What’s Wrong with a ‘Living’ Constitution?

POLITICS & POLICY

One of the most adroit bits of leftist phrase-mongering is the contrast between a “living Constitution” (what they want) and the “dead” one (which puts many obstacles in the way of big government).

Professor David Eisenberg of Eureka College has written an excellent essay on the “living Constitution” idea. The difference between the leftist conception and the actual Constitution is not that the latter is dead, but that it was meant to endure.

Eisenberg hits upon the truth when he observes that the “progressive” idea of an easily malleable constitution gives us “illimitable government.” We have been moving in that direction for the last century and, under Biden, we’re moving at nearly the speed of light. Politicians (and too many of the public) assume that any and every problem can and must be solved through action by the federal government.

In hindsight, the Founders look very wise in their efforts at creating a federal government of strictly limited powers.“

Articles You May Like

X launches Stories feature, pushing news to users powered by AI chatbot Grok
Former Georgia Lt. Gov. Geoff Duncan — who identifies as conservative — announces he’ll vote for Biden
Silly Us: Google Regurgitates Typical Excuse After Slashing MAGA Ad
Column: The Public Doesn’t Trust the ‘Democracy-Saving’ Media
MRC VP Dan Schneider Reveals Which Corporations Are ‘Worst Among Al’ Reshaping America

Leave a Comment - No Links Allowed:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *