We think you're near Los Angeles

America Inspired

Republicans edit out parts of Constitution before having it read to the House

Today the Republicans are having the United States Constitution read before conducting any other business in the House of Representatives.  The Republicans have presented the move as an attempt to return to the founding principles of the American government.  However, some have criticized the recital as a costly public relations stunt by Republicans.  Vanity Fair estimated the cost of reading the Constitution to be $1.1 million for taxpayers.  While the Constitution is read House staffers and security personnel will still need to be paid.  More bothersome to other liberals is the Republicans' decision to edit out some parts of the Constitution before having it read.

Republicans have ordered that certain controversial parts of the United States Constitution not be read.  For instance, Americans will not hear Article I, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which reads:

Advertisement

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

That part of the Constitution is commonly called the "three-fifths compromise."  Southern states wanted slaves to be counted in the census since it would give them more representatives in the House.  Northern states objected to this since slaves were not given rights in the South.  The compromise reached between the northern and southern states stated that slaves would be counted as "three-fifths" of a person.  That language still appears in the Constitution, though it was subsequently modified by the 14th Amendment.

The idea of counting slaves as "three-fifths of all other Persons" is now, of course, offensive on its face.  Liberals argue that the compromise proves the U.S. Constitution was a great, but not perfect document.  The founders seemed to recognize this fact by establishing a procedure with which to amend the Constitution within the document itself. 

In ordering the Constitution to be read, the Republicans are holding up the document as a guide for the future.  However, Republicans seem unwilling to acknowledge some of the deficiencies in the Constitution.

Update: In another twist it turns out that two Republican representatives failed to take the oath of office as required by the United States Constitution.  Both representatives subsequently cast invalid votes.

, Political Buzz Examiner

Ryan Witt is a graduate of Washington University Law School in St. Louis and has extensive experience teaching government and politics. His articles have been cited by The Washington Post, NPR, Politics Daily, The Guardian, The Huffington Post, Media Matters, Daily Kos, and Think Progress among...

Comments

  • Yawn... 1 year ago

    *choking on my coffee*

    You GOT to be SH@#ING ME?!?!

    The 'strict constitutionalists' are accepting the changes and ignoring what was changed???

    That certainly sets the bar for political hypocrisy for 2011; gonna be hard to top this one.

  • Yawnny 1 year ago

    You top it daily!

  • James7son 1 year ago

    Funny this is that portion is no longer part of the Constitution. There was an Amendment. They read the Constitution as it is written today and removed language that is no longer valid because of Amendments and instead read the Amended language. Talk about Making a mountain out of a molehill.....

  • Anonymous4 1 year ago

    Just because the 14th amendment modified the constitution of the United States does not mean that the original language no longer exists, it just means that the original language is no longer valid. It should be noted that there are plenty of other amendments that invalidate original language (allowing women the right to vote, no longer requiring property ownership to vote, lowering the legal voting age to 18...)

    Did the new leadership omit or alter those other passages, as well? If so, then your point has merit, James7son. But if not...

  • Twitthead 1 year ago

    Its so refreshing to see us acknowledging we HAVE a Constitution.

    And now we are going to learn a lot more about it, as WE APPLY IT DAILY IN THE PEOPLES HOUSE. YeeHAAAAAAAA

  • Profile picture of F Stilson Sr.
    F Stilson Sr. 1 year ago

    Are you really surprised? This is the party that Glenn Beck and FOX built. It's show time. I was expecting a chalk board and Lederhosen.

  • Yawnny 1 year ago

    Historic elections are hard to accept by you leftists aren't they?

  • Gwenny 1 year ago

    Exactly who are you talking to? Because, honestly, few liberals are leftists. And a quick perusal of this forum reveals no real leftists.

  • Anonymouss 1 year ago

    Gwenny, did you ever even think it was meant as a generic term?

  • Andy 1 year ago

    You mean like the one in 2008 that the righties ignored.

  • lg_ 1 year ago

    If people actually went to the Constitution they would find that contrary to very loud speakers, the Constitution does not preclude the actions of the 111th Congress. I think many will find the real "revisionists" when they look in the mirror.

  • Yawn... 1 year ago

    The reason the Tea Potters want it read out loud is because so many of their ilk cannot read it themselves, lg.

  • Say What? 1 year ago

    WHAT? You make no sense! THIS is the 111th.

  • lg_ 1 year ago

    Right now, right this minute. John Boehner is the Speaker of the House for the 112th Congress. I can provide links if you don't believe me.

  • Say What? 1 year ago

    My apologies. I misread.

  • //// 1 year ago

    "cost of reading the Constitution to be $1.1 million for taxpayers"

    (:

    Good, that makes up for all the Bills the Marxist wrote, without ever bothering to read them first. (:

  • lg_ 1 year ago

    Neat trick - Marxists can read them before they write them. :)

  • EC 1 year ago

    /// What are you saying. Which Marx ... of the Marx brothers?

    Try reading some actual history if you were raised literate, so maybe you can better not confuse historical characters. What Marxist you are referring to was dead many years ago, and was never a member of commerce. Knowing what you are talking about makes it easier to influence people.

    Ignorance does very little than make the person spewing forth silly!

  • Profile picture of F Stilson Sr.
    F Stilson Sr. 1 year ago

    It was Harpo, but he couldn't read them out loud.

  • lg_ 1 year ago

    Harpo - Still laughing.
    Thanks Frumpy

  • Anonymouss 1 year ago

    And that number is the number it cost EVERY day they are in session.

  • Dano 1 year ago

    I see the lunatics have finally taken over the asylum. God help the USA with this bunch of liars and hypocrites in the majority.

  • EC 1 year ago

    I'd say amen, but no telling what the illiterate crackpots will do with that one.

  • Thefoundingfathers 1 year ago

    Onward to a Fascist America. These Conservatives are the type of corporatists that would have backed Hitler. They use the media as a propaganda tool to brainwash the masses. Read your history books about the rise of the Nazis and you will be reading about what is happening today in America.

  • Anonymouss 1 year ago

    Didn;t take long for the Hitler and Nazi comments from the idiots.

  • SoCalWoodworker 1 year ago

    I understand the difference between Communism, Marxism, Fascism and socialism and DON'T use them interchangeably...wish ppl on this thread would learn the difference

  • Anonymouss 1 year ago

    Are you the fascist moderator?

  • Countertenor 1 year ago

    Thank You

  • Profile picture of liubi189
    liubi189 1 year ago

    Hey there, I find an amazing

    Hey there, I find an amazing web,please click the web ,you can find big pleasantly surprised
    ╭⌒╮WELCOME http://clothesmall.org
    ----- ~ ¤ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╮
    ╭⌒╭⌒╮╭⌒╮~╭⌒╮ HANDBAG 35$
    ,)))),'')~~ ,''~)
    ╱◥█◣ ╱◥█◣ SHOES 35$
    |田|田||田|田| CLOTH 15$
    ╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬ 2010 NEW

  • Profile picture of asghrtjtr
    asghrtjtr 1 year ago

    ------- http://fa.by/c6c519 ---------

    ------- http://fa.by/c6c519 ---------

    ------- http://fa.by/c6c519 ---------

    ------- http://fa.by/c6c519 ---------

    ------- http://fa.by/c6c519 ---------

    ------- http://fa.by/c6c519 ---------

  • Profile picture of dsfdsfhdkj
    dsfdsfhdkj 1 year ago

    very good web, i very like.

    ==============go==========

    Something unexpected surprise

    ============
    =====

    our website:

    ===== http://alturl.com/8x3hp ====

    believe you will love it.

    happy shopping web

    jordan air max oakland raiders $34–39;

    Ed Hardy AF JUICY POLO Bikini $25;

    Christan Audigier BIKINI JACKET $25;

    coach chanel gucci LV handbags $36;

    coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $18;
    。° 。 ° ? ? ? ? ? ·? Bikini $25
    · 。 ° · 。 · ? ? ? ? ?
    。° 。 ° 。? ? · ? ? ? NFL($16)
    *★MERRY★* 。 · ? ? ? ? ? · ·
    。CHRISTMAS 。* 。° 。 ° ? ? ?
    * _Π____*。*? ? ? ? ? ·? ·? JACKET $25
    */_____/~\。? ? ? ? ? ·? ·?
    | 田田 |門| ? ? ? ? ·
    ━○━★‥…+->?<-+…‥★━○━?

  • Profile picture of huhu13
    huhu13 1 year ago

    Hey there, I find an amazing

    Hey there, I find an amazing web,please click the web ,you can find big pleasantly surprised
    ╭⌒╮WELCOME http://clothesmall.org
    ----- ~ ¤ ╭⌒╮ ╭⌒╮
    ╭⌒╭⌒╮╭⌒╮~╭⌒╮ HANDBAG 35$
    ,)))),'')~~ ,''~)
    ╱◥█◣ ╱◥█◣ SHOES 35$
    |田|田||田|田| CLOTH 15$
    ╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬╬ 2010 NEW

  • Anthony G. Martin, Conservative Examiner 1 year ago

    Ryan, once again you are caught with your pants down when it comes to facts. The Constitution has been amended and changed since the example you cited, and you know it. Thus, you are not only wrong but dishonest. You have come over to my place accusing me of such, and now I am returning the favor. This article is full of factual errors, and, I see that many of the Leftwing minions who deride me are over here singing your praises for your blatant errors which are designed to do nothing but engage in pure partisanship--something which you incessantly claim you do not do.

  • Profile picture of F Stilson Sr.
    F Stilson Sr. 1 year ago

    The last person you want to catch you with your pants down is the Conservative Examiner. I'm just sayin'

Add a new comment

Join the conversation! Log in here or create a new account if you've never registered before.

Got something to say?

Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!

Don't miss...