« Free Speech - Where Do You Draw the Line | Main | Our Cousins Are Smarter Than We »
October 30, 2007
”Archaic Provisions” the Source of America’s Difficulties
One progressive’s assertion…and his answer...to replace the United States Constitution.
by Tina Grazier
The Constitution has become a secularly sacred document, as though God handed it to Moses in a third tablet on the Mount. The 2008 presidential candidates have been offering us prescriptions for everything from Iraq to health care over the past several months. But here is the problem: Their fixes are situational and incremental. In the meantime, underlying structural problems with America's governmental and political system are preventing us from solving our most intractable challenges. ** If progress as a society is to be made, it is time for elemental change. The last place we look to understand why the U.S. system isn't working well anymore - the Constitution - should be the first place. A careful look at constitutional reform should begin now and culminate in a new Constitutional Convention.
I don’t think Professor Sabato ever gets around to telling us how the “system” keeps us from solving our “most intractable challenges.” He does quote Jefferson and Washington but without offering a hint of the context in which their words were uttered. I suppose he wished only to lend an element of authenticity to his suggestions for changing our Constitution; for changing what he obviously sees as a living/breathing document:
Does this sound radical? If so, then the framers were radicals, too. They would be both disappointed and amazed that after 220 years, the inheritors of their Constitution had not tried to adapt to new developments they could never have anticipated in Philadelphia in 1787.
I think he’s wrong about this.
I believe our founders had incredible insight into human beings and the future. They managed to construct a document that need not be radically changed. It is a perfect document and stands as a solid base on which to build society. If the founders were here today I think they would be disappointed and dismayed at the way we have misused, abused and trampled upon this perfect document. They would reaffirm the warning that we have been given a republic “if” we can hold on to it…and they would lament our lack of due diligence.
The following represents what I believe is Mr. Sabato’s most pressing idea:
Limit the president's war-making authority by creating a provision that requires Congress to vote affirmatively every six months to continue U.S. military involvement. Debate in both houses would be limited so that the vote could not be delayed. If either house of Congress voted to end a war, the president would have one year to withdraw all combat troops.
This idea from the progressive’s tool box is so transparent. Those enamored with socialist policy and the notion that humans can achieve perpetual peace will do anything to wrench presidential power from President Bush and the conservative side of the aisle. The little anti-war darlings were silent when the former president chose to make war; they did not raise even an eyebrow. This alone makes both their protestations about war and their designs on changing the Constitution in order to stop war laughable. Additionally, the particulars of this proposed change regarding military involvement are an impossible farce.
The second most pressing of his ideas relates to elections:
We should give each of the 10 most populated states two additional Senate seats and give each of the next 15 most populated states one additional seat. Sparsely populated states will still be disproportionately represented, but the ridiculous tilt to them in today's system can be a thing of the past.
The red state areas just cannot be allowed to have power…no matter what! This idea screams: “we are losing! Something must be done!!” Nothing more needs to be said on this one.
One more of the professors statements about voting must be explored, however, just for the sheer fun of it:
If the 26 least populated states voted as a bloc, they would control the U.S. Senate with a total of just under 17 percent of the country's population. This small-state stranglehold is not merely a bump in the road; it is a massive roadblock to fairness that can, and often does, stop all progressive traffic.
What Professor Sabato just said is: if something that doesn’t happen did happen, it would be terribly unfair to progressives. This bit of silliness, according to Sabato, is one of the reasons that the Constitution needs to be changed. Incredible!
For those of you with kids heading off to college soon, Professor Sabato teaches at the University of Virginia where he is founder and director of the 'Center for Politics."
Folow the link to Larry J. Sabato’s article, “RETOOLING AMERICA'S MANDATE,” and decide for yourself if he successfully makes the case for changing the Constitution.
The founding fathers gave the American people recourse. Having lived under a monarchy this right was very important to them. We do not need Constitutional Conventions to clean up our messes and solve our problems. We do not need to expand, change or stretch the Constitution to meet our every whim. With incredible wisdom the founders realized that giving the people power to change the Constitution “willy-nilly” would place the nation in great peril. Instead they devised a system with three distinct divisions and multiple layers for process; a system of checks and balances to thwart sudden and wild shifts in policy and law. It has served this nation for over 200 years. What is needed in America is a movement to return the Constitution to its rightful place of honor in our society and a reawakening to the beauty of the document that would inspire the desire to defend and protect it. The Constitution is a jewel that we have been so very fortunate to inherit. It must be preserved, not changed.
Some of Larry Sabato’s ideas may in fact be worth considering. If you care to explore them more fully his book, “A More Perfect Constitution: 23 Proposals to Revitalize Our Constitution and Make America a Fairer Country,” (Walker & Company, 2007) would be the place to begin. However, it must be stressed that his ideas can be addressed within our current system, in the usual fashion, through the processes laid out in the Constitution. It does require that an idea be compelling enough to merit attraction. In other words, the professor will have to sell his ideas. My advice is that he pick his favorite...and go for it.
In the mean time I’d like to say that the obvious source of our nations “difficulties” is the inability of most Americans to accept personal responsibility. Too many of us have lost the power that comes from relying on ourselves, our families, our friends and associates. Instead we rely on government to “fix” our problems; we seek out government solutions first. By opting for victimhood, we have relinquished that which makes us strong and confident.
If our progressive friends really want to make a difference they might try rediscovering the joy and the “change” that comes from relying upon ones self and upon those closer to home. As for issues of war…and this is the one area of "America's difficulty" addressed by the Constitution...our president is doing his best to defend our nation in the prescribed way. If you don't like it petition! If you fail to gain sufficient support for your petition it might just mean you are the minority...you get to live with that.
Posted by Post Scripts at October 30, 2007 08:34 PM