THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES

 

 

 

 Solon is a connoisseur of constitutions. He respects particularly those which last well. He reveres the Constitution of the United States of America as a magnificently crafted document. It set the fashion for written constitutions, and Solon is of the opinion that if all those directly or indirectly inspired by it to devise new constitutions for their countries had saved themselves a lot of work, and simply copied the US document word for word, latest amendments and all, this planet would probably be a rather happier place.

 

 By and large, the United Sates Constitution continues to function very well indeed. Solon sees no grounds for and much against convening a new Constitutional Convention. But that very far sighted man, Benjamin Franklin, said when the Constitution was new drafted that, with luck, it might endure for 200 years. Since that Constitution has now passed its Ben Franklin maximum certified validity date, Solon was lead to reflect on whether prudence and the common rules of safety suggested that a full and complete inspection and re-certification was required. The danger of such a process would be that of essentially meddling or fussy “improvements” being introduced to the detriment of the whole. But, now that the Constitution functions in a world so different from that envisageable by its drafters, the risks of not undertaking a thorough review are that the rot, decay and slow growing irrelevance to changed circumstances that ultimately confound all human institutions may be developing in ways which we do not detect in the press of current political life.

 

 Solon therefore proposes that the United States should set up an essentially conservative Commission of Constitutional Review. It would probably be best composed of ex Presidents, ex Vice Presidents, former Speakers of the House and retired Supreme Court Justices. The Commission would commission review papers from whomsoever it selected, but would observe the custom of appointing a critic or critics of each paper at the same time as commissioning it.

The Commission would be formally proposed by the current President, on the advice of the Supreme Court, and authorized and approved by Congress. Its life might be four years. Its objectives would be first to recommend what changes in Constitutional arrangements, if any, now appear necessary for the continued  robustness and effective functioning of the Constitution over the next 100 years, and secondly to list any other changes that appear desirable in pursuit of the objectives of the Preamble to the Constitution.

 

 Solon does not presume to suggest what the agenda of such an august Commission should be. He notes, however, a number of questions which have suggested to him that that a deeper investigation might be prudent.

 

 ·        How would Abraham Lincoln become President today? Are unmoneyed people from the grassroots in some way excluded from political eminence now?

·        The power of the vested interest of the incumbent in federal office remains great. Is there any general need for term limitation?

·        Why is voter participation in elections so low? Is this low participation potentially a serious weakness?

·        What exactly is being bought with the very large amounts of money commercial interests (of individuals and of companies) pay into political funds?

·        Why is it still news when a woman or someone of negroid ancestry becomes Secretary of State?

·        What has been the impact of the major international treaties, notably NATO and NAFTA, on the Constitutional position?

·        What is likely to be the Constitutional impact of the growing international commitment to human rights and their enforcement?

·        What is likely to be the Constitutional impact of the growing role of the United Nations and its agencies?

·        The overall effect of many federal programs is to transfer resources for matters in the competence of the individual States between States. How far should such transfers be by formula negotiated between the States rather than by federal intervention?

·        Would the objectives of the Constitution be furthered by a general presumption of decentralization of powers to the most local appropriate level (what the Europeans – proving that they have not yet really adopted English as their common language - call “subsidiarity”.)?

 

 Solon feels that Ben Franklin would have consented to sit on his Commission, at least as an observer.

 

 

 Should you wish to comment, an email to solon@use-solon.org may draw a response.