It’s hard to understand objections to reading the Constitution on the House floor. After all, the lawmakers just took this oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
Some liberals have given backhanded praise to the idea of reading the Constitution. Garrett Epps, for instance, says that a reading should remind members that the Constitution was “concerned with giving Congress power, not taking it away.” While it provided for a stronger central government than the Articles of Confederation, it was scarcely an open-ended invitation for Congress to do anything that it wanted. “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined,” wrote Madison in Federalist 45. “Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”
Really, it's like saying the Bible shouldn't be read in church.
(Of course, I wouldn't put it past some Christians to be alright with that.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt remains to be seen how serious the House leadership is about this, and the corrolary requirement to cite the Constitutional basis in introduced legislation. I fear that we will see endless pro forma "Commerce Clause" or "Necessary and Proper Clause" justifications for whatsoever can be dreamed up inside the Beltway. If so, then this is a silly publicity stunt and worthy of derision. If however, legislators will have to put some actual analysis into their Constitutional justifications, then I'm all for it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEpps' thinking is why we're in the mess we're in. If you see the Constitution as a grant of power without also recognizing that the reason they listed them out was to put bounds and limits on that power, you inevitably come to the conclusion that if there's a power you think Congress should have then it follows that Congress does have that power.
Perhaps Boehner and the GOP should have added some excerpts from The Federalist Papers to their floor reading list so that liberals could hear what the authors of the Constitution understood themselves to be writing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'd be more impressed if they read the Constitution and then followed that with some Federalists Papers relevant to the article or even clause that was just read. I think they should require that sort of thing in the bills as well.
cackson - My guess is that the many of the same folks who are hesitant about reading the Constitution or taking it seriously in Congress are the same ones who are hesitant about reading the Bible or taking it seriously in Church as well. Sort of closes the circle doesn't...they want to be God in our country and and they want to be God in their own lives too.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And
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.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEpps certainly hasn't studied much. That or he is a liar or willfully misleading. In either case his opinion is uninformed and not worthy of consideration. Any HS student in a AP US History class knows about the limiting of federal power and the insistance of the first 10 ammendments - including the 10th - as a means to reassure skeptical voters of the time that we were not empowering an all powerful central government. I mean come on, this is just basic stuff. Lord are we in trouble.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse