Members of Congress have proposed that each bill on Capitol Hill include a reference to where the Constitution grants them the authority to create the bill. This is a wonderful idea, especially if one considers the implication that this concedes to the Founding Fathers’ idea that the Constitution is meant to be a document of limitation of government power.
It seems that the way the Federal Government has gone about business lately (i.e. at least 80 years, probably longer) is to pass any legislation or executive order that is not specifically forbidden by the Constitution. The primary concern touted by politicians is that something is “for the good of the people,” and when this is at odds with the Constitution, it is attempted anyway in hopes that the courts may overlook it. Is the Constitution no longer good enough for the people?
By citing the authority given to do something in the first place, politicians are ceding that their power lies in what the Constitution expressly tells them to do, and powers that are not articulated are reserved to the states and the people. Federalist No. 84 is a great example of this theory (Alexander Hamilton claims we do not even need a Bill of Rights because ALL rights are reserved to the people, except what the Constitution confers to government: “Why for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?”). In this instance, a major fear of the Founding Fathers has come true. Perhaps, if this effort is taken seriously and is not just lip service, America may find a better future a little closer to its roots. This would be a welcome change.
No comments:
Post a Comment