Events on Capitol Hill are taking a dreadful path.
Political paralysis has left Congress unable to pass a budget that fully funds the federal government, and the debt ceiling is a fast-approaching economic disaster.
Parks, monuments and museums have closed. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers are furloughed. Small businesses have been cast into limbo. Trade deals are placed on hold. Economic confidence is exhausted. And the durability of the dollar is being questioned.
America’s image abroad, like its economy, has been compromised.
In an age of mass global communication, the eyes of people around the world are locked on Washington. To Americans and foreigners alike, the United States appears weak, fragmented and self-destructive.
In addition, a Gallup report from this past week showed 33 percent of Americans consider dysfunctional government the nation’s most pressing problem— the highest level ever recorded.
Like my fellow Americans, I am angered by this government-induced damage to our delicate economy and world image. So who is to blame?
Democrats. Republicans. Both parties.
Your respective political ideology likely determined your exasperated cry.
But I think the correct question is not “who” but “what” is to blame?
The culprit is the Constitution.
Indeed, the document that enjoys a near-sacred status among Americans is the architect of this political paralysis and the resulting budget and debt ceiling crises that are weakening us today.
Under the Constitution, passing something as simple as a budget at the national level requires the approval of at least three different bodies: the Senate, the House of Representatives and the president. To make matters worse, these separate powers are responsible to vastly different constituencies, further inducing the maddening gridlock and indecision.
This wide division of powers promotes politically expedient finger-pointing rather than actual programs to help rebuild the economy. One branch always has another to blame.
And the deficiencies within the Constitution do not stop at the paralysis it is inclined to produce.
Wyoming and California are each allocated two votes in the Senate, even though the latter has approximately seventy times the population of the former.
Democratic? Not so much.
Furthermore, consider that on four separate occasions in American history, a presidential candidate has won the presidency while losing the popular election. This occurred as recently as the 2000 election, when George W. Bush ascended to the highest office even though Al Gore won the popular contest by more than 500,000 votes.
Confused? Check out Article II and Amendment XII of our beloved Constitution. These statutes provide for a messy and rather undemocratic method of presidential election.
This system forces presidential candidates to focus on just a handful of battleground states, while the others— including the most populous states of California, New York and Texas— are ignored. And as we have seen, the candidate with the most support does not always emerge victorious.
The aim of this disparaging article is not so much to propose solutions as it is to start a conversation about the Constitution and its flaws.
In recognizing the Constitution’s role in the present crisis and its undemocratic edicts, Americans should begin to consider serious reforms to their centuries-old framework.
Indeed, the Founding Fathers chucked the Articles of Confederation upon discovering the depth of its flaws.
I suggest we take heed.
Respond to Derek at