U.S. needs to restore the Constitution

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Ldurant580 Washington, 00
    Sept. 24, 2012 12:34 p.m.

    I agree with the article. The fundamental problem with the 17th Amendment is this: because U.S. senators no longer work for, or represent their state governments, states have lost any meaningful voice or political influence over the national government. The Framers understood this, which is precisely why their original intent was for the Senate to protect the sovereignty of the states against this very kind of encroachment. The document the Founders provided is much different than the one our government is now operating under. Restoration of constitutional principles as envisioned in the original document is the solution.

  • Liberdee St. George, 00
    Sept. 24, 2012 11:25 a.m.

    I enjoyed the words of Utah's Senator Orrin Hatch: "Brilliant as the Founders were, they could not fully envision our day. "Strict construction" suggests looking backward to their time and basing new law on society as it was then. But society will never be as it was then...the Constitution is America's North Star - a fixed beacon by which our nation can always navigate safely, as generations of mariners have done on the open seas. We need to understand the original intent of the Founding Fathers, and factor in unique changes two centuries later."

    I made a goal to read and study and understand the American Constitution this year. It has been a privilege to do so and I hope God will guide our hearts and hands to use its principles to bless us all.

  • Mary Jo Mapleton, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 12:52 a.m.

    The original form of the Constitution of the United States was based upon intensive study of government forms to derive a system designed to sustain and protect basic human rights. The genius of it was to locate government decision making to the largest degree possible, close to those involved in the consequences of the government action. The concerns that some perceive to be flaws in the original Constitution were deliberate limitations on centralized power in matters known by the founders to be best considered, argued and decided at local levels in the towns, cities, and states. Citizens in the individual communities were to decide the issues in the manner that most suited their unique locale and populations. The usurpation of these decisions into the distant and insensitive federal government has caused the abuses of individual liberty through hyper-regulation, financial burdens and the destruction of the unity and distinctive moral character and culture of communities. We do need to reaffirm the value of self-governed people and declare their independence of big government manipulations. We need new amendments to overturn the ill-considered amendments that removed power from the people and placed it in petty, bureaucracies and bureaucrats. Yes restore!

  • DVD Taylorsville, 00
    Sept. 20, 2012 8:50 p.m.

    One area of constitutional restitution would be the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Privately managed prisons may be saving us in taxes, but look at the daily life inside there. Reforming? Not likely. Cruel and unusual, very likely.

  • EJM Herriman, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 6:39 p.m.

    Dump rake: your posting about the Constitution not being taught in schools, in and by itself, is so inaccurate that I had to answer. It is taught n high schools. As a high school teacher of American History I can tell you it is taught. 12th graders must take a semester class of American Government in which the Constitution is taught. A State of Utah graduation requirement. Please before anyone else makes a posting like this have your facts correct.

  • ConstitutionalEd Orem, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 2:17 p.m.

    In my experience the agreements and disagreements posted here are over different perspectives of the same history. It's very difficult to find masses of people in the U.S. that have the same understanding of the history of the Constitution. It concerns and disappoints me to hear the self-righteous attitudes of some on here, who think because of their education, they, and only those with similar education, are the only ones qualified to discuss the matter. While everyone should be welcome to the conversation, the education provided students in today's universities on the subject of the Constitution (with any depth, this usually revolves around case law from 1900 on), is just simply corrupt, and does not necessarily qualify you on the subject. An in-depth study of the Founders' intent for the Constitution, by their own words (not a Harvard, Yale, Columbia Progressive) reveals a very different story than what is being taught in our schools. I've spent thousands of hours studying this subject from the Founders' view, and from modern views - Mr. Jackson's assessment is absolutely correct. I believe if we all sat down and shared information long enough, we would eventually agree.

  • LTP Sandy/USA, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 12:16 p.m.

    I'm glad to see an article advocating the Constitution the Founding Fathers gave us. I agree with William Gladstone when he said, "The American Constitution is, so far as I can see, the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man."

  • jbarr North Ogden, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 11:22 a.m.

    This is an excellent article! JOHN C.C. from payson - We can and should "restore" the constitution by repealing ammendmants that have destroyed the rights of the states and the protection for the people that it used to provide. Repeal the 16th and 17th ammendmants!

  • Homemaker for Liberty Kaysville, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 10:49 a.m.

    Thank you Al for your insightful article. This is obviously a product of in-depth study of the US Constitution from the viewpoint of our Founding Fathers. History has a way of repeating itself because people refuse to learn from the past. At a time when our nation is in rapid decline, we would be wise to learn from our Founders who faced tyranny, believed in God, and sought His inspiration in creating the best form of government known to man.

    The Constitution is an inspired document. The Bill of Rights provides a great example of amendments used to clarify the meaning of the Constitution. However, amendments that were added in the late 1800s and 1900s were created by less inspired men and altered the protective chains of the Constitution to open the door for tyranny. The original Constitution provided for a strong government at a local, state, and federal level but protected us from BIG government where all power resides in a single authority. At this time, when our liberty is at stake, we would all be better off if we studied the Founding Fathers and the incredible Constitution they provided for us.

  • dumprake Washington, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 9:58 a.m.

    The problem is this: the U.S. Constitution is no longer taught--anywhere. It is not taught in elementary schools, junior high schools, high schools, or college--it is gone from the classroom. It has been replaced by Black Studies, ESL, and a myriad of silly, social engineering nonsense. The constitution is not respected because it is not taught, nobody knows the first thing about it anymore. And worse, we have a president who disdains the constitution, who does not like it because it limits his power. Exactly! And we have a supreme court infected with justices who have such a bizarre understanding of the constitution that they seriously, now, consider legal opinions from other countries when ruling upon cases in the United States. And we've allowed the United Nations to replace the constitution as the dominate discussion point on most every topic. The UN is so lost in a wasteland of contradictions, it's embarrassing. Correcting this will require the complete replacement of our educational system, top to bottom.

  • bandersen Saint George, UT
    Sept. 20, 2012 7:36 a.m.

    The ignorance hear is mind boggling. Words have meaning. The constitution is what is is and if you don't know the meaning of the words, you have partisanship bickering over issues that are already answered in this document. If you don't understand words, or don't believe in it, then write a new one, get rid of it, but don't say that you believe in it, then espouse ideas that have nothing to do with it. That is arrogance and pride. Ignorance of the consitution and its meanings is no excuse. It was written for a anyone with a limited reading ability to understand. It doesn't need to be quibbled about, rewritten, or complained about. It is the best charter for freedom the world has ever known. Protect, defend it, and read it. Let the pundits, the corrupt politicans, and arrogant manipulators tell us what they think it means or want it to mean. It is simple. Just follow it and quit making excuses!

  • durwood kirby South Jordan, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 8:49 p.m.

    I don't know of any other way to put it. I have a difficult time believing that all of those folks who are ranting about the Constitution have actually put much time into the study of it. However, I find it easy to believe that those same people have donated lots of effort studying other folks' commentary on the subject.

    Read the Constitution and associated case law, including Supreme Court decisions. Second-hand opinions from pseudo experts isn't good enough, not on a subject this important.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Sept. 19, 2012 8:30 p.m.

    Moab, UT
    Sorry Blue devil. If one is fined by one of these Fed agencies (States have them too), you are deemed guilty unless you can prove your innocence"

    That would be completely true if before you were fined you were not notified of the issue before hand. But in most cases, if not all, the one being fined knows well and good this is coming at them. The idea that the government one day out of the blue and just fines you... doesn't happen that way very often. I have had my own "misunderstandings" with the IRS, and not one time was the issue not able to be resolved.

    But maybe I am just lucky....

  • John C. C. Payson, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 12:54 p.m.

    You can't both support the Constitution and oppose its amendments. They are the Constitution.

    You don't "restore" the Constitution. You are for it the way it is written, you are against it, or you propose another amendment.

    The author makes as much sense as a member of an anti-government militia calling himself a "patriot."

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 12:26 p.m.

    There was only one brief moment when the U.S. economy constituted 50% of world GDP. That was immediately following WWII, when most other industrial powers lay in ruins. Our share of world GDP today is in the low 20% range, just about where it was in 1900.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2012 12:23 p.m.

    I wish the Author would tell us what his education and qualifications are in support of his views on the Constitution.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 9:38 a.m.

    Let's see, . . . "The Constitution they gave us resulted in only 6 percent of the world's population producing over half of the wealth of the world in less than 100 years from its inception." Is the Constitution solely responsible for this? Seems a little overstated.

    "As a result [of both houses being beholden to the people], our national debt is an astonishing $16 trillion, we're over-regulated, over-taxed and over-burden with problems that Washington, D.C., is incapable of fixing." No, the national debt is $16 trillion because of unnecessary tax cuts, loose regulation on Wall Street, and two ill-advised wars. And we're not overtaxed or overregulated. We're actually undertaxed and underregulated in many significant ways.

    "Problems such as . . . regulation of businesses . . . are better solved at the state and local level." Even when they involve multinational corporations? What a naive view of reality.

    Yes, "the system is broken," but the Constitution doesn't need to be restored; it needs to be revised to make it more relevant to the 21st century, which has issues the Framers didn't account for because they lived in a primitive, agrarian society.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Sept. 19, 2012 9:21 a.m.

    The Constitution needs revision to negate the effects of the Citizens United decision. We now have the best government(s) that money can buy. Wake up people before democracy ends, if it hasn't already.

  • KDave Moab, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 9:16 a.m.

    Sorry Blue devil. If one is fined by one of these Fed agencies (States have them too), you are deemed guilty unless you can prove your innocence. If you don't have $100,000 or so laying around to use to fight the Fed Gov. that is just too bad for you. You may call that "due Process, I don't.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 8:23 a.m.

    I found 19 resolutions that the present Congress proposed for "balanced budget amendments." Fourteen of these House and Senate resolutions were presented by Republicans,
    and the Flag Desecration amendments,
    the Christian amendments,
    the Human Life amendments,
    the School Prayer amendments,
    the Pledge of Allegiance amendments,
    Equal Opportunity to Govern [the Arnold Schwarzenegger for President] amendments,
    repeal the 17th amendment amendment,
    Federal Marriage amendment,
    repeal the 22nd amendment amendment,

    I could go on and on....

    The point is this;
    For those who SAY they are the ones protecting the Constitution,
    The Republicans are constantly trying to CHANGE the Constitution.

    However --
    I did support the ERA,
    And would fully and happily support Sen Tom Udall's amendment proposal to overturn Citizen's United and Corporate personhood.
    FYI Sen Udall is also a Mormon...and a Democrat.

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 7:04 a.m.

    Are you arguing that we should adhere to Article IV, Section II for instance?

    Corporations are NOT people and MUST be regulated; otherwise we get what we deserve from these greedy entities. We're not "over regulated".

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    Sept. 19, 2012 6:46 a.m.

    I agree with this article. As will most of the posters to follow.

    I also agree when Mr Jackson wrote - "Our problems are not Democratic or Republican. The system is broken, and the reparation needed is the restoration of the Constitution."

    And I believe that those on the left will agree with the above statement and those one the right will place all the blame on the Democrats.

    Can you say "denial"?

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 6:44 a.m.

    The original constitution was a step up, but still a very flawed document. It had major flaws. It allowed slavery. Only male land holders could vote. One of the ammendments that followed fixed this. Contrary to what the Al Jackson the author of this opinion piece claims, ammendments as a whole have improved the constitution, not degraded it.

  • UtahBlueDevil Durham, NC
    Sept. 19, 2012 6:06 a.m.

    "Today, any agency (IRS, EPA, OSHA, etc.) of the Federal Government can come into your home or place of business to fine you, garnish your wages, shut down your business or imprison you, and there is no one at the state level who can stop them. "

    It is called due process.... and in none of these cases your represent here is the right to due process suspended. Not at the state level, but at a federal court level. If you break federal law, you handle issues in federal courts. If you break a state law, it is handled in state courts.

    The notion that because states can't intercede in matters of federal law constitutes a constitutional crises makes one wonder if the author understands constitutional law in the first place. And honestly, if this is all getting back to whether the government has the right to tax, I think we need to be really careful about winding back the clock to the state of constitutional law back at the time of the founding fathers. If we were to do that, 70 percent of Americans would loose their right to vote with the stroke of a pen.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 5:41 a.m.

    This letter really isn't about the Constitution, or the ability of our nation to govern ourselves under it in a way that responds to changing times and circumstances. It's more about advocacy for the writer's political perspective. Don't let yourself be deceived.

  • A voice of Reason Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 19, 2012 5:34 a.m.

    If more Americans had a decent education and actually were allowed to be taught the principles in the Constitution, then a great many more in this country would be concerned with our current government and the idea of a social government.

    I got news for you, it may eventually hang by a thread- but the constitution will be upheld in the end.