When it comes to the Constitution, there are two main camps – the Constitutionalists and the “Living” Constitutionalists.   The Constitutionalists believe that the Constitution of 1787 can work at all times.  The Framers’ Constitution has guided this nation for most of the first two centuries and has rendered the freest, most prosperous, and most creative nation in the history of the world.

Then there are the liberals, who believe that the Constitution (and it interpretation) must “evolve” with the times and therein lies the problems we face today.  Proponents of the “21st century constitution” or “living constitution” aim to transform our nation’s supreme law beyond recognition – and with a minimum of public attention and debate.  Indeed, if there is an overarching theme to what they wish to achieve, it is the diminishment of the democratic and representative process of American government.  It is the replacement of a system of REPUBLICAN government, in which the Constitution is largely focused upon the architecture of government in order to minimize the likelihood of abuse of power, with a system of judicial government, in which substantive policy outcomes are increasingly determined by federal judges.  Rather than merely defining broad rules of the game for the legislative and executive branches of government, the new constitution would compel specific outcomes.

Forms of the Founders’ Constitution would remain – a bicameral legislation, periodic elections, state governments – but the important decisions would increasingly be undertaken by the courts, specifically the federal courts.  It will be the California referendum process writ national, a process by which the decisions of millions of voters on matters such as racial quotas, social services funding and immigration policy have been routinely overturned by single judges acting in the name of the Constitution – not the Framers’ Constitution, but a “constitution for our times”, a “living constitution”.

One of the liberals’ favorite argument for a “living constitution” is the “the founding fathers could not have predicted …. (insert favorite liberal cause or ideology here).  That is where they ignore the obvious.  The Framers put into place a means for the nation to amend the Constitution – to change it “with the times”.  This process has worked for over 200 years.  But this would put too much power into the hands of the people and not that of the politicians and their special interests (as we have seen in the last 40 years).  This process has been undermined time and again to the point where many “rights” have been granted through creative interpretation.

The Framers, through long experience of witnessing abuse of power, knew what they were doing when they wrote the Constitution, it amending process and its Bill of Rights, which specifically addressed situations and solutions to conditions that are not covered in the Constitution.  Too bad, MODERN liberals and their activists do not understand (or choose not to) these basic principles.  It is time that they did.