Once again you make a statement that means nothing. I provided things straight from the constitution. You provided a bunch of crap from your ass. If it was so "explicit", the government wouldn't be able to do what they already do. So once again, you're talking out your ass. You have a viewpoint of how you want to interpret things. How you think things should be run. Maybe you should go to a different country that closer fits what you want cause you're not going to get it in the US. If all you're going to do is continue to argue opinions then you're not worth having any sort of discussion with.
By the way. On the particular topic of this thread, I said no to it. Because it's not solving the underlying problem but instead is just slapping a bandaid on something in order to get votes.
You provided your opinions and interpretations of what you think The Constitution means. I referenced the tenth amendment to The Constitution. I am very sorry your reading comprehension and general understanding of basic legal concepts is so poor, but your ignorance doesn't change the facts. Just because The Constitution is being violated is not proof The Constitution does not restrict those things.
Hamilton and Madison could not even agree on the general welfare part of... "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."
The supreme court has ruled that the government is within their constitutional right to pay for "social" type programs. Justice Owen Roberts (republican) reaffirmed that and simplified it by saying "Put simply, Congress may tax and spend."
So once again, you have some fantasy of the country you think you live in that is not held up by reality. Continue talking out your ass if you like though.