were for purposes not within these enumeratedrnpowers. Thus 70 percent of allrntaxes collected for that year are unconstitutional.rnThe suit also debunks the myth thatrnCongress has power under the CommercernClause to tax in order to fundrnprograms not otherwise within the enumeratedrnpowers, such as many of today’srnsocial welfare programs. To the Framers,rn”commerce among the states” meantrntrade among the states, not manufacturing,rnmining, agriculture, retailing, or otherrnactivities within states—activities thatrnall precede trade among the states. AsrnProfessor Richard Epstein of the Universityrnof Chicago Law School has shown,rnit makes no sense textually to say thatrn”commerce” means manufacturing,rnagriculture, or any other activity thatrnprecedes trade:rnOne should assume that the wordrncommerce . . . bears the samernmeaning with respect to each of itsrnobjects…. What possible senserndoes it make as a matter of ordinaryrnEnglish to say that Congressrncan regulate ‘manufacturing withrnforeign nations, or with Indianrntribes’ or for that matter ‘manufacturingrnamong the several states’?rnOnly if “trade” is substituted for “commerce”rndoes the Commerce Clausernmake sense: “Congress shall have powerrn. . . to regulate trade with foreign nationsrnand trade among the states, and tradernwith Indian tribes.”rnThe tax refund suit got a big boostrnfrom a recent decision of the SupremernCourt. About ten days after the suit wasrnfiled, the Court declared in United StatesrnV. Lopez that there actually are limits onrnthe commerce power. Perhaps the mostrnimportant statement in the case came inrnJustice Clarence Thomas’s concurrence,rnwhere he complained, “The [CommercernClause] power we have accordedrnCongress has swallowed Article One,rnSection 8.”rnJustice Holmes once said, “Creat cases,rnlike hard cases, make bad law.” Therntax refund case is at once both a greatrnand a hard case. It is a great case not justrnbecause the amount of money in questionrnis astronomical, higher than anyrnother in legal history, and because it involvesrna question common to all federalrntaxpayers, but because it seeks to reversernmore than 60 years of federally mandatedrnsocial engineering and to revitalizernthe simple, founding principle that therngovernment has no more power thanrnthat specifically given it in the Constitution.rnDouglass H. hartley is a tax lawyerrnin Milwaukee. Contributionsrntoward defraying the expenses ofrnthis suit are welcome (757 NorthrnBroadway, Suite 500, Milwaukee,rnWisconsin, 53202), as is help fromrninterested counsel.rnI T E R A T U RErnKiddy Lit forrnthe 90’srnby Herb LondonrnChildren’s books used to relate talesrnof heroes and villains. They presentedrna Manichaean world in whichrngood triumphed over evil. Childrenrnmight be scared, but they were assuredrnthat the forces of light could easily berndistinguished from the forces of evil.rnWell, that scenario of yesteryear hasrnbeen replaced by a very different conditionrntoday.rnThe 1994 Newberry medal for thern”best” children’s book went to LoisrnLowry for The Giver. This is a tale aboutrna hypothetical community in which issuesrnof suicide, euthanasia, and mentalrntelepathy are emphasized. Characters inrnthis novel reside in a controlled communityrnwith narrowly defined roles of birthmothers,rncaretakers, nurturers, laborers,rnand givers. The government determinesrnthe number of children per family. Inrnthe House of the Old, leaders decidernwhen a person is to be released (read: putrnto death). At the Ceremony of Release,rnthere is a toast, and a goodbye speechrngiven by the person released. Whenrntwins are born, only one is allowed tornlive. Invariably, the smaller twin is “released”rnwith a lethal injection. On onernoccasion, a 12-year-old objects to thernpractice, but he is mollified by a Giverrnwho points out that her daughter askedrnto be released ten years earlier and wasrngiven a syringe to inject herself.rnIn one California school system, severalrnparents complained about the use ofrnthis book in an elementary school, chargingrnthat it was insensitive to the value ofrnlife. These parents were told that “publierneducation may not be the best choicernfor them.” I agree. What conceivablernbenefit is there for youngsters in a bookrnof this kind? Are ten-year-olds preparedrnto make judgments about euthanasia?rnClearly, what once inspired, nowrninflames. What was once the axial standardrnfor moral behavior in Horatio Alger,rnToodle, The Little Engine That Could,rnhas been converted into amorality. Afterrnall, teachers and librarians now askrnwhether, in this complicated worid, werneven have a right to tell children how tornconduct themselves.rnMy reply is that you have a right andrnan obligation to do so. Teachers have anrnobligation to select books that provide arnmoral basis for good behavior. Homer isrna better guide for the future than Ms.rnLowry, and no matter what the rationalizersrnsay, virtue must be cultivated. Therngood must defend itself not merelyrnagainst the bad, but against the indifferent,rnthe complacent, and the relative.rnIf the myths in our culture are derivedrnmerely from the pragmatic, then “anythingrngoes” is the lyric for social discourse.rnChildren cannot be expected tornmake philosophical judgments without arngrounding in what is right and what isrnwrong, what is good and what is bad. Tornassume, as contemporary pedagoguesrndo, that students can arrive at sensiblernjudgments through the exchange ofrnopinions about controversial issues isrnwrongheaded. Critical-mindedness docsrnnot occur in a vacuum. Students mustrnhave a knowledge of morality in order tornmake moral decisions.rnUnfortunately, the democratic idearnthat the free exchange of opinion willrninevitably yield truth is betrayed by arndifferent reality. The free exchange ofrnintelligent opinion may lead inexorablyrnto truth, but only if the opinions havernvalue. In our era, we have debased thisrnnotion with a belief in all opinions and arnreliance on the pedagogical idea that anyrncontroversial notion should be the subjectrnof class discussion. Is it any wonderrnJohnny can’t read, Mary can’t add, andrnneither can distinguish between rightrnand wrong?rnHerb London is the John M. OlinrnProfessor of Humanities at New YorkrnUniversity.rn48/CHRONICLESrnrnrn