We have a Constitution

and a process for amending it.

There has been talk, from time to time, of rewriting our Constitution.  Certainly any reasonable person would think that now, when we are so divided and combative is not the time to do that.

Certainly, there are changes that need to be made but the existing amendment process that would normally work is also compromised by those same divisions and fights.

The Constitution is very clear about some things and intentionally vague and open to interpretation in others.  I think that's by design.  However, that's not really the problem.  The problem is that the division of the 2 major parties, to the exclusion of any other, has resulted in nearly complete abandonment of what is actually in the Constitution.

The current administration, lead by a pathological con man who is completely disinterested in anything other than whatever happens to be in his own mind at any particular point in time, has little interest in our Constitution, particularly if it is at odds with the current interests of the Lunatic in Chief. (He has been diagnosed by many professionals).

Even those who probably know better are ignoring what the Constitution says because it serves their immediate purposes to do so.

Still our Constitution exists and will, eventually, be the measure of the lawlessness that currently reigns in the White House and other government institutions.  It is the basis of the Law of the land despite the Supreme Court's own abandonment of its principles whose purpose is to rule on the Constitutionality of all subsequent laws and regulations.  They too will be measured by those principles.

What I've learned recently - updated

 I've been playing with this blog for a couple of years.  

I began this in April so this is an update even though I didn't publish it earlier.

What I've learned over the past couple of years is that I, and therefore most of you, have not been sufficiently educated about the founding of our country, the history of the colonies that became the early states and the men who wrote the defining documents of our government.

As I begin to write something, it is my intention to be accurate about the topic while expressing my opinion about the topic.  In order to be accurate, it's necessary to know what you're talking about, in contrast to the person who currently occupies OUR White House, who has little interest in accuracy or truth, only in his own wishes, whims and aims.

I realized that I know little about the men who wrote the documents that define our government and the early presidents.  I decided to do some research about them.  That will take time.  There will be a page that shows that research.

In the meantime, I will say that I have some experience that may explain my interest in this and what I bring to this discussion.

I have lived and worked in 4 states in public employment, specifically as a librarian, but as an executive librarian.  I was considered a municipal department head and named as such in a couple of positions.  

I worked with a variety of municipal departments, individuals and various community organizations.  In the case of community organizations, I have had the experience a few times of assisting them as the organization was being formed; that included writing their By-Laws (like a Constitution).  I also did the same with a couple of larger library organizations of which my library was a member.  

I have also, over the years, worked with many library boards and municipal councils and know how they work.  I've also seen that regardless of the purpose and function of any organization, the individual members and their personalities, strengths and weaknesses, affect the operations.

"Story:"

I worked as a branch librarian in a town (which will remain unnamed) in the San Francisco Bay Area, for a while. I was warned to be careful around a particular Town Council member, an older man who'd been on the council for a long time.  

Apparently, one of the things he liked to do was to spend time at the Corporation Yard, the town's place where they house and maintain the town's vehicles. This particular operation varies from town to town depending on the budget and the facilities they have.  In any case, this old fart liked to drive the vehicles around the parking lot of the Corporation Yard and he was allowed to do that.  It's just not acceptable behavior but some people get away with things.  

Why is it a problem?  THINK!!  They aren't his vehicles; they're bought with tax-payers' money.  Some of them, like fire engines, are enormously expensive and are expected to last as long as possible.  Is he going to pay for the gas, any repairs that might be needed?  Unlikely.  In addition, by being on a town's vehicle, any injury he might incur - who's going to pay for that?

Some of us understand all of that without explanation; we were raised with boundaries.  Some of you might not understand if you were not so raised.

People who think they have the right to take advantage of their position, whatever that might be, are problems and potentially dangerous, in various ways, for others around them.  They can be stopped but the repercussions can be as much of a problem as the bad behavior.

So, local councils and boards are much like Congress and the Senate.  They are elected officials, entrusted to represent the best interests of their constituents and OUR country.  But, they are just people.  When we elect them, we don't know them, we hope they'll make things better or leave things in good shape.  There are little guidelines in OUR Constitution about how they should do their jobs.

When the Constitution was written and the country was being formed, things were much different than they are now.  The federal government operated much like local councils.  Now, many of them are making decisions far beyond their abilities.  It's really frightening.

In any case, as early as Civics class in high school, I have questions and opinions about how the process of government worked, thus this blog.

Elections

 While I began a review and analysis of OUR Constitution in my last blog, there is little time before the next federal elections, so, I'm switching to issues which need to be addressed.  I will get back to that.

Just a reminder -- I am not a member of any political party and expect that to be the case for the rest of my life.  I feel very strongly that the 2 major parties are most of the problem with our political system.  

Our sitting president has decided to withdraw his candidacy and is endorsing our Vice President as the Democratic candidate for the presidency.  So, I'm taking a look at information about our federal elections including what's in OUR Constitution.  That will take a few days. 

So, this is it for now; except that I feel very strongly that every Citizen has the right to vote; the right to a secret vote; and the right to not vote.  However, the last should be clear, to everyone, more or less, that to not vote means you're excluded from being represented.

Onward. 

Analysis of our Constitution and more: paragraph 1

 Analysis of our Constitution and more: 

The writers of out Constitution were people, imperfect people.  They didn't all agree on every little detail in the end product.  I'm not a Constitutional scholar; just an ordinary citizen. These are simply my opinions.  I do, however, have over 37 years in public service, in 4 states, in multiple libraries working for the boards and sometimes municipal councils.  There is a process of arriving at decisions and results that is commonly accepted, with some variations.  Some of you think that's part of the problem but it's certainly a lot better than yelling and screaming and shooting at each other to solve problems.  It's called being civilized.

There is a great deal in the Constitution that has been amended; there's a great deal that still needs to be amended.  Rewriting the entire thing as some have proposed and even I have considered would be a dangerous thing, especially in times like today when people are so at odds because we live in a country that has long been established, has history, a body of laws, a stable, though varied cultured and an attempt to start over would be enormously disruptive and could lead, today, to potentially unresolvable conflicts and violence.  Better to write more amendments. 

 Using a transcription of the original Constitution with the original spellings and capitalization, the original words will appear in “  “ and bold font.

 An analysis and suggestions will follow:

The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

 “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

 This introductory paragraph of our Constitution outlines the purposes of the establishment of the nation and the primary functions of the government:

•     …to form a more perfect union,…

·        …to establish Justice,…

·        …to insure domestic tranquility,…

·        …to provide for the common defense, …

·        …to secure the blessings of liberty…

 Many of these are vague, some are/were debatable.  The vaguery can be seen as necessary because we cannot know the future or the needs of the people in that future.  To be too specific, would mean endless amendments and laws to cover all the possibilities.  So, general principles are presented. 

 I think, in view of today’s citizens, there may be a strong debate about establishing a union; and where is the definition of “perfect”.  Even as the Constitution was being drafted, there may have been some who came to this continent without a thought of their relationship with the rest of the people here.  The divisiveness of today could destroy our “union”.  Do the majority think the country is worth preserving?

 To insure domestic tranquility and to provide for the common defense seem fairly straightforward aims.

 To establish Justice and to secure the blessings of liberty are the most vague but the phrasing of each seems quite telling.  To establish Justice seems clear that the government will take on that responsibility for the citizenry.  It seems to establish the authority of the federal government.  To secure the blessings of liberty, to this reader, is a foolish promise.  First, you have to define liberty, then the blessings of liberty and exactly how are either to be secured.  One can argue that life itself does not do that.  It is, perhaps, why we have so many laws and regulations that are unenforceable.  Certainly, there is nothing in this paragraph limiting liberty as one might anticipate that the liberty of one will undoubtedly sometimes conflict with the liberty of another.

 The paragraph is, in part, a bombastic pronouncement of the intentions of the drafters of our Constitution.  It is an official decree of the establishment of a federal government. The more concrete intentions are acceptable; the others wishful thinking.

No suggestions for improvement here.

There is a page, see the menu at the top of the blog, with the entire text of our Constitution.

Comments are welcome.