Friday, March 29, 2024
Miles from the Mainstream
D. R. ZUKERMAN, proprietor

The Left's War on the Constitution


February 1, 2014 --

The New York Times January 29 editorial on President Obama's State of the Union address announced: "The Diminished State of the Union."

The problem, as stated by the editorial: "Congress has become a dead end for most of the big, muscular uses of government to redress income inequality and improve the economy for all, because of implacable Republican opposition." The paper declared that "it is more important than ever" that President Obama act by executive order. Ignored by the Times is Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution that, with reference to the president, states, in pertinent part: "He shall from time to time give to the congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient...." Article II, Section 3 does not confer on the president any power to issue executive orders to enforce any recommendations from his that Congress ignores, much less confer on the president the power to order Congress to accept his recommendations. And while The New York Times might prefer "big, muscular uses of government," we were assured by James Madison, in Federalist No. 45: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined."

Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist No. 69, explained how the constitutional powers of the president are not the same as the powers of a monarch. LPR would ask The New York Times to show cause why we should not conclude that the editors see the Constitution as conferring the powers of a monarch upon a leftist president -- if, that is, the Constitution is to be given any consideration at all.

The paper's news article on the president's speech began: "After five years of fractious political combat, President Obama declared independence from Congress on Tuesday as he vowed to tackle economic disparity with a series of limited initiatives on jobs, wages and retirement that he will enact without legislative approval."

Where, LPR would inquire, is it stated, in the Constitution, that the president is independent of Congress? How is the concept of an independent president compatible with the concept that the president and legislature, along with the judiciary, are co-equal branches of government.? Why should we not conclude that The New York Times is in the vanguard of the left's war on the Constitution?

(LPR does not expect that the Republican establishment would ever dare accuse the president of waging war on the Constitution.)