Contracts have been part of my life for a long time. A Deere/UAW contract governed my work life for over 30 years. Car loans, mortgages, charge cards, and insurance policies are contracts. I’ve signed them all. Marriage is a contract. Done that. Dish network, Mid American energy, and Moline’s water dept. will not provide service without a signature. Contracts provide a structure for spelling out obligations and benefits to all parties. We’d have a hard time maintaining a society without them.
Without realizing it, the first contract I entered into was with my country. The Pledge of allegiance, recited by rote in my kindergarten class is part of a contract. It is an expression of one’s obligation to the United States. The Constitution is the framework for the government’s obligations to us, its citizens. It delineates the structure of government’s three co-equal branches, defining the checks and balances they exert over each other. It is a document designed to protect the unalienable rights annotated in the Declaration of Independence. Upon entering the military, I reaffirmed my oath to support and defend it.
Lately, it seems my contract with the United States is being modified without consent. I’ve often heard pundits express opinions that the Constitution is a “living document”. I agree. The Constitution has a mechanism for change, called the Amendment process. It’s cumbersome. It’s designed to be. 2/3 of both houses of Congress must pass a joint resolution to amend and 3/4 of State legislatures must ratify. Very hard to do with less than universal support of the governed.
Myself, and millions of citizens have been fulfilling our obligations to America : We hold jobs, pay taxes, vote, obey laws, and serve in the military. One end of a bargain is being held up. Conversely, we see our Government’s obligation to us being changed outside the process we agreed to.
We’ve recently seen decisions from the Supreme Court ignoring The Constitution as written. Justices have cited “foreign law” in several opinions. Some rulings have usurped legislative authority.
The death of Justice Antonin Scalia’s brought this to a head. A subscriber to the concept of “Originalism”, he based his rulings upon interpretation of the Constitution’s text. A slim 5 to 4 majority (mostly) agreed. His replacement by President Obama with a Ginsberg/Breyer/Kagan/Sotomayer type justice could very well have ended the obligation of the Government to its citizens as we know it. Rulings based upon foreign law, political ideology, or individual Justice’s “life experiences” might become the norm. We really would not have a Constitution.
That, in my opinion, would render my contract with America null and void. I’d be released from my obligations.
Fortunately, the election of Donald Trump may change that. If he nominates a Justice of the ilk he’s promised, the Constitution we all operate under may be saved.
I hope so. A society cannot exist without a clearly understood, fairly enforced contract between the people and their government.
Eugene Mattecheck Jr
A superb commentary!
If there is anyone out there who believes they have an effective counter-argument, I believe readers would be very interested to see it.