Adv American Gov. November 14th ’98McCulloch v MarylandCan congress incorporate a bank? Can a state tax the national government? These were some of the key issues that brought up in the Supreme Court case of McCullloch v Maryland. James Madison, the judge in this case, rules in favor of the National Government.
He proclaimed that it was constitutional to have a national bank, and not appropriate for Maryland to tax the bank. Now we turn the tables toward Maryland. In my reasoning I believe that Maryland can uphold their right to tax the national bank, as well as make claims of the ?necessary and proper clause? being incorrect in it’s meaning. Maryland in my opinion holds very good references and ideas which lead me to believe that the national bank should never have been created, and if so created be able to have been taxed. Both points coming from the Constitution. Maryland as well as every other state in the union, has the power to tax.
It is a concurrent power, which enables them (Maryland) to obtain the power to tax. The power to tax is the power to create. Since the national bank itself is in Baltimore, I believe the state, in which it is holds ground, which is Maryland, has some type of property tax upon the national bank. In this point we can see how the state government has some kind of right to tax the national bank.
Moving forward, we come across the Necessary and Proper Clause (Elastic Clause). It is stated in the Constitution that the government is empowered to imply this clause to issues at hand. The controversy issue is the appropriate definition for this word, necessary. However, necessary in Maryland’s point of view means ?indispensable? and Madison defines it as ?convenient?. Now in this point, it is unjust to provide the national government with such power as this.
If it is in fact convenient for the national government, is it convenient for us the people? The answer is no, this gives leverage to Maryland’s argument that necessary should in-fact mean as is. As we can see through my, and the state of Maryland’s view, the national bank should have never been created, and even if such an idea would have been about, it is still reprehensible for taxation. Maryland in my belief was correct in it’s arguments, and points. Now as I conclude, I have shown you my reasons why, and have brought me to my final decision that there really is no equality between the state government and the national government.
In seeing this, it is appropriate to believe that the congresses can in-fact do as they PLEASE.
