9 Comments
тна Return to thread

The document doesn't need repairing - it needs replacing, preferably with a document that supports a Westminster (i.e. parliamentary) style system rather than the Latin American-style presidential system now in place (Look up the stats on which countries besides the US actually have presidential systems. You'll be shocked.)

Expand full comment

Why in the world would we now try to be like the very form of government we rebelled against?

You also discount the sense of tradition, Patriotism and downright love Americans have for their Founding Fathers and the Constitution of these United States.

At present the United States is going through what is undoubtedly a cataclysmic and frightening time. We are in a serious battle for our Democracy. Constant disparaging of who we are, our past and how our Constitution works is untimely to say the least.

Expand full comment

Maybe because it works, for the UK and for most of the world outside of the United States. (And has worked for upwards of a thousand years.) Why would the US want a form of government which is found almost exclusively in South America, and in South American dictatorships at that? There was nothing inherently wrong with the form of government in place in England at the time of the American Revolution - just in its policies toward its colonies in the New World. I grew up in the US and would love to see its brave political experiment succeed, but at the rate things are going, I'm afraid it might not - at least not without some major rethinking.

Expand full comment

Someone asked you what specifically in the US Constitution you thought was in error. Have you answered that?

What exactly isn't working in our Democratic form of government?

Expand full comment

I think the biggest problem is that it allows the states too much latitude in formulating their own laws and policies. This was appropriate for a very young America, which had a small, culturally and ethnically uniform population, occupied a relatively small geographic area, and where, for the most part, the states were on the same page politically. Now that the United States is a huge, multicultural, ethnically diverse conglomeration of 50 individual states, each of which with its own views on critical issues like reproductive rights, voting rights, housing, access to health care, and the provision of a welfare infrastructure, the original constitutional concept has become all but unworkable. (Look what's happened with abortion legislation in Texas, for example.)

Expand full comment

And the Republicans argue for more States' rights whereas the Democrats argue for more Federal control. A perfect example is where President Biden instituted mask mandates which infuriated the Republicans. They prevailed upon the courts who in some cases overturned the mandates. I don't have the specifics on why they overturned the mandates. I don't see where this is the fault of the Constitution but the interpretation.

Expand full comment

It's hard to misinterpret the 10th Amendment "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States are reserved to the States, and to the people." In my way of thinking, this gives the states an INCREDIBLE amount of latitude - a degree of latitude which is literally tearing the US apart.

Expand full comment

Talia I can appreciate your frustration with our Constitution as it has gradually evolved over more than 250 years. Can you describe how we might scrap the present Constitution and create some sort of parliamentary system? As I described in my commentary, the devil is in the details. I donтАЩt foresee such a revolutionary endeavor.

Expand full comment

The question should be: What is in the Constitution that you perceive as not working?

Expand full comment