It was a bit of a shock several months ago when a member of Congress declared that the federal government can do practically whatever it wants to do.
Asked by angry constituents what limits exist on federal power, U.S. Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., casually replied, “I think that there are very few constitutional limits that would prevent the federal government from rules that could affect your private life.”
He then added, “The federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country.”
It seems Stark was speaking literally. Consider, for example, some of the intrusive ways that the $862 billion federal “stimulus” is being spent.
A stimulus-funded Tennessee-wide program requires participating child-care centers “to be tobacco-free, ensures infants and children have appropriate feeding patterns and mandates a set time of physical activity,” the Times Free Press reported recently.
The price tag for the program? Almost $800,000!
Now, certainly no one would argue that child-care centers should encourage smoking. And it’s plainly desirable for children to be fed appropriately and to exercise to promote good health.
What is stunning, though, is that some would believe those are constitutional responsibilities of the federal government, and that money from Washington will create the desired results. Does the history of federal involvement in education, or other areas where Washington has no constitutional role, give you any confidence that more federal programs are the answer to issues such as childhood obesity?
And what could this latest spending — which adds to our crippling national debt — possibly have to do with creating jobs, which is supposed to be the primary purpose of the “stimulus”?
Parents, child-care providers, teachers and many other individuals have a big role to play in helping children lead healthy lives. But the federal government should not try to be a national “nanny.”