Regarding calls for a Constitutional Convention to "rectify" our current political problems, Karl Denninger observes (emphasis in original):
[A convention] will do nothing until and unless it includes the willingness of the States to back the requirements of the Constitution with whatever force is necessary for it to be obeyed, Supreme Court, Executive and Congress be damned.
But..... is there anything actually wrong with the Constitution that isn't within these lines now?
All the examples cited in this article are already violations. This is akin to screaming that rapists will be stopped by passing a second law making rape illegal. Why would you believe the rapist will be deterred if the first law was ignored?
If you're not willing to back up the law with whatever force is necessary for those subject to it to decide that obeying said law is a better idea than breaking then whatever you pass is of no value whatsoever.
Indeed demanding that [we] write more words on a page is nothing more or less than a naked attempt to deflect attention from the fact that the States have every right and in fact duty to enforce The Constitution (as do the people) right here and now, and yet those who have no interest in the actual Constitutional boundaries in fact have a very-clear pecuniary and political interest in promoting both false hope and lies.
Don't fall for it; demand that those talking about a ConCon first enforce the existing Constitution to the letter and then, and only then, will you consider permitting them to change that which, when executed as-written, proves to be deficient in some form or fashion.
There's more at the link.
I couldn't agree more. A Constitutional Convention under our present circumstances would simply give hotheads on both sides of the political aisle an excuse to bloviate, try to insert "poison pills" in the revised Constitution to frustrate the other side, and generally build on our present disorders to make them worse for everybody.
Let's instead enforce the existing provisions of the Constitution (particularly those that restrict the powers of the Federal government), get back to what our government should be, and only then worry about changing things further. It's a far simpler, easier, cheaper, and less complicated solution . . . but each side has so many axes to grind by now that it's sure to be rejected. Neither side wants to give up the power it's grabbed for itself, constitutionally or otherwise.
Peter
All we need is the "We Really Mean It This Time!" Amendment. That'll fix it! As a wise moose once said: This time for sure!
ReplyDeleteA constitutional convention created, and ended, the madness of Prohibition. History shows it's a fruitless effort without enforcing the mandates of the Constitution , and wandering from the restraints envisioned during the formation of the U.S. government.
ReplyDeleteThe ninth and tenth amendments are not hard to understand. They're short and in plain English. But I don't think they've been enforced since the days they were ratified. It's going to have to get very, very ugly for that to happen.
ReplyDeleteJess,
ReplyDeleteProhibition began and ended with constitutional amendments.
There has not been a constitutional convention since 1787 when the Articles of Confederation was abolished and the Constitution adopted.
A good point.
ReplyDeleteI've been disappointed recently in how little "good" governors such as those in Texas, Florida, and North Dakota have pushed back against government overreach and ridiculous regulations.
A constitutional convention will allow the people behind Barack to "fundamentally" transform America. It's the most dangerous idea out there and the OK boomer crowd keeps thinking they won't be fooled again by buying into it.
ReplyDeleteWhy does this smack of the modern method of "solving" problems. They appoint a committee, fund a study, talk and talk about it ... but nobody ever DOES anything about it. Paralysis through analysis. All this sturm und drang without any action. Bureaucracy begets more bureaucracy.
ReplyDeleteOur "elites" and "leaders" don't know how to DO anything. It's like everything is just a thought exercise. They all live in some virtual world in their heads. So problems never get fixed.
And I can't help thinking that that is exactly the result they intend.
Even the people who are supposedly on our side ... like all those conservative think tanks for the past 40 years that have sucked up donations but accomplished nothing. And when opportunities arose to act, they shrank back and switched sides. Betrayed us.
That's exactly the result I'd expect from some constitutional convention. SOunds like a good way to lose at the negotiation table when we ought to be digging trenches and setting minefields.
Peter....
ReplyDeleteI’m right there with you.
We have idiots here whining about the voting system, when they won’t bother to find out how it works and won’t pay attention to how they vote. (We have a preferential system, which is the equivalent of having run-off elections but only having to visit the polling booth once.)
It’s not the system that is broken, it is the VOTERS.
It is fine to ensure that only people entitled to vote, get to do so..... but if your States are too corrupt or negligent to enforce it, then by what kind of fantastic thinking to people imagine that a Federal government will be any different.
Start by shutting down both DOEs (Energy and Education), HHS, HUD, EPA, etc. and every other federal agency not specifically authorized by the Constitution and we can talk.
ReplyDeleteI won't even start on the CIA/NSA/DIA black complex for lawlessness.
Actually enforce the laws on the books? What a 'novel' idea... grrr...
ReplyDeleteAs a race humans are getting dumber and dumber with each passing generation. We are mental midgets compared to the Founding Fathers of this country. The second amendment is a prime example. The term "shall not be infringed" is lost in meaning for most people this day and age. I think any laws about guns are unconstitutional because of those 4 words.
ReplyDelete