The United States Constitution - Preamble
82A Brief Study
The Constitution of The United States of America is a simplistic document by design. I hope to do a study of each section or article in a series. I want to start with the Preamble of the Constitution and move forward. Each with it's own Hub. If this has been done before I apologize but my take on things might differ and the more ideas that are out there, the better.
The Preamble- We the People of
the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish
Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense,
promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the United States of America.
This opening statement is so powerful that to merely skip over it for the "meat" of the document is to disregard the opening ceremonies of every major event in a life. It is to forget the birth of a child, the anniversary of a marriage or the discovery of the continent in the historical context of an American life. While conception of this document was labored over in the Declaration Of Independence and later Articles of Confederation, its birth and that of the nation started with these 52 words.How fitting that every state, the Capitol City of Washington DC and the country as a whole is represented in this founding documents numerical value.
It begins with a statement of whom, "We the People". Nowhere in the history of the world has such a founding document owed to its people its very existence. In every other country on earth any documentation recounting its origins has been given to the people, not created by them. The Constitutional Convention delegates were chosen from 12 of the 13 states to represent their people and their individual state (Rhode Island having sent no delegate). It was we who created this country, the very people who would run it, live under its laws and would preserve it as if it were our own because in fact it was and is our own. "We" would give it life, not have it thrust upon us by others trying to hold us to a preordained station.
Continuing- "...of the United States,". I want to point out the obvious. Notice the word "the" is not capitalized. Until the end of the Civil War the state were referred to as, "the United States are" instead of the now norm of "The United States is". This stems from the idea that the US was a conglomerate of individual states working in unison for a common purpose, not a centralized national unit divided by geographic bounds. In this we have certainly changed.
Continuing- "in Order to form a more perfect Union,". By no means was perfection the ultimate goal as these men understood perfection would not be achieved, but a more perfect union than that as designed under the Articles of Confederation certainly was achievable. The articles lacked the most basic of provisions for allowing the newly formed Federalized government to fund its own actions. It was charged with maintaining an Army in reserve, but had no way to raise funds to pay for such action. National defense was its most important function and without funds it was destined to fail. It held no real power to legislate with all power reserved for the states. This too was failure in the wait as the common good could not always be negotiated at the state level.
Continuing- "establish
Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense,". These three subjects provide the very reasoning for the above statements. There was limited power to create and again, fund a Federal judiciary, no provisions by which to insure tranquility, which even today it is a vague reference to "do good and no harm" in essence, and again national defense was underdeveloped. All the more reason to qualify the desire for a "more perfect union". You can not "provide" that which you are unable to fund.
Continuing- "promote the general Welfare,". Now here above all the other provisions in the Preamble do we find the most maligned, misunderstood and most simplistic to understand statements. In the a fore mentioned "national defense" it is preceded by the word "provide". This was one of the only sole responsibilities of the newly formed Federal government. However, the word "promote" is a very different word. When I tell my kids to drive carefully I am promoting their welfare. When I buy them the car for them to drive, I am providing the car to be driven carefully. When the government funds a research project into cigarette smoking and its possible connection to disease then releases that report to the public, it is promoting the general welfare. When it pays for Health Care it is now providing the General Welfare. The differences here are stark and the contrast can not be ignored. The Federal government is to do those things to which it are prescribed and nothing more. Promote vs. Provide, is the proverbial apples and oranges.
Continuing- "and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity". The "Blessings of Liberty" are best defined in my mind as the ability to live without fear of the government bringing upon you undo stress. You should be free to enjoy a life as abundant as you can create without undo stress on the liberty of others. The freedom to create wealth, buy property, build a future for yourself and your children, to make decisions that are best suited to you and your community and to fell secure in those rights of decision. Your wealth should be able to be passed down to our "Posterity" without fine, without confiscation and without shame or guilt.
Continuing- "do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Ordain is an interesting word as is establish. To create from the ether a nation which is at the same time the sum total of its parts and standing alone against those who would do it harm. The duality of this nation had never before been conceived. That the power granted the Federal Government was merely on loan being sovereign to the states and the people creates another level of duality. And while Republics were not new to the planet, one in which the people themselves sought to create one in order to provide a meaningful institution to work on its behalf was in deed a new concept. Power was shared, or better defined as granted, to the newly formed Federal government by the states and people to do their bidding, where in the past this power was "granted" temporarily to the people from the ruling classes.
We are a dichotomy of terms. A singular nation of individual states governed by the population that retains as its sovereign right the lending for a time their personal responsibilities to those duly elected and drawn upon from the that same population. While it may seem a mess to the uninitiated it is truly a poetry of trust...
But what would I know; I'm just an Average American.
Educate yourself further
 | Amazon Price: $12.48 List Price: $24.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $1.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $18.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $6.00 List Price: $16.00 |
CommentsLoading...
Great Points.
Keep on Hubbing!
Are you saying that Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional?
It's the other way around someone. The banks borrow from the Fed, in order to stay liquid. This is supposed to stave off bank runs and keep banks from having to deal with the consequences of their stupidity. In the past, bank runs kept banks somewhat responsible to their depositors, if the bank acted stupidly, they'd have a run on the bank as depositors withdrew their money and deposited it in another, hopefully more prudent bank.
That's how the Federal Reserve creates money out of thin air and why the purchasing power of each dollar has been declining since the Fed's inception in 1913. Prior to the Fed, the purchasing power of the dollar had remained stable for about a century.
I wonder what you mean by overconsume? The problem as I see it is that we've overproduced in some areas, like housing, due to the insanely low interest rates we've seen over the last decade. Those low interest rates sent the wrong signals to the construction industry and that's why we have the glut of houses on the market that we do today. It wasn't the banks who instigated the slash to 1% prime, but the President of the US. So in that respect the Fed is an unofficial branch of the Federal Government, but unlike many executive branch offices, has no Congressional oversight other than consenting to the President's nomination to the Chairman of the Fed. Finally that nomination, by the President and not the banks, shows that the Fed is indeed a part of the national government and not merely a consortium of banks.
That's not to say that banks don't see any benefit to the arrangement. For one thing they "borrow" money from the Federal Reserve at below market rates and "lend" that money out at market rates, giving them 1-3% more on average in interest than they otherwise would have gotten. Plus they're immune, for the most part, to bank runs, thus enabling them to take risks with depositor's money that they would never have dreamed of before the Fed.
Just in case folks don’t know, every Federal civil servant swears an oath to uphold the Constitution. This includes our President, our senators, our representatives, our Supreme Court, and the military that defends us. This is required by our United States Code, and for some, by our Constitution.
However, it might be a bit presumptuous to assume that everyone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution is actually aware of what it says. In my opinion, ensuring that those who have sworn to uphold the Constitution understand their roles and responsibilities is far more important right now than any one issue.
So, I’ll be looking forward to the further hubs in this series.
A couple of Notes: At one point you indicate “The Federal government is to do those things to which it are prescribed and nothing more.” One of our amendments (10?) specifically addresses this, basically saying, if we did not grant the Federal government a power, then it remains a power or right of the people or of our states.
I like the distinction between ‘provide’ and ‘promote’. Perhaps it is this distinction that led the Congress to include in some of their bills clauses indicating that ‘if any part of this law is deemed to be unconstitutional, then that will not invalidate other parts of the law’. I will be looking forward to the article in your series that talks about the Roles and Responsibilities of the Judicial Branch. Ultimately, they decide the matter.
Keep on hubbing, this will be an interesting series.
someonewhoknows, While not directly connected to the subject matter you bring up some interesting points. A Federal Bank, as the Fed is considered by most is not a new idea, in fact it has been in existence before and the "decommissioned" twice before. The Bank of the United States was eliminated by one sitting President (Jackson I believe) and the Second Bank of the United States was killed by it's own greed and director Nick Biddle but with no regret of Van Buren.
The Fed not being constitutional in the least will be dealt with when I come to the coining of money.
Eovery- As always, I appreciate your continued support.
dfager- I am not saying the Social Security is unconstitutional, the Constitution holds that position. Under the General Welfare "clause", which is not a clause at all but a statement of intent, many government programs have evolved. Liberty, or should I say securing the "Blessings of Liberty" are not served by mandated confiscation of finances from the people for the sole purpose of redistribution. However, in this day and age it is ridiculous to assume that the end of that program can be seen on the horizon, whoever, a plan to bring them closer to the liberty promised in the constitution could be enacted by the people themselves retaining (and by retaining I mean ending a certain pretext of the power and responsibility on loan to the Federal agency) those accounts to be ran as they see fit to run them.
Medicare too is viewed through the prism of the constitution as blatantly unconstitutional as was the attempted take over of Health Care in this country by the current Chief Executive as it was merely an expansion of an already bankrupt program. Personal responsibility is a hallmark of liberty. Pricing would not be so out of control if market forces were at work in this countries health industry. But when the largest "insurer" (Medicare) can mandate specific costs it will reimburse and not reimburse those losses are passed on to other sectors of the industry, in this case the privately insured and uninsured. That is that is the natural balance the market seeks when out of balance by monopolistic forces such as the government flexing the rules to it's benefits. Winners in any fight creates losers.
ledefensetech, You too have a specific view on the Fed, which I am surprised it being discussed at this juncture. But I would remind you and someonewhoknows that smarter men than we have had this debate before, several times, and the ownership of our coinage and treasury is mandated by the constitution to rest with Congress. I will go deeper into that later as I get to that area of the constitution.
Garfield- He who controls the money supply of a nation controls the nation.
“If Americans ever allow banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless”
Thomas Jefferson
Seems Jefferson was well ahead of his own time...
FitnezzJim- I thank you for your comments and will try to keep it interesting. It is indeed the 10 Amendment that confirms those rights not enumerated to the Federal are retained by the states and the people respectively.
Here Here on the blog "Average American," A fine summary of the makeup of our intended republic...great job
Thanks MiWalt.
i wish more people would appreciate, respect and analyze this amazing and special document like you have. this nation would be better off for it if people did. but it makes me feel great to know there are people out there who do realise how rare and special the constitution is. you are right, never before has a government owed its existence to its people since the very beginnings of small government in primitive times. thank you for caring. people take for granted how important and special the u.s. const. is.
Thank you for your informative hub. You made some good points here which I will be able to use on my research on US constitution.
someonewhoknows 2 years ago
I've come to the conclusion that money can be created by doing work,or more accurately paying for work to be done by the "Government" or the "people" as a whole.We can create money and use it to pay for 'public works' as a way of distributing that money into circulation.
The way we get money now is by borrowing it from a privately owned group of banks called the federal reserve.In fact,the"money" they loan is not money at all in as far as it is created out of the debt or I.O.U's that the people themselves agree to pay for,at some time in the future.In reality the fed is using our willingness to back our own money.That's like going to a loanshark who's willing to lend you your own money at interest.That is "INSANITY".I 've always thought it kind of insane that we the people borrow from ourselves,and pay ourselves back,with interest.We are in fact making ourselves impovershed over time by doing that,as inflation causes each dollar to decline in value.
Psychologically speaking,everyone wants more money.This only works,if we overconsume.
Overconsumtion is unsustainable.If,we have more money than we need,then it's value is diminished automatically,if a lot of people are able to buy a limited resource.If,the resource is unlimited,then it's value declines also.