The recent bill Trump had signed that gave the citizens the $600 stimulus was saddled with ridiculous pork. Does anyone question how they can spend money on "Gender Studies in Pakistan"? The answer is, Constitutionally, they can't. How about all the foreign aid? Again, this is highly questionable Constitutionally.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to spend in two areas, and two areas only - the general welfare and the common defense. That is it.
Now, the general welfare law has gone through much interpretation through the years (https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/article-i/clauses/755) but the core of it remains the same - Congress generally can only spend on the general welfare.
The thing is, things like "Gender Studies in Pakistan" would not hold up as spending allowed by Congress under previous court interpretations. Congress literally violates the Constitution at ever turn with their pork laden projects.
The Founding Fathers wanted to limit Congress spending power, but they left the "general welfare" clause open to a lot of interpretation by Congress. However, Congress has been challenged in court before.
Basically, people should be seething that Congress has reached a point they feel they can spend money on whatever they want when the Constitution specifically limits spending to two areas.
Yes they stretched words like "general welfare" like a latex balloon. Back in those days, the phrase was understood as "something that equally helps EVERYONE. So for example, "corn subsidies" obviously help farmers more than iron workers--- so it's NOT in the 'general welfare.' But today they stretch the argument: "Well, we all need food, so corn subsidies are in the general welfare." Apply this everywhere. Welfare helps welfare queens, education spending helps parents more than non-parents, on and on and on. All of this spending is special interest and by definition not in the 'GENERAL' welfare.