Imagine you're building a house at the beach. But after pouring the concrete slab, you decide you want a differently shaped house, or one that is closer to the surf.
So you just build part of the house on the concrete and the rest of it in the dirt and sand.
How structurally sound will that house be? How long will it stand up to time and the elements?
In a similar fashion, America has, for decades, been building a society that is off its foundation: the Constitution.
The question must be asked: Is a foundation essential for the American house?
You have to wonder what kind of answer you might get if you asked the person on the street. Is the Constitution even relevant anymore? If it gets in the way of what we want to do, should it just be ignored? Should we build whatever shape country we want, without regard to the foundation that was poured for us in the Constitution?
If so, how long will this country stand up to time and the elements?
The most ignored portion of the Constitution may be the 10th Amendment, which simply and powerfully says: "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."
That means, any task or function not explicitly assigned to the federal government is the province of the states or the American people. Not the federal government.
But the evisceration of the 10th Amendment means American society has been turned on its head -- and we're building a society off the foundation.
As a proposed Michigan legislative resolution reaffirming state sovereignty says, the 10th Amendment makes it clear enough that "the federal government was created by the states specifically to be an agent of the states. Currently, the states are treated as agents of the federal government ..."
Importantly, the 10th Amendment talks about powers "delegated" to the federal government. That means power flows toward Washington, not from it. Yet, for decades, the federal government has dictated social policies and funding -- from welfare to transportation and more -- and now wants to dictate the country's health care policies and Americans' carbon emissions.
For decades, Americans and their respective states have been treated by Washington's elected officials and unelected bureaucrats like serfs and subjects.
Again, it's totally off the foundation.
What's the importance of that? Simply this: If you ignore the foundation, there is no rhyme or reason to what you build -- and it won't stand the test of time. Soon -- we may already be there today -- you won't recognize this country. It won't resemble the foundation that was laid for it and which made it the strongest, greatest nation on Earth for some 200 years.
We need to come to grips with this very simple but profound fact and everything it implies.
Matthew Spalding, of the Heritage Foundation, has written an exciting and timely new book about this very topic: We Still Hold These Truths . The title, of course, is out of our Declaration of Independence, in which our Founders made the case for a country established on the natural law that granted man individual liberty direct from the Creator, not any government. In his book, Spalding writes:
"Over the past century the federal government has lost much of its mooring, and today acts with little regard for the limits placed upon it by the Constitution, which many now regard as obsolete.
"...(T)he real crisis that tears at the American soul is not a lack of courage or solutions as much as a loss of conviction. Do we still hold these truths? Do the principles that inspired the American Founding retain their relevance in the twenty-first century? We will find it difficult to know what to do and how to do it as long as we are not sure who we are and what we believe."
Who we are is a diverse nation like no other ever assembled -- not bound by a single ethnicity, but by the principles and ideas outlined in the founding documents. Those documents, therefore, are the very fabric holding this nation together. Today, as the federal government is on the march and Americans heave a collective yawn in the face of it, that fabric is tearing as never before.
When President Harry S. Truman was dedicating the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 15, 1952 -- the anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights -- he made this beautiful but ominous reference to the original Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution housed within:
"We find it hard to believe that liberty could ever be lost in this country. But it can be lost, and it will be, if the time ever comes when these documents are regarded not as the supreme expression of our profound belief, but merely as curiosities in glass cases."
So, we must ask ourselves: Do those documents mean anything anymore? Or are they mere curiosities in glass cases?
Comments
Phrase it any way you want, but as long as D.C. controls the tax money, it controls the country. Congress needs to be flushed to make a change in the way D.C. operates. Right now, the constitution is considered the ultimate evil by one of our parties and as long as they remain in control, it will be ignored. If this country survives the next three years, change will come.
The Constitution is no longer a viable document in the lives of Americans. When it should be a literal instruction, it has been interpreted to death. Much of its original meaning is not as the founding fathers intended it anymore. As an example it does not say anywhere in the Constitution that there will be "separation of church and state". It says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". It also does not say that you have "freedom FROM religion" but the "free exercise thereof" has all but been eliminated.
As long as there are "special interest groups" and "lobbyists" there will never be a "structurally sound" base for the constitution. Everyone wants their little flair to become the norm and to hell with those folks that don`t agree, even if those folks hold the majority of citizens interests at heart. If you holler loud enough and long enough someone will toss you a bone just to shut you up, you know who you are. Anyone notice that since integration the English language, spelling, continuity have all but disappeared from our language? The dumbing down of America started then...
From a society called "the great melting pot" to a society called the "cob salad topped with nuts".
I can't help it! Justus4 is truly a moron!
doubt...you are being more than kind.
justus4 you tell people to read a history book,i think you need to read them the ones printed back in the late 1800's and early 1900's not that pc bull crap printed today.
This is a good article, and sadly all too true. Thanks ACES.
Here we go again. Every time the Democrats control the White House and/or Congress, self-appointed constitutionalists in the Republican Party and their pseudo-intellectual enablers in right-wing think tanks whine about our country being torn from its foundation. Strange, but I don't remember any of these same people fussing about George Bush and Karl Rove passing a Medicare prescription drug program. And how many wars have conservative Republican presidents started without constitutional authorization from Congress? If you want to live in a country with little or no central government, go to Afghanistan or Somalia.
Justus makes an interesting point of the federal government acting when the Constitutional rights of some are violated. Shouldn't the states take similar action when it is the federal government compromising the Constitution?
They argued while writing it; they argued while signing it, and they've argued about it ever since. Some see it liberally while others can expound forever on the meaning of a single word. And the Constitution has some archaic cobwebs in it. Viz: citizen's militia in the second amendment and the requirement for the President to be a native born American. Our bicameral legislature was a political compromise at the time the Constitution was written and it wasn't too hard for everybody to swallow at the time but it's a different story today. Consider - South Carolina with a population of 4.5 million has two Senate votes while California with a population of 36.5 million has two Senate votes. And Georgia with a population of 9.6 million has two Senate votes while New York with a population of 19.5 million has two Senate votes. And Alaska with just over one-half million population has to two Senate votes while the whole state has less people than the city of Atlanta. But we call ourselves a representative government.
Yeah, Chronicle, check out the second amendment: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,....funny how that part gets ignored in favor of the second half. Of course, too there were the parts once in effect that allowed slave trade to continue, the 3/5s personhood, women weren't eligle to vote, prohibition....yes these we're all changed, but proves to illustrate that no document is the "supreme expression" except in its ability to be modified with the times.
Justnuts is on his slavery obsession today.
Gas, please take some political science classes before you grow up. It was specifically designed that way so that states with small populations could be equally represented. Or have you not had 12th grade Civics yet?
Point 1: Justus has the unique capability to spout words from his anus, and we all know what commonly issues from that orifice. Point 2: If the resolution emanated from a southern state, it would be national news. Coming from a northern state, it is ignored. The truth is that under the Constitution each state is sovereign and their association in the United States is voluntary. The Commerce Clause of the Constitution has been interpreted so liberally that almost everything now falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government, when the original intent of the founders was that the federal government would only deal with international affairs and interstate commerce...nothing else that interfered with state's rights.
Corigmom, I was going to be more tactful with Gas. LOL
corgimom - I'm aware of the reason for states having two votes in the Senate. The original thinking was small states needed protection from big states. The states expected to exercise the majority of powers themselves and they didn't expect the central government to be much. But the Civil War ended that way and the central government became all powerful. Now citizens in every state are subject to an enormous body of laws from Washington. But the situation has become more undemocratic over time. An Alaskan Senator votes on laws that effect every citizen in the country but only represents approx 250,000 people. While a California Senator has the same vote and he represents 18 million people. I'd want more for my money and more say so if I was a California resident. That old boy's agreement back in the beginning leaves a lot to be desired.
gasp, you sure have a Dems knowledge of the constitution.
johnston.cliff - Do you suppose we all look through a filter?
And you don't think that sparsely populated states still need protection from heavily populated states? OK. Whatever.
corgimom - Your reading comprehension baffles me.
Remind me to never make a contract with a Democrat.
Yes, gasp, I feel the uninformed Dem, the base, all looks through the "government news" filter of CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, NPR, AND PBS, all of which read off the same talking points notes.
I can see that most of the posters who are attacking this editorial seem to be unable to read and understand the Constitution. The tenth amendment was written to limit the power of the federal government and to broaden the power of the sovereign states who united to gain freedom from the tyranny of a strong central government. So, dummies, do a cephalo-rectal disengagement and try to understand that a strong central government is able to dictate to you what you shall do in every aspect of your lives. The republic designed by the founders was to keep government out of your lives as much as possible. If you can't understand THAT, you are just too stupid to live.
NoTruthteller, evidently you weren't paying attention when we conservative Republicans were raising hell with about every damned thing the Repub Congress was doing. They became like drunken DIMocRATS with their spending and many paid the price as we stayed home last two elections or just voted for their opposition. As for wars started under a Republican President Congress didn't authorize, name one.
Riverman1 - I gather you're opposed to absorbing enlightenment. Don't knock it if you haven't tried it!
gaspingspringwater, how many Representatives does SC have and how many do CA, NY, and the other more populous states have? Evidently you didn't catch that part of the designing of the Constitution in your revisionist history book so that those state have more say in TAXATION (House responsibiluty) while two Senators per state gives small states like RI, DE, etc the same voice in that house as CA, NY, and the other populous states. Our founding fathers were actually briliant men who designed the most fantastic governing document in the history of man. It has taken the activist courts to usurp it as it is today. Also, the flunding fathers never meant for rules of either house to totally preclude the minority from participation in writing legislation, but that too is the situation today in the House and Senate where it is written behind closed, locked dooors by the majority's clique. I find no where in the constitution where any government can force a citizen to BUY anything, especially health care insurance. I hope this winds up in teh SCOTUS, if passed.
johnston.cliff - I noticed you didn't include Fox News ( wink-wink ) in your long list of news sources. But I agree with you! They're certainly far out and the White House said that too.
JC and gasp[, I suppose you don't believe that the NY Terrorist Times, the Washington Poop, Left Angeles Times, Boston Glob, News Week, et al are not "far out" (to the left). Newsweek's front page with Sarah in shorts sold more mags than they have in months if not years. Wonder when they will rung Hitlery in running shorts (an go really bankrupt sooner)?
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
