Thursday, January 13, 2005

You Can't Mess with the Constitution, but We Can

One aspect of politics today that I cannot abide by is the rhetoric that gets employed whenever the Republicans begin a drive to amend the Constitution in one way or another. "Oooo," says the nearest available Democrat for comment (statistically speaking, most likely the Rev. Al Sharpton), "You're messing with the Constitution!"

Now in terms of the individual merits of the amendment drives such criticism can be either more or less justified, but what gets me is the Democrats posing as some sort of bastion of protection for the Constitution. Dems are much more likely to advocate blithely changing fundamental aspects of the Constitution to suit their own narrow interests, and often without going through the amendment process at all. One example is the agitation to scrap the Electoral College (which I will get into at a later date.) A newer example is a call to revoke life tenure for Supreme Court justices. (See, Roots grow deeper on the Supreme Court)

Now, you can make the argument for changing life tenure, although I find the arguments presented in the above linked article more than slightly silly, but you cannot then claim that isn't "messing" with the Constitution. And when you read statements like:

Changing the Constitution to limit the tenure of justices - 18 years is a number many scholars advocate - or to establish a mandatory retirement age, will be an uphill battle, though Congress may be able to address the issue through legislation.

Everyone should be glad that the Republicans are at least following the Constitutionally proscribed method for altering the way we run this country, and not just making it up on the fly. That may be small consoloation, but that is a lot better than no consultation.

No comments: