severe limitations on the powers of government.

Those early Congresses took it upon themselves to vote monies for general welfare projects such as roads, canals and docks; though it should be noted that some Congressmen expressed the opinion that even those projects did not pass Constitutional muster.

The original intent is clear, though even the framers themselves disagreed on the extent of power Congress should hold in regards to the general welfare clause, the framers did not intend for this to be a wide-sweeping power that delved into the lives of the citizenry.

In fact a relatively recent Supreme Court case makes it clear that Congress didn’t have the power to adopt a mandatory national benefits program.

The U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co., 295 U.S. 330, 55 S. Ct. 758 (1935), said the Congress did not have the authority to create a mandatory benefits program by compelling registration into any benefits program:

"The catalogue of means and actions which might be imposed upon an employer in any business, tending to the satisfaction and comfort of his employees, seems endless. Provision for free medical attendance, nursing, clothing, food, housing, and education of children, and a hundred other matters might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. Can it fairly be said that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the prescription of any or all of these things? It is not apparent that they are, really, and essentially related solely to the social welfare of the worker, and therefore remote from any regulation of commerce as such? We think the answer is plain. These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power."

When we couple the military reasons (national defense), behind our Interstate system, with the intent of the framers; it becomes quite obvious that roadways are a valid example of powers held by Congress, while social security is a prime example of Congressional abuse of limited powers. One example (roadways) helps to promote the common good, while the other (social security) helps to repress the common good.