Published: February 24, 2006 01:42 pm         

Power-hungry executive branch

JOHNSTOWN — Power-hungry

executive branch

Bush no different than predecessors

The U.S. Constitution: It is the law of the land, a document every federal official takes an oath to defend and uphold. How they go about it is a different matter.

The passing years since its adoption in 1789 have seen continuing efforts to dilute or change the interpretation of the original document. This has been done by an executive branch seeking more power and latitude than the Constitution provides.

It has been done by the legislative branch seeking to take more control over American life and to strip away responsibilities that rightfully belong to the individual states.

To a large extent, it has been done by the judicial branch in what it has termed an effort to make the Constitution “relevant” to modern America.

We believe the document has been relevant in its original form and strictest interpretation ever since it was written.

There have been countless attempts to amend the Constitution, but only 27 have been successful, which speaks for the strength, vitality and timeliness of the document.

There have been and are Supreme Court justices not content with their role in American life, but eager to legislate through judicial decree. There is no indication that the Founding Fathers, in their ultimate wisdom or lack thereof, intended the courts to take upon themselves the responsibility of writing the laws.

The duties of the president are not enumerated individually, for good reason. They are too numerous, and new situations bring new responsibilities. He is the administrator, the one charged with making sure the government runs as it should within constitutional boundaries.

Sometimes those boundaries appear too restrictive for a president, and he either assumes or asks Congress to give him added powers. The current president clearly believes he has powers beyond those enumerated by the Constitution in some matters. Others before him have felt likewise.

We do not believe the Congress has the power to make any law that conflicts with the Constitution, and we believe it is the duty of the Supreme Court to make sure it does not. Any action contrary to that would require an amendment, for which there is a well-defined procedure.

We strongly believe in the Constitution and its ability to maintain balance in the sometimes weird manipulations of federal government.

We believe interpretations should indicate the intent of the authors and signers of the document, not reflect the whims of those who wish it would say this or that, or should say other than was intended.

Of the 27 amendments, four deal with the election and responsibilities of the president and vice president. They are the 12th, 20th, 22nd and 25th amendments.

For instance, the 20th moved the date for taking office to Jan. 20 from March and provides for the vice president-elect to fill in if the president has not been chosen by that time. The 22nd limits the presidency to two terms.

Some people refer to the Constitution as a sacred document. It is not. It is a document that was written and ordained by free people and should be held in highest esteem.

There is no other like it.

     

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.