If
only the stakes weren't so high. But they are. Politics isn't for
the faint of heart. Perhaps it doesn't involve the actual shedding
of blood – though popular literature, films, and television
sometimes posit otherwise – but American politics suggests boxing
or cock fighting to the observer. There is certainly a battle going
on. And no quarter is given, No handicap is awarded, though many
handicaps exist. Indulging in some mixed athletic metaphors, there
is a toe-to-toe fight between the players who are racing to the
finish line. No holds are barred. In addition, unfortunately, all
teams are often off-side.
A
chess match may be a more fitting analogy, yielding less actual
blood, but a battle nonetheless. It surely includes the jockeying
for position, and no moves seem to be barred – no matter how
unseemly they appear. The rules are sometimes ignored by all
participants in the quest to outflank the opposition. Consequently
wiliness, response to attacks, and unexpected moves characterize the
competition. Winning is the only thing.
Our
Constitution is now over two-and-a-quarter centuries old. It
originated as a document designed to unify a number of states with
conflicting interests, but with a need for common defense. Having
separated from the British Empire there was a need to establish a
stable government for a new nation, and our founding fathers, under
the influence of European political philosophers, and by the hand of
James Madison, produced a system of government that, with the
approval of the citizens of the new nation, has become a model for
many subsequent democracies.
Creating
our country required a document that would balance many competing
philosophies, wishes, and economic realities, and be acceptable to
voters. And it needed to provide a framework for governing long into
the future. The debates were illuminating, but they were heated.
Ultimately, however, they generated a system acceptable to a majority
of delegates and to the voters in the new states.
An
important element was a system of checks and balances designed to
ensure the control of each of the branches by the others, with none
preeminent. And there was a careful delineation of the
responsibilities of each, and allowance made for the states to have
responsibility for whatever was not covered by the text as written.
The document wasn't complete, requiring amendment immediately, but
provision for doing so was built into it. The founders realized that
change would be necessary, and they provided for that need. They
were building “a more perfect Union,” and there had to be a way
to correct imperfections when they were discovered.
As
opposed to chess, though, American politics scorns the “check” as
all of the participants seek the checkmate. And there are frequent
instances when our government is out of balance. It's often difficult
for the amateur to follow, and participants have staffs and playbooks
to guide them – outlines of previous matches, devices that they
will either cite or ignore depending on the utility of doing so.
They're more knowledgeable and better prepared than we. They're
aware of the Constitution and the way to change the rules. But
that's too hard, and there's no guaranty that things will go their
way. Perhaps, amendment is possible, but change more often happens
ad hoc. It's whatever some party can get away with.
In the struggle for dominance in the present and future, they pay no
mind to the past. And they demand dominance of the Federal
government, not the states.
Moves,
also, bring chess to mind. The Judiciary, as exemplified by the
Supreme Court, seems to favor the approach of bishops,
notwithstanding the First Amendment. As the Church may interpret the
Bible, the Court “interprets” the Constitution, finding meanings
that no one else can see. That means moving obliquely, and, by doing
so, overpowering both the Legislative and Executive branches. They
have conquered Congress, by deciding what its words mean (and their
understanding is final, not Congress's intent) and, the President, by
deciding which of his actions (according to their view) falls within
the guidelines set by the Constitution.
Not
to be outdone, Congress moves more in the manner of rooks – “in a
straight line … in a rank [and] file” (I took slight liberties
with the definition in The American Heritage Dictionary) and with
force based on party loyalty. They march together. Although
devotees of the board game usually refer to the pieces as “castles,”
the meaning of “rook” as a swindler should not be overlooked, nor
should their resemblance to confused birds in a rookery. Their
advantage in the infighting is that they may choose not to fund
Presidential initiatives, and the Senate may defeat the nomination of
a Supreme Court Justice.
The
greatest threat to all the other players, however, is the Executive
branch, led by the President, who commands all the moves of the
queen. He moves in an unpredictable manner in any direction and can
go as far as he wants to in order to avoid the domination of the
others, or in order to destroy them. The queen wants to be king.
(Transgender issues, and the President's sympathy, will be addressed
at another time. This is intended as a discussion of power.) The
President takes an end-run around the Senate when necessary (as it
was when he wanted approval of a treaty – which he decided to call
an “agreement – with Iran), pressures Congress in general using
his “bully pulpit” (and the control of the media enjoyed by the
office) to convince them of our country's needs – as he sees them,
and as they and the voters should see them. And he employs
“Executive orders” to enact whatever legislation he desires, even
though the power to do so is not in the Constitution. Like the Court
and Congress, he wants to win. He he wants to be in charge. And he
wants to leave office as world champion.
And,
of course, there are the pawns. Us. We, the People of the United
States. We sponsor the match and pay for the tickets. In theory we
control everything through our franchise. But, as in chess, we can
be sacrificed. The bishops, rooks, and queen have their way with us.
We can be manipulated for their ends. We may have the vote, but the
branches of government have control. In theory they are our
servants, but in reality we are there to serve them.
Every
now and then there arises among us a knight. He is prepared to go
over and around the system, but he is too often defeated or directed
by the others. That's the way it is with knights. They owe their
loyalty, and their future positions, not to the people from whom they
arise, but to their superiors. So we are left to do and die as good
soldiers. Though we're the majority, we have little power.
In
a way, it's all entertainment. It's bread and circus. It's an
elaborate bullfight. It keeps us busy as they compete with each
other for mastery. Sadly we ignore the warning of the red cape but
are fascinated by the battle taking place. We don't recognize that
it is our Constitution that is dying before our eyes. All the rest
is bull.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I know you agree, but you can leave comments anyway.