President
Obama delivered his State of the Union speech before a joint session of
Congress this week, as provided by the Constitution. The pertinent section on
this reads as follows:
“He shall from time to time give
to the Congress Information of the State of the Union,
and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary
and expedient.”
The
Madison Conservative would prefer that presidents follow the example set by
President Thomas Jefferson; he submitted it in writing and left it at that. The
television age has seemingly created the need to embellish the State of the
Union speech and transform a constitutional requirement into a media event.
President
Obama’s speech followed his inaugural address in that it laid out a set of progressive,
liberal priorities for his second term. There are those of the political class
and their media flacks who will debate the feasibility and practicality of his
agenda and the plausibility of its chances for passage through a divided
Congress.
There
was, however, embedded within this speech a statement made that should give
every American pause, for it belies the Presidents’ call for negotiation and
bipartisanship. It carries with it as well a portending of a dangerous assault
on the fundamental structure of a democratic republic designed as an equal
tricameral form of government, with each third having very specific and
purposeful responsibilities delineated in framework.
Contained
within the portion of the speech that spoke to his call to address climate
change, there was proffered this foreboding statement; it is chilling if the
President of the United
States actually means it.
To
wit:
“I urge this Congress to pursue a
bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain
and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act
soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up
with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution,
prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the
transition to more sustainable sources of energy.”
The
telling phrase: “…if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I
will.”
The
president does have the power of executive orders, but this goes beyond that.
This is a threat that if legislative third of our government does not act in
accordance with his wishes and choices, he will act upon what he believes is
his sole prerogative. That is not democracy, that is not constitutional – that
is tyranny.
This
is not hyperbole or hysteria. The President has made clear that he will act if
the Congress does not. Such a statement shows an absolute lack of understanding
of the structure of American democratic self-rule. The president may not act
unilaterally to affect legislation. It is odd that the speech included this
line within the context of climate change, but it will no doubt be used to control
issues well beyond that narrow focus. The president has already affected the
role of government in mandating health care insurance be required of the
citizenry – the first step towards declaring that any form of personal choice
can fall under the guise of being unhealthy and thus be regulated by the government.
The debate on concussions in the NFL is a harbinger of this potential threat to
individual freedom and personal choice. Football violence is unhealthy;
therefore the government has the right to legislate all such activity.
Under
the umbrella of climate change, industry and business will be claimed as negatively
affecting climate change; that factory is emitting greenhouse gases, so the
government must step in and legislate it out of business.
This
is a chilling prospect, borne of a single individual believing he has the sole
authority to act if the representatives of a free people elected to government
do not act as that singular person demands.
Democracy
requires forever vigilance, for all tyranny requires to take root is for good
people to remain silent.
No comments:
Post a Comment