Constitution Day 2007
What is the most important date in American history? Most of us would swiftly answer the Fourth of July. But think about today, September 17th. On this date in 1787 the convention in Philadelphia completed work on one of the greatest acts of creative leadership of all time, "this Constitution of The United States." Their work rescued America from what Madison later described as "gloomy chaos" and set the world marching toward what we can now see as the Age of Democracy.
Yet there will be no parades today, no picnics or fireworks. Perhaps a library somewhere is sponsoring a talk. Constitution Day will pass largely unnoticed. It is not surprising. Americans have over the last 40 years drifted away from a connection to our Constitution, the document that invented the United States as we now understand it and helped America to become the longest enduring democracy in history (Athens lasted 170 years as a democracy).
We revere the framers. We gobble up books about them and love snippets of their wisdom. They have become our secular gods. Yet we have little sense of what it was they actually invented. We know that the Declaration of Independence proclaimed our liberty. But liberty alone, as it turned out, was not the answer to the question of how to create a successful nation. As the framers learned in the eleven years following 1776, liberty unleashed the ambitions, the self-interests of individuals, factions and states. Selfish behavior was so rampant that the army nearly starved in the field of battle. Farmers took up arms. States threatened border war with other states. The country, if it even was a country, was falling apart. This was the "gloomy chaos" Madison confronted when he entered Philadelphia.
He and his fellow delegates saved America by recognizing that the pursuit of self-interest, which lay behind all the chaos, was fundamental to human nature. Before 1787 self-interest was something that had to be transcended to preserve Democracy. But the Constitution turned "vice into a virtue," harnessing ambition and channeling it into a system of representative government that pit interest against interest to find the greater good. Power was separated and balanced. The system was driven by "conflict within consensus" as historian Michael Kammen summed it up. There had never been a government like it before. This was their great invention: a government that let people be free by recognizing what people were really like.
The power of their invention is inarguable. Out of that sweltering hall in Philadelphia, out of that crisis of the early American nation, emerged a blueprint for government that was designed to let the people govern themselves despite their imperfections. It did not count on people to be selfless or bigger than themselves. "If men were angels, no government would be necessary,' wrote Madison. This new idea for government presumed people would pursue their own interests. Indeed it counted on them to do just that.
And it created paths for others to disagree, and resist them, or argue for something different. Their invention was a government designed to channel these struggles. To impede change until enough people supported it. To force people to the middle To encourage compromise. To spread power around so, in Hamilton's succinct vision, the few could not oppress the many and the many could not oppress the few. A lot could get done if people worked together in this system. But, if they fought each other, it could all grind to a halt.
In other words what they sent out from Philadelphia 220 years ago today was not just a piece of parchment. They created a new set of ideas about government and democracy. They had no idea how effective those ideas would be
The American "experiment" has worked better and lasted longer than any alternative.
But we do not recall all this for a history lesson. Because today, despite all our success, many Americans are feeling deeply frustrated and disillusioned with the functioning of their country. "Our conviction about American greatness and purpose is not as strong today," William J Bennett writes on the very first page of his History of The Untied States.
We are searching for a renewal.
The Constitution itself is a good place to start this day. It is after all what makes us Americans. We are not a country defined, in the words of journalist Ray Suarez, "by blood, or clan, or land origins, or religious belief." Rather, we are held together by the strength of our shared beliefs in our Constitution and its principles -- such as a respect for process, a willingness to compromise, a tolerance for dissent. We call this our Constitutional Conscience
But we have been drifting away from these principles and our modern politics has become brittle, confrontational and uncompromising. Our common bond has been unraveling. Recent experience reminds us that we make mistakes as a country when we move away from how our system was built to work. When people say now they wish The Congress and the media had done more to question the march to war in Iraq they are saying, too, that they wish the leaders of congress and the press had done more to assert their authority, and fulfill their responsibilities, under The Constitution. Even many proponents of the war concede now that the checks and balances did not work well. We believe that is precisely because of a weakening of our sense of our Constitutional roles, our constitutional conscience. Voters do not reward elected officials for executing their constitutional responsibility so it is little wonder that most elected officials don't pay much heed to those responsibilities. "People revere the constitution yet know so little about," Senator Robert Byrd said, "and that goes for some of my fellow senators."
Ronald Reagan, one of our most important 20th century presidents saw this problem coming as he left office. He warned of what he saw as a growing failure to appreciate our own history. Ultimately, he said, this would eradicate "the American memory" and threaten the American spirit. Some years later, Derek Bok the former president of Harvard worried that no one any longer bothers to prepare people to be citizens. Civics has nearly vanished from our curriculums, squeezed out in many cases by the understandable drive to teach science and math. We do that to assure our competitiveness in the world economy. But we should be just as concerned about our moral authority in the world. Moral authority comes from the strength of our principles. We are the inheritors of one of the greatest statements of democratic principles ever written. One piece of rehabilitating our moral authority in the world and our confidence in our selves is to reconnect with our own statement of best principles, "this Constitution of the United States." Franklin Roosevelt, our other great 20th Century president, said we should read The Constitution "again and again" like the bible. Or maybe we should all go to that Library talk.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Based on the actions of the present administration, it leaves one to wonder if Bush, Cheney, and others are even aware the constitution exists.
Oh yeah, they're aware. That's why they needed Yoo and Gonzales to trash it. And the Justice dept to continue it's 'blindness' to it.
"Ronald Regan, one of our most important 20th century presidents
What makes Reagan an all too "important" president is that he used the United States Constitution as toilet paper and got away with it, with the result that the current president is doing the same. If Americans appreciate even their recent history, they'll demand Dubya's impeachment. If you let him get away with it too, get ready for a fascist president in the near future.
It's too funny listening to the previous extreme left-wing posters. Dare I say it, the authors went much further then you quote:
--Franklin Roosevelt, our other great 20th Century president,--
In other words, they are naming Reagan as one of the two greatest presidents of the 20th Century. Celebrate, celebrate.
You obviously don't agree with Reagan and I wouldn't agree with FDR.
Even if we want to argue about domestic policies, however, the authors certainly have a point. Both of their choices won the war they were given on their shift.
FDR was the president credited with winning WWII and Reagan the Cold War. Those accomplishments have to rank them high on any listing.
One has to rewrite history to conclude that Reagan was anything more than an addle-pated actor who was the poster child for "greed is good". Initially, GOP said Reagan defeated communism; but that did not wash with the selling of America to China so it has been changed to "cold war". Reagan sold out to Japan--who can forget the rising sun over the Pebble Beach golf course ? Bushies use the same script. None of them would make a pimple on FDR's ass.
FYI, the CIA had been predicting the end of the cold war for years *prior* to Reagan.
Reagan also *tripled* the national debt, borrowing more than all presidents before him, from George Washington to Jimmy Carter, combined.
This is because he didn't have enough tax money to spend after his insane tax cuts for the rich (i.e. slashing the top marginal tax rate, that kicked in after the first 3+ million dollars earned, from 70% to 28%).
More and more of our tax dollars each year are wasted repaying interest on this debt rather than toward programs to benefit us going forward.
Worse yet, he spent hundreds of billions of dollars from the social security trust fund *and* he DOUBLED the social security tax (rather than increasing the tax cap from the first $90,000 of income).
I could go on, but really, that's more than enough to convince any reasonable person that Reagan was far from being one of the "two greatest presidents of the 20th century".
Reagan was actually a closet libertarian and strict constructionist. Unfortunately, you cannot elected president on such a platform in this day and age. We have been too mis-educated on the precepts of free markets versus government meddling.
"Ronald Regan... warned of what he saw as a growing failure to appreciate our own history."
If Americans appreciated the lessons of their history, they wouldn't have let Reagan get away with his war crimes, because they'd have seen they were inviting future presidents like Dubya to behave in the same way. And it's that disastrous legacy that makes Reagan an all too "important" president.
i am still confused as to how ronald reagan is considered such a great president. he was charismatic. period. he was an actor, reading one-liners that made him seem intelligent, articulate, witty, and wise. he was neither. he was an actor. just like w is a puppet.
Same play, same act...diff
"Clueless", or "How to look like the Marlboro Man while really being Christine Jorgenson"
And neither was he 'responsible' for bringing down the USSR. JFK brought the madness to the worlds attention and dared Kruschev. The USSR blinked. We technically won the war there. To the extent that The USSR had to spend its $ on nuckear missles and other arms & aricraft, this did drain their treasury..
Their 10 yr war in Afghanistan hardly helped either.
In fact the scenario which brought them down is beginning to look like what Bush has ushered in-removing environmental standards & laws, building more weapons & spreading our military too thin while Knowing we don't have the $ to pay for it. We're looking at the beginning of the end of the US Empire Unless we Take Back the Constitution which was Stolen from us and Stop negative meddling in the affairs of the rest of the world. Instead we should implement a 'Marshal Plan' for the Mid-East & Africa. & make Peace.
They treated their environment the same way China is doing to its own now.They will destroy themselves as well with this and overpopulation. The Only thing which may save them is that We owe them so much $.
Regan didn't do a Damn thing to defeat the USSR--all the scientists said that "star wars" wouldn't work. It still doesn't unless rigged. It was Gorbechov who came to Regan to tell him there must be more openness & diplomacy because his country was imploding. Regan simply took advantage of that fact. He didn't scare the USSR into standing down or dissolving.
I still confused as to how you consider Reagan a war criminal. One poster said he did not really do anything and was just an actor....o
Can't have it both ways people. You arguements make no sense.
ronald reagan put the finishing touches on capitalism by his deregulation agenda.
unchecked capitalism will self destruct as the few gain power and money over the many.
money is power in american politics.
when the middle class goes the few control the many and here come revolution. hopefully voter revolution but dont count on it.
and yes middle class americans (wanta be neo cons) line up to vote repub will speed up this process of eliminating the middle class meaning you.
best self destructive behavior I have seen in a long while.
I think you are missing some very important concepts about how capitalism works and how government interacts with the marketplace. Let me try to illustrate by responding to your post piece by piece:
1) "ronald reagan put the finishing touches on capitalism by his deregulation agenda."
What do you mean by this statement? I think RR put some things back the way the used to be.... that is more beholden to the free market. I think what he did made things better. Take airline deregulation. Before the industry was deregualted air travel was financially in reach of at best the upper middle class. It was very expensive to fly somewhere in the 60's and even the 70's. Look at air travel today. The cost of flying is definately affordable for the middle class and I see many folks below middle class able to fly. Greyhound has lost much business over the last 20 years.
2) "unchecked capitalism will self destruct as the few gain power and money over the many."
Ok, capitalism is not perfect by any means but it has enabled far more people to live a better life than socialism for example. So I disagree that capitalism has produced the result you imply here. You wrongly assume that capitalism is a zero sum game. In other words you assume that if one guy gets rich that means he took it from someone else. This is not the case. Apple computer,IBM, Compac, HP and other companies got rich by providing a PC computer that most anybody can afford. Did they do this by depriving me of wealth? No! I actually did better by making use of the products that these companies produced.
Let me continue..
To continue,
3) "money is power in american politics."
Well, this on its face this is a true statement. But why is this so? Let's say you are GM and the government is about to pass some big law regarding how you build cars. If this legislation had the potential to decrease GM's profit or disrupt their business why would they not try ot influence the congressmen on the outcome? They would be stupid not to try. As a shareholder of GM I would demand that they try to influence the legislation.
My point is that the more you give government authority over business in the private sector the more you will see those potentially affected attempt to influence the decisions. That is what has happened to our government today. Government has their fingers in so many pies that we have a large number of "special interests" that seek to influence their decision making. This is not the fault of capitaism.
4) "when the middle class goes the few control the many and here come revolution. hopefully voter revolution but dont count on it."
Contrary to popular opinion the middle class in America is not disappearing. Some of the stats suggest that this is the case but when you break them down it is not what people think it is. I blame the mainstream media for this misconception. The main reason this has come about is that the data has been skewed by large numbers of poor immigrants that have entered the country over the last 20 years.
I will tell you what will fortel our distruction: Socialism. This encompasses redistribution of wealth, overreaching government involvement in the marketplace and the takover of entire industries. Socialism has been tried in many places. It has not succeeded anywhere to the same level that capitalism has suceeded in building wealth and happy lives. Russia, imploded under the weight of its own failed experiements in socialism as has Cuba and the whole iron curtain.
So I guess I just disagree with your implication that capitalism is no good.
Amazing that george Bush jr was able to shred the Constitution and the neocon republican supporters actually cheer his efforts.
What we need is to schedule a SECOND Constitutional Convention. Badly.
Better to talk it out and put it down in black and white than to start a civil war right here with that elephant loitering in the middle of the living room.
Pillows at 3 paces. BEGIN!
The Founding Fathers must be turning over in their graves.
Make that spinning.
http://www
absolutely 100% correct - without renovating this Constituti
it doesn't need renovating. it just needs to be understood and used properly. this document, when followed, is pure beauty. corrupt parties, whether legislative or judicial, need to be held accountable for their actions. everyone, please get a copy and read it. it is phenominal. happy constitution day!
We don't need a second constitutional Convention- the docuamnet has not changed. We need a second American revolution to rid ourselves of a Dictatorship, which the constitution and all our other articles of law were enacted to avoid. Storm the WH, drag their sorry corrupt asses through the street fro all to throw rocks at and tehn transfer then the the luxury suites at Gitmo- all amenities included. WE'll come get you when we finally get around to it. Theres plenty of suites availble- who else can we accomadate?
scary!
No we do not need another Constitutional Convention. With such vocal fear-mongering Republicans running around, we risk losing the Bill of Rights, Habeas Corpus, Separation of Powers and all of our civil liberties.
Exactly.
I agree, live by the golden rule! I too would fear a constitutional convention at this time because the country is still so polarized. We could lose a lot. I also agree with the need for a second constitutional convention but not until Liberals/P
But our current president said the Constitution was, "Just A God Damn Piece Of Paper !". I think that sends a message to the citizens of this country, "If your not a member of my class, you don't need no stinkin constitution".
Oh, and also, comparing Ronald Raygun to FDR is an abomination. Both where cripples but at least FDR had a functioning brain !
I agree that comparing Reagan to FDR is an abomination. FDR is the one who trashed the constitution! Look at the history. Most of FDR's programs were struck down as unconstitutional at first. It was only when he put public and political pressure on the supreme court that the court eventually caved and ushered in the era of big government.
It was this turn of events that is largely responsible for our dis-illusionment with government today. It has become a large, inefficient behemoth. The sheer number of functions and programs that we have added in itself has had the effect of concentrating power in the government that we or the framers did not intend.
The framers never envisioned the government paying for citizens, healthcare, retirement or subsidizing business or the mirade of other unconstitutional functions that our govenrment now has. And you wonder why there exists so much polarization?
I say FDR did not get this right. If you look closely at the data none of the alphabet soup of programs his administration created did anything to end the depression. On hindsight, the free market essentially solved it on its own (helped by the war effort).
I know many of you on this site do not want to accept this. But if you endeavor to think outside your "historical box" it is very easy to see what works best. I venture to say that 1000's of government programs has not proved the best way....I think the framers of the constitution would agree.
Well the people who elected him forgot about the affect of concentrated power and how it corrupts everything it touches.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
