Maybe they should've thought of all those other metals which were already well-used long before they were even born?
Maybe it didn't really matter because states couldn't coin money in the first instance? State's can't make money, and they can't require their citizens to take anything other than gold or silver as legal tender.
The constitution explicitly limited the power of state governments to make legal tender anything other than gold or silver coin. (In addition to counting lower metallurgical elements out, it also counts out all other forms of legal tender, e.g. chickens, cotton, slaves (at that time), etc.) Are you seriously insinuating that such a limitation necessarily extends to limit the power of the federal government? There's a whole section limiting the federal government's power. If the Framers wanted to limit such a power, given the limitation on state power, don't you think they would have? If the Framers wanted "to coin money" to mean and only mean "to coin gold or silver money," don't you think they would have included such words? They obviously thought about using something other than gold or silver when they limited the power of the states.
That's really what you want to rest your argument on: the Constitution limited the states' power, so ergo, the federal government's power must also be limited to a gold and silver standard?
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 10/2/10 12:59 (UTC)Maybe it didn't really matter because states couldn't coin money in the first instance? State's can't make money, and they can't require their citizens to take anything other than gold or silver as legal tender.
The constitution explicitly limited the power of state governments to make legal tender anything other than gold or silver coin. (In addition to counting lower metallurgical elements out, it also counts out all other forms of legal tender, e.g. chickens, cotton, slaves (at that time), etc.) Are you seriously insinuating that such a limitation necessarily extends to limit the power of the federal government? There's a whole section limiting the federal government's power. If the Framers wanted to limit such a power, given the limitation on state power, don't you think they would have? If the Framers wanted "to coin money" to mean and only mean "to coin gold or silver money," don't you think they would have included such words? They obviously thought about using something other than gold or silver when they limited the power of the states.
That's really what you want to rest your argument on: the Constitution limited the states' power, so ergo, the federal government's power must also be limited to a gold and silver standard?