Everyone with any sense knows that the Constitution says nothing about funding the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Education, the National Endowment for the Arts, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, so on. The Federal Government is, by any sane reading of the constitution (I.E. not insanely extending "necessary and proper"), incredibly limited in scope. So since the electorate demonstrably does not care, why does Terence Jeffrey think that merely pointing the fact of unconstitutional spending once again will get anyone upset, inform anyone of anything new, or otherwise be worth writing?[1]
[1] http://www.townhall.com/columnists/terencejeffrey/tj20050504.shtml