The Olympics opening ceremony leads me to ask – how are Biden and Kamala using the law to promote trans in kids?
JUL 28, 2024
This scene from the opening ceremony of the Olympics has been shared everywhere and got me thinking about Biden and Harris promoting transgenderism – particularly in our youth. To my mind, pushing this in kids is beyond sick, but I was curious as to the legal mechanism they were using to justify the promotion of pro-trans policies. The reality is that there are more mechanisms being used under the law than I could possibly discuss in a single article, but one particular legal justification for promoting absurd policy does stand out – the delegation of power to the executive branch agencies through Congressional spending authority. Let me explain.
The spending clause of the Constitution allows Congress to fund just about anything it chooses. That power is quite broad and the fact that Congress can print money – whether we have it or not – means that Congress frequently uses federal money as a carrot to manipulate America into acting however the majority party chooses.
To ensure there is no political accountability for our brave congresspeople, a favorite trick to provide political cover for elected officials is to delegate power to executive branch agencies so they can act shocked when bureaucrats put forth absurd policies based on the money they’ve been given to spend. The elected officials hold hearings and yell about “those terrible bureaucrats” but then continue to pass funding bills (you know – like the omnibus bill passed earlier this year). This creates political cover for Congress while allowing bureaucrats, that are almost impossible to fire, to do the dirty work.
The spending power of Congress has long been abused in this way but it’s hard to find a more profound example than in the realm of the trans issue. Only the most ardent and insane activists support promoting trans in kids but that has not stopped the bureaucrats from pushing it… with the Congressional wink and nod that occurs when funding continues their way. As I looked into this I found a wonderful, plain language, explanation of how this works in education from a case out of the Eastern District Court of Kentucky – Tennessee v. Cardona, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106559.
Title IX was enacted as an exercise of Congress’ powers under the Spending Clause U.S. Const. Art. I, § 8, cl. 1. The Spending Clause gives Congress broad powers to “set the terms on which it disburses federal funds.” Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., 596 U.S. 212, 216, 142 S. Ct. 1562, 212 L. Ed. 2d 552 (2022). And “legislation enacted pursuant to the spending power is much in the nature of a contract: in return for federal funds, the [recipients] agree to comply with federally imposed conditions.” Id.(quoting Pennhurst State School and Hosp. v. Halderman, 451 U.S. 1, 17, 101 S. Ct. 1531, 67 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1981)). As with any contract, education institutions cannot “knowingly accept” funds from the federal government unless they would “‘clearly understand . . . the obligations’ that would come along with doing so.” Id. at 219 (quoting Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Ed. v. Murphy, 548 U.S. 291, 296, 126 S. Ct. 2455, 165 L. Ed. 2d 526 (2006)). See also South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203, 207, 107 S. Ct. 2793, 97 L. Ed. 2d 171 (1987) (providing that Congress must state the conditions of receipt of federal funds “unambiguously” so that the states may “exercise their choice knowingly, cognizant of the consequences of their participation”).
In this case the court ruled that gender identity and sex are not the same thing and so Title IX does not apply but the principle goes well beyond Title IX. It is worth noting that while Title IX remains free from the lie that sex and gender identity are the same, Title VII did not fare as well (though that idea is arguably ripe for another case).
The use of this spending (as a Constitutionally mandated mechanism for motivating states and people in general to conform to the ideals of our elected officials) is not new and has been leveraged in every part of American life. The problem is that the spending carrot used to be limited by the taxing power of the government because we only used to spend what we could raise in tax money. Since we no longer care whether we can afford the policies our government is promoting, there is no constraint on bought off officials promoting absurd policies.
This issue cannot be overstated and is fundamental to the breakdown of America. Because we print endless amounts of money without inhibition, it is now worth it for the ultra rich from around the world to buy off elected officials to promote absurd policies that will make the elite even richer. Spending millions in donations to PACs is absolutely worth it if the policies pushed as a result of that spending makes you billions and until elected officials are forced to have a more balanced budget we essentially have a situation whereby the global elite can count on their “investment” into PACs to assure they earn billions. Remember, an absurd policy supporting something like trans in kids or global warming makes people in specific industries money. While we the people may hate the policy, we now know that sufficient spending can buy elections so it simply comes down to the value of the policy from an investment standpoint.
For example, let’s look at trans in kids:
- Costs to promote include things like PR campaigns, donations to political campaigns, media manipulation, online manipulation, etc.
- Profits come from selling drugs, medical interventions, weakening America generally (costs related to life-long health maintenance after transition intervention, mental health issues, counseling, and another likely less-productive citizen).
- The analysis then determines how much it is worth to spend to push trans in kids versus the profits and that is the amount that is spent.
This article is a bit in the weeds but it is essential to understanding how law and economics interplay in American policy. As I said at the beginning of the article, there are many other mechanisms by which things like trans for kids are being pushed under the law but I thought this one was worth pointing out.
We are at a point that unless we can control spending, and unless we can limit the money is politics our nation is lost. It is not if, but when. Also remember, this issue will be here when Trump leaves so even if you think he can fix the nation, unless part of that plan includes limiting money in politics or forcing a balanced budget, trust me when I say that the problem will continue.