The United States Constitution is quite prominent in our recent public discourse. Most conservatives claim.jpg){kind=logo}
to revere it nearly to the point of idolatry, insisting that Congress only has the power to take the actions expressly included in the text. They’re called “strict constructionists”. Liberals usually hold that our founders meant for us to interpret the Constitution in the context of our times. The dispute boils down to whether the Constitution is a “living document”. They’re both right.
The Constitution is the set of rules by which our government operates. Just as in any other activity – sports, business, schools, and families – life is only fair when everyone follows the rules. In this case, the rules give us some flexibility.
The founders had recently finished fomenting revolution. They didn’t want to be aristocrats. They didn’t want to be gods. They wanted the government to reflect and honor the will of the people. They wrote it and they passed it along to us. They wanted it to be what WE want to make it. They wanted America’s face to be our choice.
James Madison wrote most of the text of the Constitution. He started with a blank piece of paper and a pen. The delegates debated, argued, and compromised. There had never been anything like it before. They could have included anything they wanted in it. They chose to include some interesting passages.
Article V specifically outlines two methods for changing the Constitution – and only one requires Congressional action. They made it difficult to amend, but they did make it possible. The ability to change is the primary requirement for life. If the founders didn’t want the Constitution to change, then why would they include the process for changing it?
Madison was quite capable of writing in great detail, as shown by the sections on the Electoral College and the election of senators. Yet it contains several vague clauses.
Article I describes the powers and duties of Congress, and the powers forbidden to it. Section 8, Clause 1 requires Congress to “. . . provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States . . . .” Okay, slow down. “Welfare” in this case does not mean public assistance benefits. It means that Congress must do what is in the best interest of the country. And we leave that to the judgment of Congress. Clause 18 is called the “elastic clause”. It authorizes Congress “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof”.
And that is where Congress got the authority to establish the Internal Revenue Service, NASA, the Air Force, Social Security, Medicare, public assistance programs, health insurance reform, corporate bailouts, national parks, the interstate highway system, the Smithsonian Institution, the Library of Congress, student loan programs, presidential czars, and every federal regulatory agency. So don't let the Republican distraction campaign fool you.
As the nation’s chief executive, the president is responsible for the daily operations of the government. That happens through the cabinet departments and the Executive Office of the President. The authority comes from Article II and from the elastic clause. And yes, executive orders are constitutional. They are not laws. They are merely the president’s method of communicating his orders to his staff. They haven’t perfected ESP yet.
Our founders chose to leave certain parts open to interpretation so that the nation could grow. Without growth and change, everything dies. Why would they waste their time writing a dead document, which would leave all of us stuck in the 18th century? Don’t you think that the police should need a warrant to search your car, computer, or cell phone? You won't find any of those in the Constitution, but the Fourth Amendment protects your rights.
Of course, parts are contradictory – notably the Ninth and Tenth Amendments – but that’s why we have public debate, free speech, and a free press. So, most people like the parts that support their preconceived views. You know, like the bible.
The United States of America was a great idea. The Constitution is a great document. In the end, 39 convention delegates signed it, including Pittsburgh’s Robert Morris.
Go ahead, see for yourself. I dare you.
For more information
- Read the US Constitution
- Read the Bill of Rights
- Read the Amendments
- See all of President Obama’s actions since taking office.
On August 10, 1821, Missouri entered the union as a slave state.
Be sure to read every installment of the Pittsburgh Public Policy Examiner.
Click “subscribe” above.
Click “subscribe” above.
Comments
That is completely wrong. The so called elastic clause is not elastic at all. “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof”. All this meant was that whatever was necessary to put the constitution into action would be done. In other words it would not get hung up on some small adminstrative detail. It was things like that in which the founders talked about. Also executive orders are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. They were meant for the president to issue orders WITHIN the executive branch ONLY!! Lastly the 9th and 10th admendments are not contradictory. They are written quite plainly. Please, Please read the federalist and anti-federalist papers.
The article's treatment of the framers' intentions with respect to the mutability of the Constitution is a tad flamboyant. Anonymous above has it right. One of the framers' greaterst fears was our departing from the original intent and meaning of the Constitution which they felt would result in the republic's dissolution. Understanding there would be a need to amend the Constitution to address issues/concerns/developments not foreseen, the amendment process was included. Let's put it this way: if the framers were alive today, they would be utterly horrified. Why? The Republic has been taken over by liberal,activitist ideolgues who view the Constiution as an annoying obstacle to their achieving their statist agenda. As for the "elastic clause", it was intended to allow the federal gov't to exercise its enumerated powers so long as that exercise in no way, shape or form overreached the bounds of its Constitutional authority. Necessary and Proper didn't mean Necessary and Convenient. The Living Constitution model, a modern invention, is perilous and corrosive and undermines the efficacy of the eternal constitutional order intended by the framers. They warned us against tampering with it. The framers viewed teh Constitution as timeless, and in that sense alone can we call it "living". It should not mean "evolving" to suit each generation's whim.
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!