Dr. Ron Paul

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul has caught the attention of a significant number of conservatives. Many on the Right see Dr. Paul as the only politician in Washington who is actually guided by the first principles of our Constitution. According to his campaign website, "Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution." The phrase "expressly authorized" harkens back to a Jeffersonian interpretation of the document. I admire Dr. Paul. It is certainly true that, among the rank and file politicians in DC, he is one of the leading intellectuals. And on the moral/social issues, it would be difficult to find a better candidate. But is Dr. Paul's "expressly authorized" style to approving legislation the undisputed position of the Founders? We see that, in the earliest days of the republic, there was strong disagreement regarding just how the "necessary and proper" clause was to be read. Jefferson believed that only that which was expressly stated in the Constitution should be authorized by Congress while Hamilton believed that the Constitution granted that body "implied" and then "resulting" powers, which perhaps were not explicitly stated in the document. The debate between the two was fierce but, in the end, Washington sided with Hamilton.

Within the context of the establishment of a national bank, Hamilton explains it as follows:

"Whence it is meant to be inferred, that Congress can in no case exercise any power not included in those enumerated in the Constitution. And it is affirmed, that the power of erecting a corporation is not included in any of the enumerated powers."

"The main proposition here laid down, in its true signification, is not to be questioned. It is nothing more than a consequence of this republican maxim, that all government is a delegation of power. But how much is delegated in each case is a question of fact, to be made out by fair reasoning and construction, upon the particular provisions of the Constitution, taking as guides the general principles and general ends of governments."

"It is not denied that there are implied, as well as express powers, and that the former are as effectually delegated as the latter. And for the sake of accuracy it shall be mentioned that there is another class of powers, which may be properly denominated resulting powers." -Alexander Hamilton's February 23, 1791, opinion as to the constitutionality of the Bank of the United States.

The point is not to debate who was right, but to dismiss the naive view that there existed among the founders a unanimous position when it came to interpreting the Constitution and the powers of government. Dr. Paul's philosophy is respectable and there certainly is a great need to pull back the reigns of Congressional power. But it is not entirely accurate to graft a strict constructionist reading of the Constitution on the entire founding generation.