Posted on 12/02/2014 11:38:18 AM PST by Academiadotorg
Its interesting that some of those who would make the living Constitution argument seem most anxious to put the old parchment to rest. Whats coming will be painful, frustrating, and dangerousand it will illustrate a constitutional malfunction unforeseen in 1787, Garrett Epps writes in The Atlantic. The country will survive, and its possible it can even make progressbut at tremendous cost in polarization and missed opportunity.
The country is like a car driving with the handbrake on: Any movement forward will be accompanied by smoke and internal damage.Epps is a professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Baltimore. So we might profitably put a six-month moratorium on paeans to the wisdom of the Framers, he avers. Profitable to whom?
The problem of divided government is a bug, not a feature, and the Constitution itself provides no guidance on how to work around it, Epps avers Im not taking one side against the other; Im trying to illustrate a dangerous weakness of our system, one that the Framers clearly did not foresee, Epps claims. Many of them believed there would not be political parties in the new system. Others no doubt thought that the government they had designed would consist of a Congress that met for a month or so every December and a president who would supervise a slumbering bureaucracy the rest of the year. Some of them assumed the president would be a passive figure, administering directions from Congress; others imagined a chief executive with some of the majesty of the king of England.
I dont think any of them anticipated that the two branches would ever clash over which represented the will of the voters. His timing is impeccable: He writes this after voters nationwide willfully cast their ballots against the policies of the president. Moreover, isnt it a fascinating dichotomy that when a Republican president commits an act of questionable ConstitutionalityNixon comes to mindit precipitates a Constitutional crisis in the minds of elites, as they oft state, but when the Constitutional malefactor bears a D, the Constitution is the problem?
If indeed there is a problem with the Constitution, perhaps it is that it is not being followed in a bipartisan fashion. This seems to be the view of a pair of historians from The Kings College, who beg to differ with Epps. Actually, they dont beg.
Much could be said in response to this charge against the foundersstarting with the fact that they didnt just anticipate divided government, they designed the government to be divided with the separation of legislative, executive, and legislative powers, David Corbin and Matt Parks write. If they erred, it was in assuming (a) that the government would be divided as much (or more) legislature against executive as Party X against Party Y and (b) that parties would be more numerous and fluid than they have turned out to be. They hoped, in other words, for something better in congressional leaders than sycophantic ideologues, like Senator Reid, who invite the president to go big in usurping legislative authority, but they harbored no illusions that their system would facilitate expansive legislative programs, which were neither needed (see Federalist 53) nor conducive to self-government (see Federalist 62).
Gridlock, most of the time, was a better option that bad or frequent lawmakingand the occasional times when it frustrated good initiatives were a reasonable price to pay for avoiding the assaults to enterprise and liberty of a voluminous and unstable legal code.
Speaking of which, it is worthwhile remembering the words of the brilliant author M. Stanton Evans who said: Gridlock is the next best thing to having a Constitution.
Evans nailed it.
“natural born citizen”
when they didn’t bother to enforce the most basic of requirements... the rest of the document was never going to be upheld
Constitution???
What’s that?
he sure did
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.