Constitutional Reform?

With the current public disenchantment with arrogance and corruption in our federal government, the Constitution has been the focus of scrutiny by many knowledgeable pundits. Some are focused on the failure of all three branches of government to know or even care about constitutional checks and balances. Is constitutional change in the form of Amendments or a constitutional convention the answer to these ills?

The founders established checks and balances to prevent any branch, legislative, executive or judicial, from seizing too much power. They saw these limitations of power as the best means of preventing the gradual erosion of basic constitutional liberties and the onset of tyranny.

Thomas Jefferson expressed fears about the tendency of the judicial branch, with lifetime appointments, to become too powerful and dictate legislation by judicial fiat. The fact that the Supreme Court has moved in this direction seems indisputable. But the tendency of Congress and the Presidents to do as they wish without reference to their constitutional limits is also indisputable and no less a cause for concern. We have seen Congress pass bills (some unread) that could not withstand objective constitutional scrutiny. Presidents legislate by executive order and appoint czars who are not accountable to the American people to construct regulations furthering partisan political agendas.

Add to this the observable insensitivity of senators and congressmen to the concerns and opinions of their constituencies. The grass roots view is that congress has become a ruling class focused on personal power and wealth when the founders intended them to be servants of the people. How can one think otherwise when career politicians, who enter public service from middle class beginnings amass great wealth while in office? How much corruption in the legislative and executive branches needs to be exposed to prove that corruption is widespread and systemic?

A number of authors have offered opinions on what has happened to constitutional integrity over time and what remedies should be considered:

In The Constitution in Exile, Judge Andrew P. Napolitano details the incremental departure of the federal government in all three branches from the principles and intents of the Constitution.

David Barton’s book, Original Intent, explains how profoundly Judeo-Christian principles influenced the Founders in their original constitutional intentions. This book provides copious documentation destroying recent attempts to assert that the Founders were mostly agnostic men to whom religion was irrelevant in their political determinations.

In Professor Larry J. Sabato’s A More Perfect Constitution, he presents 23 suggestions for amending the Constitution through the option of a constitutional convention. Sabato asserts that most of his suggested amendments will never come from Congress since they would adversely affect the personal interests of senators and congressmen, e.g., term limits. The suggestions are worth considering though few will agree with all of them.

Whatever conclusions one reaches from these and other authors, it is clear the principles and intents of Founders in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are under attack, and have been for a long time. The Founders understood that the Constitution was imperfect at its birth, and that changing conditions would necessitate amendments. But they saw the underlying principles as permanent and inviolate.

Whether or not a constitutional convention could ever actually happen, one thing seems clear: All three branches of the federal government have overstepped their constitutional authority many times to bring about changes they deemed essential, in utter disregard of their specified limits. Congress has passed many laws that would not hold up to constitutional scrutiny if challenged. The same is true of the Executive Branch in legislating by Executive Order. And the Judicial Branch has legislated from the bench according to its political and social proclivities, having shown itself to be downright hostile to religious freedom of expression.

The question that remains is this: Even if the Constitution were to be amended and improved, what would prevent any of the three branches from ignoring its intent as they have so wantonly done in the past? I am convinced that perfecting the Constitution would not even be a topic of discussion were it not for the federal government’s continual side-stepping of this foundational document in order to further a variety of political agendas. The more safeguards we add to the Constitution, the more ways our leaders will find to circumvent its principles.

So, what is the real problem? Clearly the biggest issue is one of character and integrity. What can we expect from judges and politicians who are in it for personal fame, power, wealth or their private interpretation of what is best for America?

Many Americans are angry about the corruption visible in all three branches of government. We are sickened by the words and actions of leaders who make it clear that truthfulness and transparency are less important than political power and personal gain – who view themselves as a ruling class that is not accountable to the people. Government by, for, and of the people appears to be an obsolete concept. Corrupt leadership is firmly entrenched, but why?

It is easy to blame the corrupt politicians, but many of them are career politicians for whom there is great power in incumbency. It is the voting public who chooses these people.

A recent internet posting attributed to a commenter in a Czech publication, Prager Zeitung, reads, “The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency,…The Republic can survive a Barack Obama…It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president.” (I was unable to verify the source, but the quote is worth considering, whoever wrote it.)

In another recent posting from The Washington Times, Ted Nugent said, “But it gets worse. For, you see, the blame doesn’t fall just on the obvious stupidity of our friends and families who voted for this corrupt, death-wish government in whose stranglehold we find ourselves. Ultimately, it is our fault. It is the failure of those of us who know better but have failed miserably to educate our own. Living our lives with a captive audience of family, friends, co-workers, socialites, fellow worshippers at church and other parents at school — everyone in our everyday walks of life — far too many of us have allowed uneducated, history-devoid, denial-riddled, fantasy-driven, anti-gun and anti-hunting, anti-capitalism general ignoramuses to remain so and run amok, when by all thoughtful considerations, it was our duty to educate and upgrade everyone in our lives to truth, logic and the American way.”

These postings reflect strong language with which you may not agree. But it points to a crucial principle in a government whose Constitution begins with the words “We the People”: The people are ultimately responsible for the government.

Do the voters keep re-electing despots from ignorance, apathy or for promises of personal economic gain? Glenn Reynolds related a story about the time he showed the back of a $50 bill to a young high school grad, who not only did not know whose picture it was but admitted she had never even heard of Ulysses S. Grant. How can we expect voters to make informed choices when they are totally ignorant of our founding principles, our history, and how our government operates? And what can we expect from voters who are so preoccupied with their daily lives and the pursuit of wealth that they just don’t care and don’t even exercise their duty to vote? The consequences of this kind of ignorance and apathy are being felt, and a dreadful conclusion is predictable.

I wish someone would tell me how to reverse the ignorance of the American people after several generations have been taught only revisionist American history – if any at all.

Walt Kelly first used the quote “We Have Met The Enemy and He Is Us” on a poster for Earth Day in 1970. The expression lives on. The blame for electing radicals and despots is ours as voting citizens. “We the People” have the power to restore integrity and sound principles to our government. But will we do it? Are we willing to stand and be counted for what we believe, even when the opposition labels us as terrorists, racists and idiots?

Count the cost and decide what you will do, please!

Robert C. Wilson is a veteran of the U.S. Army with a B.S. in mechanical engineering and a M.S. in Business. His writings are posted at www.BFranklinPost.com Please email your comments to forum@centerforajustsociety.org.

The CJS Forum seeks to promote an open exchange of ideas about the relationship between faith, culture, law and public policy. While all the articles are original and written especially for the CJS Forum, they do not necessarily reflect the views of the Center for a Just Society.

Picture licensed from Flickr user Mr. T in DC under Attribution 2.0 Creative Commons license.