Over the last 50 plus years, there has been a gradual erosion of the system of checks and balances in the US. This chipping away over time has allowed for blurring of the clear lines of power and responsibility that were initially established. This can become dangerous to our liberty. Examples are administrative law, legislating from the bench, and over-use of Executive orders.
This chipping away and erosion generally increases the power of the federal government and decreases the power of the individual states. This is a goal of a belief called Progressivism. People who believe progressive political philosophy feel that we would be a better people if we allowed the federal government to have the power to control the government and take care of more and more of our needs.
With this increase in government dependency comes a decrease in belief that each individual, given freedom and liberty, can provide for their needs and the needs of their family. We begin to think of government as the Nanny, constantly providing for the needs of the children (dependents). Many times, we refer to groups who believe in increasing the power of the federal government as Progressives, or more commonly, Liberals.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” Ronald Reagan, A Time for Choosing, Oct. 27, 1964
I will present some information about some of the ways that have been established to chip away and erode the system of checks and balances and thus increase the power and scope of the federal government.
There is a misconception that we have three co-equal branches of government. This is not the case. When the Constitution was written, a greater amount of power was given to the Congress. The Congress controls the monetary funds throughout the government. It has the power to provide funds or withhold them. The Congress could potentially reduce the Judiciary branch to a Supreme Court only, or to reduce the Executive branch by defunding cabinets, departments, and the military. There is almost no constitutional issue that Congress could not ultimately solve if it has the will to do so. The Executive and Judicial branches cannot make this claim.
Administrative Law
As the country grew in size in the last century, there was concern among those in power that the Congress may not be able to handle all the issues that would arise with trying to oversee a large population and a busy industrial nation. Congress started to allow for more government agencies to manage various aspects of a busy industrial population. This is loosely based on Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7 of the US Constitution: “to establish post offices and post roads”. From this, initially Congress could establish mail service (the US Postal Service) and the roads and transportation to get the mail delivered. Since that time, the scope of this responsibility has broadened to include agencies such as Departments of transportation, public welfare, health and human services, public works, energy, environmental protection, etc.
Each of these agencies or independent regulatory commissions then has the power to set regulations dealing with their scope of interest. These regulations become a type of law that has never gone through the established system of making law (Congress). However, even though the Congress has not made the law, the people are still subject to sanctions (fines and imprisonment) if the established regulations are not followed.
The people (we the people) no longer have direct oversight of these agencies, because we do not have the power to elect these regulators or to remove them from office. However, the people are subject to fees charged and sanctions imposed by the agencies if they fail to comply with the established regulations.
Legislation from the Bench
Article 3 of the US Constitution allows for the judicial branch: “The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.”
The Constitution does not definitely state that the Supreme Court has the power to declare laws “unconstitutional”. However, this has been an accepted belief since the precedent-setting case of Marbury vs. Madison in 1803. The details of this case are beyond the scope of this blog, but for more details, please refer to: http://www.lawnix.com/cases/marbury-madison.html.
Depending upon the make up of the Supreme Court, the Justices may take the position that they will interpret the law according to the original intent of the writers of the US Constitution (strict constructionist), or they may decide to take a liberal view of the Constitution and bring other forms of law [such as law from other countries or international law] into their consideration (liberal constructionist or judicial activist).
When the Court takes the position of the liberal constructionist, the Justices have created law that goes beyond the US Constitution and is not written by the Congress. (Common example: Roe v. Wade, 1973)
This chips away at the will of the people (we the people) in that the people do not elect the US Supreme Court Justices nor can the people directly remove them from office. Thus law is established without “consent of the governed”.
Executive Orders
The concept of Executive Orders is loosely supported by:
• The Vestive Clause of the Constitution: “ The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” Article 2, Section 1, Clause 1
• The Take Care Clause: “ he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” Article 2, Section 3
• The Commander-in-Chief Clause: “ The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and the Navy of the United States.”
The President of the United States writes Executive Orders. In some semblance, all Presidents have used them since George Washington. The original intent was to clarify or act to further explain a law put forth by Congress or the Constitution. They were not to be used to make law.
In 1952, President Truman wrote an Executive Order to put the steel mills under federal control. The Supreme Court struck this down because it was considered an attempt to make law.
Over time, this concept has eroded to the point that presently law is made by Executive Order with great frequency. Once again, this robs the people of their voice in how they choose to be governed.
You may be somewhat alarmed by the information that I have presented here or it may be familiar to you. In either case, you will probably ask what we can do about this erosion of our voice in government.
One thing to consider is the importance of elections of public officials. Remember that the Congress could correct most if these issues if they have the “will” to do so. We have to elect those to Congress who do have the will to make the necessary changes. Then we must hold them accountable for their actions once they are in office. Remember that “we the people” have the power to elect and remove from office.
It is vitally important that we pray for our country, and its return to its foundational beliefs.
II Chronicles 7:14: “If My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”
We have been commanded in God’s Word to first of all pray for those in leadership.
I Timothy 2: 1-4 “First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Billy Graham on his 94th Birthday, November 7, 2012: “ The Bible says, ‘Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord’ (Acts 3: 19-21, ESV). Only the Gospel, God’s Good News, has the power to change lives, heal hearts and restore a nation.”
I have hope for the future of this country, but I do believe that we stand now at a crossroad. The voting population is split at almost the 50% point. It is imperative that we turn the country back toward its founding principles. If not, we are at the point of no return and will be looking at a European style of socialism.
Ronald Reagan, in his October 27, 1964 speech, A Time For Choosing, said, “We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.” To read the text of this famous speech: http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/reference/timechoosing.html.
It is my hope that you will read this, post comments, share this with others, and prayerfully consider the suggestions that I am making.
God bless you.
References:
Findlay, Bruce Allyn and Findlay, Esther Blair. Your Rugged Constitution. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1950
McClellan, James. Liberty, Order, and Justice. Indianapolis, Liberty Fund, Inc., 2000
Skousen, W. Cleon. The 5000 Year Leap. National Center for Constitutional Studies, 2006
US Constitution
Billy Graham quote from AFA Journal, Jan. 2013
Reclaiming the Shining City 