![]()
|
Jewish World Review Feb. 11, 2009 / 17 Shevat 5769
The Hell with Our Constitution
By Walter Williams
![]() | |
|
| |
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
Dr. Robert Higgs, senior fellow at the Oakland-based Independent
Institute, penned an article in The Christian Science Monitor (2/9/2009)
that suggests the most intelligent recommendation that I've read to fix
our current economic mess. The title of his article gives his
recommendation away: "Instead of stimulus, do nothing seriously."
Stimulus package debate is over how much money should be spent, whether
some should given to the National Endowment for the Arts, research
sexually transmitted diseases or bail out Amtrak, our failing railroad
system. Dr. Higgs says, "Hardly anyone, however, is asking the most
important question: Should the federal government be doing any of this?"
He adds, "Until the 1930s, the Constitution served as a major constraint
on federal economic interventionism. The government's powers were
understood to be just as the framers intended: few and explicitly
enumerated in our founding document and its amendments. Search the
Constitution as long as you like, and you will find no specific
authority conveyed for the government to spend money on global-warming
research, urban mass transit, food stamps, unemployment insurance,
Medicaid, or countless other items in the stimulus package and, even
without it, in the regular federal budget."
By bringing up the idea of constitutional restraints on Washington, I'd
say Dr. Higgs is whistling Dixie. Americans have long ago abandoned
respect for the constitutional limitations placed on the federal
government. Our elected representatives represent that disrespect. After
all I'd ask Higgs: Isn't it unreasonable to expect a politician to do
what he considers to be political suicide, namely conduct himself
according to the letter and spirit of the Constitution?
While Americans, through ignorance or purpose, show contempt for our
Constitution, I doubt whether they are indifferent between a growing or
stagnating economy. Dr. Higgs tells us some of the economic history of
the U.S. In 1893, there was a depression; we got out of it without a
stimulus package. There was a major recession of 1920-21; though sharp,
it quickly reversed itself into what has been call the "Roaring
Twenties." In 1929, there was an economic downturn, most notably
featured by the stock market collapse, after which came massive
government intervention you might call it the nation's first stimulus
package. President Hoover and Congress responded to what might have been
a two- or three-year sharp downturn with many of the policies President
Obama and Congress are urging today. They raised tariffs, propped up
wage rates, bailed out farmers, banks and other businesses, and financed
state relief efforts. When Roosevelt came to office, he became even more
interventionist than Hoover and presided over protracted depression
where the economy didn't fully recover until 1946.
Roosevelt didn't have an easy time with his agenda; he had to first
emasculate the U.S. Supreme Court. Higgs points out that federal courts
had respect for the Constitution as late as the 1930s. They issued some
1,600 injunctions to restrain officials from carrying out acts of
Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court overturned as unconstitutional the New
Deal's centerpieces such as the National Industrial Recovery Act and the
Agricultural Adjustment Act and other parts of Roosevelt's "stimulus
package." An outraged Roosevelt threatened to pack the Court, and the
Court capitulated to where it is today giving Congress virtually
unlimited powers to tax, spend and regulate. My question to my fellow
Americans is: Do we want a repeat of measures that failed dismally
during the 1930s?
A more fundamental question is: Should Washington be guided by the
Constitution? In explaining the Constitution, James Madison, the
acknowledged father of the Constitution, wrote in Federalist Paper 45:
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal
government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State
governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised
principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign
commerce." Has the Constitution been amended to permit Congress to tax,
spend and regulate as it pleases or have Americans said, "To hell with
the Constitution"?