Burlington High School 
Burlington, Kansas 
Teacher: Mrs. Devra Parker

Miss Use of Enumerated Powers: The End of Our Nation?
By Mason Johnson
12^th grade
 

As of October 24, 2006, our national debt was over eight trillion dollars and has continued to increase at an average of 1.60 billion dollars per day. Each year, Congress misinterprets the Constitution, spending this money on things that the framers of the Constitution never meant for it to be spent on. The Constitution was not created to give Congress an endless amount of power, but instead, it was meant to allow our government to aid the people of our great nation while following the Constitution’s basic outlined principles.

It is safe to say that without a Constitution, our nation would not be what it is today, but what exactly is so great about the Constitution? Why is something that was written so long ago still important today? Many Americans have forgotten that the Constitution is not only a document written hundreds of years ago by our Forefathers, but it is also a living document that still pertains to the matters going on today. The Constitution was created to evolve with our society and, so far has done what it was created to do. The framers of the Constitution were very wise, and took into thought almost every aspect of government before writing the Constitution. It is the manipulative forces behind Congress that have, and will continue to, drive our country into the ground.

When the Constitution was first written, Congress respected it and followed it very earnestly. Bills were thought out very carefully and the full spectrum of law was put into consideration before the bill was even written. Men like Thomas Jefferson defended and fought for the rights of every American citizen. But, now the Constitution is constantly taken for granted and many times disrespected. Congressmen have their own ideas, beliefs, and strategies. They don’t take into consideration whether or not their ideas are constitutional; they simply write their bill and present it to Congress. Congress then use loopholes they find in the Constitution to spend large amounts of taxpayer’s money for these bills to be put into action. This is simply unconstitutional. In no way, shape, or form did the Framers mean for Congress to be able to spend money on whatever it pleased. A set of checks and balances are set up, and without these checks and balances, our nation is doomed. If Congress continues to manipulate the Constitution, people nationwide will continue to lose respect for the great foundation that is our Constitution.

Like I said, Congress manipulates the Constitution. Take, for instance, the Welfare Clause, a clause instigated for good reasons, which is now being used for practically any issue pertaining to money. William Drayton once stated, “If Congress can determine what constitutes the general welfare and can appropriate money for its advancement, where is the limitation to carrying into execution whatever can be effected by money? How few objects are there which money cannot accomplish? Can it be that the great and wise men who devised our Constitution should have failed so egregiously as to grant a power which rendered restriction upon power practically [useless]?” Drayton knew that the Framers intended for our Constitution to be followed precisely and not to be overlooked.

… Roger Pilon suggests that, “Congress should take the lead by engaging in Constitutional debate[s] in Congress, much as happened in the 19th century, thereby encouraging Constitutional debate[s] in the nation.” He went on to tell of how some Congressmen, such as J. D. Hayworth, John Shadegg, Sam Brownback, and Bob Barr, came together and created an informal constitutional caucus during the 104^th...CCongress. In a nut shell, the caucus debated the issue and brought forth some of the menacing problems. Alas, the caucus is waning. Few things are getting resolved and the problem is still at large. Pilon believes that the caucus should be extended and that every Congress member should join the caucus. Perhaps if this takes place, then the issue can fully be taken into consideration and resolved.

The Constitution is much like a parental figure. We Americans look to it for guidance, for, without it, we would not know what to do. As Americans, we have failed to listen to our elders, for we like to think that doing things our own way is fine, and whichever way can give us more power is the way to go. This isn’t the case. We need to get back to our roots and stop allowing this injustice to take place. Stop allowing Congress to pass bills without the Constitution’s consent. Every last governmental body--congress, the Supreme Courts, even the Presidency--has encountered some sort of corruption, thus straying away from the Constitution’s teachings, and it must end now. We MUST take a stand and say that enough is enough, because if we don’t, the debt of our great nation will eat us alive.

Questions Based on the Required Reading and
Your Personal Internet Research

Q1- Explain what Roger Pilon means when he speaks of a bifurcated Bill of Rights. Describe what happened in 1938, according to his testimony.

In referring to the bifurcated Bill of Rights, it says that the bill of rights was split into two parts. The first being the rights like speech and voting, which are classified as fundamental. There are also non-fundamental rights, such as those to do with commercial transactions. In 1938 the court rewrote parts of the constitution. The second of which was of the rewriting of the general welfare clause.

Q2- Give three examples of what is described in the testimony as fundamental rights and three examples of nonfundamental rights. Which of these rights do you, after reading portions of Dr. Pilon's testimony, believe should be subjected to strict scrutiny?

Fundamental rights include speech, voting, and press, while non- fundamental rights would be those like property, contract, and business.

Q3- Define:

Enumerated powers – The concept of enumerated powers says that the legislature may only express those powers that are mentioned in the constitution.

Living constitution – Living constitution can be defined many ways, but can refer to the ability of the constitution to change and evolve through the amendment process.

Politicizing the constitution –Politicizing the constitution is making a controversial issue out of the constitution.

Q4- Why does Roger Pilon claim a living constitution is worse than no constitution at all?

Roger Pilon believed that a living constitution made the constitution look fine from the outside, but allowed the political forces that the constitution is supposed to restrain come forward in full force. He believed that because of this people will come to respect law less and less.

Q5- Explain what is meant by moral legitimacy, political legitimacy and legal legitimacy. Give your own example of each.

Legitimacy on all counts is being completely honest. Political legitimacy deals with political truth-telling and doing what is right; moral legitimacy keeps your standards and morals set on an honest path, and legal legitimacy means sticking to the truth through a legal standpoint.

Q6- Dr. Pilon spends some time enumerating five implications of an illegitimate constitution. Name the five implications and state why one seems to be the most serious in your personal opinion.

The most important of the five implications is loss of legitimacy. It is the most important because in turn we have the ability to make our government have unlimited power if we continue on our current path even though the constitution was set up to have a limited government. The second attack on the constitution’s legitimacy is the confusion in law; how laws can be unconstitutional in themselves and how the courts must decide upon this and whether it infringes upon peoples rights. Not only those two but also the disrespect for the constitution and the law created under it and because the legislature can create laws that encroach upon peoples right to rule of law itself is at risk. The fourth is the implication of the loss of integrity in the constitution and the discipline that comes from that to impose on the government. Finally, there are the economic implications and how our government can mess with the economy and how we need to protect it.

Q7- When he says "those true to its conception as a means of founding, maintaining and promoting a great nation in the public good." is Mr. Frankfurter talking about the wisdom of enumerated powers or the constitution's preordained destiny as a living document?

I believe that Mr. Frankfurter is describing the constitution’s ability to stay current and a living document. He states that “Lawyers' cries of unconstitutionality are nothing to be alarmed about,” because the constitution is a living document and has always been argued since its’ creation.

Q8- Do you agree with Felix Frankfurter, that the Founding Fathers refused to write limitations and qualifications into the U.S. Constitution?

I agree with Felix Frankfurter, because the framers of the constitution left out certain limitations and qualifications for the future, and without this lack of limitations laws would be restricted today to what they were hundreds of years ago, or they would be constantly amended.

Q9- Compare the manner in which the U.S. Constitution was changed after the Civil War with the way changes were made to the Constitution during the New Deal era.

The manner in which the constitution was changed after the Civil War was through the ratification process, while the changes made in the New Deal era were by judicial trickery.

Q10- U.S. Constitution prevents legislators from making the needs of Americans their priority. This paragraph claims that the expressed purpose of the U. S. Constitution is to form a more perfect union and provide for the general welfare. (fill in the blank)

Q11- FDR made a political speech for the times; the eve of WW II. References were made in his speech that may be relevant to our position in the world today. Comment on the similarities.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt talked about how there are always people who see what the government is doing as unconstitutional, and how the way the government is run and what rights and freedoms we can enjoy are enabled to be changed. FDR said that the founding fathers mare the constitution so that it could fit the needs of the people in any age and that is not to be looked at as an old document with old ideas. He said that the constitution is misinterpreted, but it is what we should live by as a whole because it will change to fit the people’s needs, wants, and desires.

Q12- Comment on whether you think the "new idea" come to "dominate thought about government" is still the dominate idea or has the past 70 years turned it into an old idea that needs to be reformed? Make these comments brief as this question is the crux of the paper you will be preparing for submittal.

The government Controls the people, but is ruled by the constitution. Congress has these amended powers that allow almost any type of spending that congress finds necessary. I believe that the people of our nation, after so many years, will lose faith in this body. America is ever-changing, and the Constitution was designed to fit that need. But when the government does something that is not strictly written in the constitution, the outcome in unknown.

Back