Posted on 09/23/2005 9:58:12 AM PDT by neverdem
Journalists, pundits, and colleagues consider Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) an expert on the Constitution. They note that he carries a copy of the supreme law of the land in his pocket at all times. He cares about it so much, in fact, that he slipped an amendment into a 2005 appropriations bill requiring all institutions that receive federal funds, including thousands of schools, to teach about the Constitution every September 17, the anniversary of its signing. In doing so, over the last few days (September 17 fell on a Saturday, so Friday and Monday events met the law's requirements), Byrd provided a perfect "teachable moment," a chance to explain how, when it comes to education, federal policymakers have ignored the Constitution for decades.
To understand what the federal government can and cannot do, it is necessary to remove the Constitution from one's pockets and to look at Article I, Section 8. One should also break open the Federalist Papers, a compilation of essays penned by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in 1787 and 1788, which explain how the Constitution defines the powers and constraints on the federal government.
Article I, Section 8 lists the few -- and only -- powers belonging to the federal government. They include the power to borrow money, regulate commerce with other nations, establish post offices, raise and regulate military forces -- and little else. In contrast, the list of powers the Constitution does not delegate to the federal government is almost limitless, including powers to fund schools, regulate schools, and even require schools to teach about the Constitution.
"Ah, but the Constitution says that the federal government shall provide for 'the general Welfare of the United States," critics reply. "Surely education falls within that mandate."
They are right that Article I, Section 8 declares that the powers entrusted to the federal government are intended to "provide for the common defense and general Welfare of the United States." But the Constitution is not that simple. It cannot be understood in one day of exploring the First Amendment, for instance, or, as one Vermont high school did for Constitution Day, by examining whether the Constitution treats children and adults differently. To be truly understood, the Constitution requires deeper study.
This is where the Federalist Papers come in. In "Federalist No. 41," James Madison explains that the "general Welfare" clause itself gives absolutely no power to the federal government. It is, Madison explains, just an introduction to the enumerated powers that follow it.
"For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted," Madison asks, "if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars."
In case this weren't clear enough, the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution reaffirms that the federal government may exercise only those powers specifically granted to it: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
With all this repetition, one would think our legislators -- especially the Constitutional "experts" among them -- would understand that the federal government has only a few, enumerated powers, and that the states and people have all the rest.
Sadly, though, at least regarding education, this is not the case. Passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 1965, which for the first time provided federal funding for compensatory education, was the first signal that when it came to education, federal legislators were ignoring the Constitution. We have since been given numerous reminders, including the creation of the U.S. Department of Education in 1979, enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, and now, of course, Constitution Day.
Despite the ironic unconstitutionality of the federal Constitution Day mandate, we can hope our students learned at least one thing from their forced enlightenment. The Constitution should be more than just a prop legislators keep in their pockets -- from time to time, Washington policymakers would themselves do well to study the sacred document.
Neal McCluskey is an education policy analyst for the Cato Institute.
The words, "supreme hypocrisy" come to mind.
The article makes an interesting point.
Apparently the way the Federal government gets around many of the limitations on it's power is by not requiring obedience, but "rewarding" certain behavior with money, money taken from taxes in the states in the first place.
For example - 55 MPH speed limit - there is no federal speed limit and constitution justification for such a thing.
But if states want their share of highway money they had to lower their speed limits.
It's a real problem.
We're not Free to Ignore the Constitution (Posted 5/25/05)
5/25/05 Associated Press Added to the article collection in 'A Charter School Tale': The Constitution long has ensured that Congress can't tell schools what to teach. But that's no longer the case for at least one topic -- the Constitution itself. The Education Department outlined yesterday how it plans to enforce a little-known provision that Congress passed in 2004: Every school and college that receives federal money must teach about the Constitution on Sept. 17, the day the document was adopted in 1787.
Now, given all of my lamentations about how little people understand the Constitution, my belief that many of our public schools propogandize liberalism (the Constitution is a very conservative document), and my deep respect for the Constitution, some of you might suspect I would have a very positive reaction to this story. Wrong. I have a very, very negative reaction.
[Democratic Senator] Byrd inserted the Constitution lesson mandate into a massive spending bill in 2004, frustrated by what he called a huge ignorance on the part of many Americans about history.
First, it is humorous to see Sen Byrd talk about ignorance of history and respect for the Constitution. Second, if Byrd can insert this sort of thing into a spending bill, then what's to stop someone else from sticking in something delegating, say, April 22nd, to lament about global warming and how greedy and reckless America is causing it and insinuating that more environmental regulations are needed and.... Oh, whoops! We already do that (Earth Day)? Well, you get my point... In 10 years how many school days will be totally controlled by the Federal Government? 5, 10, 30, 50? Third, notice how a faceless and un-elected government agency, which is unconstitutional in its existence, is charged with enforcing, according to their whims, an unconstitutional law! Our founding fathers must be rolling in their graves. Fourth, notice how this must have passed the 'Republican' house and senate and escaped veto by the Big Government Education 'Republican' President. Another pattern, these 'Republicans' always try and 'tweak' and 'adjust' and 'reform' government and often support expanding its powers when Big Government works to further their own agenda.
The Federal department of Education should be abolished, the Unions which stagnate our public school system should be stripped of their power, Sen Robert Byrd should be educated, and true Conservatives should run against the Republicans that acquiesced to the passage of this act. In a perfect world...
At every hour of every day, I can tell you on which page of which book each school child in Italy is studying.
- Benito Mussolini
Cool! On Sept. 17th, so can the Federal Department of Education!
The Union's victory in Civil War ended the proposition that states that created the federal union could leave it (or short of that, nullify unconstitutional encroachments on their sovereignty by the federal government as Madison and Jefferson argued in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions) destroyed the most important structural restraint on the ability of the federal government to exceed its legal powers
Once that check (the vertical check and balance of the sovereignty of the states was far more important in the Founders minds than the horizontal checks and balances between the 3 branches of the federal government) was destroyed...the ultimate fate of the US was written...ultimately, what is to stop the federal government from abusing its powers? Most Americans today are so ignorant of the Constitution, they are unaware that there are any limitations on the power of the federal government
bump
You folks are great. You see the supreme hypocrisy and pandering that defines our government, and you recognize the explicit meaning of the Constitution has been ignored for generations. The question becomes: will a new breed of patriots arise that remembers and restores the Framer's original intent? No doubt we've been under the grip of socialists for at least sixty years, but can we at last re-teach our countrymen the value of liberty and the personal responsibility it demands?
It's the same thing with "tax credits"...it's a euphemism for "a fine if you don't do what the government wants..."
Most Americans, even pubbies, seem to be too stupid to understand what is going on.
Maybe if more people were educated on what the constitution says they would realize what the federal government is REQUIRED to do and what it is NOT ALLOWED to do. Remember, any power not expressly designated to the federal government belongs TO THE STATES!
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.