I wrote this for a school project.
It’s Cabinet Battle #3 from Hamilton’s point of view on the debate about loose vs strict constructionism.
See, the government really needs a loose interpretation
The point of the elastic clause is to benefit the nation.
If we don’t let the government exercise its claims,
This entire country will be going down the drain.
We need economy and urbanization
In order to make money and prosper as a nation.
Future crises will knock on our door
What will we do then? We can’t just ignore.
What about war, fires, and floods?
At that point, you’ll regret this bad blood.
A strong government is needed to help this nation thrive
Without one we’ll end up like France. In layman’s terms: we’ll die.
You fight for strict interpretation and I don’t really get your view
You say that we must preserve the people’s rights, well what are slaves to you?
Another thing, the people’s power still remains the same
They can vote. A novel concept! What happened to your brain?
It’s like you’re stuck in the 1500s, an old man I can see
With even older ideas about what constitutes popular sovereignty.
I don’t really know what the meter is but this is the best I’ve got.
@ashley-bradley17 @linmanuel