By now you've poured through the bulk of the Constitution and dealt with examples of government dysfunction. Here are links to two articles in the Atlantic that argue in their own ways - that the Constitution written in 1787 is not up to the task of organizing governing in the 21st Century.
- The U.S. Needs a Constitution—Here's How to Write It
- Preserving Liberty Is More Important Than Making a Fetish of the Constitution
I want you to read and digest each and weigh in on their comments. Do they have a point, or does the existing constitutional structure offer benefits they do not take seriously?
For GOVT 2306 students:
This Tuesday is election day. Among the items on the ballot will be the nine proposed amendments to the state constitution. One that I have misgivings about - though I don't know that I oppose it - is Proposition 7.
Here's the language on the ballot:
The constitutional amendment authorizing a home-rule municipality to provide in its charter the procedure to fill a vacancy on its governing body for which the unexpired term is 12 months or less.
This makes it easier for positions in cities to be appointed, rather than elected. It designed to do so when a short period of time exists before an election is scheduled to occur, but I wonder if it might be abused. Will this election allow power to accumulate in the hands of the people given the power to make the appointments? It does allow for efficiency however, so I'm mindful of that, but still...
I want you to familiarize yourself with the amendment and weigh in on this issue. Is Proposition 7 a useful way to increase efficiency in local governments and minimize the costs of elections, or is it a recipe for corruption and a problematic consolidation of power?
