Tag: Bill Of Rights

Why Was Bill Of Rights Added?

College of Political Knowledge

Subject:  Early American History/Government

Today is the most important day in our history and we observe it not…..17 September 1787……this document gave birth to a nation….

All of us learned about the forming of the US Constitution….all the debate, the convention and then the ratification process…but how many people know that the Bill of Rights were not part of the original Constitution…..it was added in 1791……

The origins of the Bill of Rights…..were they original thoughts?

The Virginia Bill of Rights (proclaimed in 1776, only days before the Declaration of Independence) was the first of ten such declarations by the states during the Revolutionary War period (1775-83). All of these declarations contained provisions that eventually found their way into the national Bill of Rights. Major portions of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth amendments, for example, can be traced directly to the Virginia Bill of Rights.

The origins of many of the other rights and liberties contained in the Bill of Rights can be found in the English tradition, dating as far back as Magna Carta (1215), a document that marked the first step toward constitutional law in England. For example, the clause in the Fifth Amendment, which declares that individuals cannot be deprived of their “life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” is rooted in Chapter 39 of Magna Carta.

England’s Petition of Right (1628) and Bill of Rights (1689) further expanded individual liberties and placed increased limitations on the ruler’s powers and authority. English liberties and rights, such as trial by jury and protection against self-incrimination and unreasonable search and seizure, were, in fact, included in the charters establishing the American colonies. They were considered to be the “rights of Englishmen.”

Then we ask, why were they introduced after the ratification of the Constitution?

At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, delegates rejected a motion made by George Mason, author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (1776), to preface the Constitution of the United States with a bill of rights. The failure to mention basic rights soon became a major issue in the subsequent debates over whether or not the proposed Constitution would be ratified, or approved.

When the Constitutional Convention ended, delegates went back to their respective states to hold their own ratifying conventions. Each state would decide for itself whether or not to approve the new framework for the American government.

The debate over the need for a bill of rights was sparked by a proposal made by a dissenting minority in the Pennsylvania ratifying convention. Some delegates believed that guarantees of certain basic rights and liberties were missing from the proposed Constitution. They called for a number of amendments that would secure a wide range of liberties, such as the free exercise of religion, freedom of speech and press, and protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Majorities in the ratifying conventions of New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina also called for numerous amendments to the proposed Constitution. Although the substance of these recommended amendments differed from state to state, most contained provisions that would limit the powers of the new federal (national) government and protect the people from inconsistent and oppressive rule.

The Anti-Federalists (those who were opposed to ratifying the Constitution) argued that the broad powers of the new federal government would threaten the powers of the individual states and the liberties of the people. However, the Federalists (those who supported ratification) argued that a bill of rights was unnecessary. Alexander Hamilton, for example, maintained that because the proposed federal government would possess only specifically assigned and limited powers, it could not endanger the fundamental liberties of the people. “Why,” he asked, “declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?”

Nevertheless, the Federalists had to pledge their support for the addition of a bill of rights to the Constitution once the new government began operations. Otherwise they would risk endangering the Constitution’s ratification in certain key states and face the possibility of another constitutional convention.

The inclusion of the BoR was part of the compromise between all parties to keep the union together after the country began is young existence…….The Constitution was more about property rights not individual rights…basically, the people demanded a statement of rights to be included……It was an after thought that got its day.

2011 Info Ink Book Review #1

From time to time I am given a book that someone wants my opinion on….usually it is politically motivated or historically motivated……and for the Xmas we all celebrate I was given a book entitled “Revolutionaries” by Jack Rakove….about the beginning of this great country and the events that lead to its establishment……

The official title is….”Revolutionaries:  A New History Of The Invention Of America” by Jack Rakove,  a Pulitzer prize winner…..

We all know the general story of the founding of the country….the Tea Party, Paul’s ride, Concorde, Trenton Valley Forge…on and on…..through the Constitutional battles fought…to the swearing in of our first president……this is all generic and easily taught and more easily understood….but Mr, Rakove goes much further….like any political story or history, if you will, there are always back stories that seldom get talked about….this is where “Revolutionaries” begins….

He takes the reader from the Tea Party (the physical protest, not the political movement) to the ratification of the newly penned Constitution…all the battles fought in the political arena to find and then implement the “perfect” republic.

We all know the generic history of the founding of the United States of America, but Mr. Rakove takes the reader to the back stories of the founding from the firebrand Sam Adams to the snooze fest that was Washington (the man not the city), the intelligence of John Adams and Madison and all the in-betweens, the moderates, if you will.

All in all “Revolutionaries” is an excellent look at the early days of the revolution and the country……an excellent characterization of the players in the founding of the country…the inter-actions, the arguments, the radicals, the moderates and the wimpy…..

I recommend this book to anyone that has a deep desire to learn about the founding of the country, beyone the generic…..well done Mr. Rakove…..

Let’s Change The Constitution

From the VOMITORIUM

The US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence, you remember these documents, the foundations of the USA….it is perfect in its simplicity…at least that is what so many try to tell us….but the reality is the these documents are NOTHING but political tools to be used or discarded as the need arises.

Take  the amendments, for instance…..Conserv are all over leaving the 2nd amendment the way it is…because it is perfect and because it is a vote getter with gun nuts…..but that is amusing since not all the amendments are perfect in their eyes…..take the 17th amendment…..

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications required for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

There are those in politics, especially the conservs, that would like to have the 17th repealed and that senators would be elected by state legislatures and not the people.  But why?

I have a problem whenever politicians try to take power from the people in any way…..and if this is ever to happen then the people will lose some of their dwindling power over politicians.

And now there seems to be a GOP push to repeal the 14th amendment…..politicians like Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, the minority leader and calling for this repeal in an effort to help control illegal immigration….oh yea.. the 14th amendment says……

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Their theory is that if we take away the rights of those born in the US of illegal parents then it will somehow help control the perception of massive illegal immigration.

As Lindsey Graham said:

“I may introduce a constitutional amendment that changes the rules if you have a child here,” Graham said during an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “Birthright citizenship I think is a mistake, that we should change our Constitution and say if you come here illegally and you have a child, that child’s automatically not a citizen.”

The 14th was added to the Constitution to protect the children born to now freed slaves…..so that they could NOT have any of the rights that were given to those denied to them.

Let us talk about illegal immigration talking points by Repubs……they bring with them crime….false…crime has actually gone down in the areas around the border……the illegals are bring in drugs….also false…this has never been proven by the border patrol…..in other words they are using FEAR (a useful tool for the GOP)  to try a set a tone on immigration that is just not there.  Make no mistake…corporations will do everything to halt any real substantial immigration reform…they like the status quo…..why?  illegals work for less money and they are used to make Americans settle for less money….they, the Corporations,  want Americans to compete for the lower paying jobs…this is why even a Repub like Bush could not get anything done while president.

My point is….sorry about the digression……that if they are serious about tinkering with the Constitution they could open a large can of worms….and they may not appreciate the direction it takes.



A “New” Old Issue

There is always someone that tries to resurrect a tired old issue; they try to re-package it to sound more up-to-date….but any analysis will show that it is a tired unsuccessful issue or program.

The GOP is trying to resurrect the Health Savings Account (HSA) as a way to push health reform…at best a tired issue….but my favorite is the push for tort reform, you know those frivilous lawsuits….but unfortunately for the GOP, the CBO crapped all over that proposal….why….they have said that lawsuits account for one half of one percent of the total cost of health care.  Pretty much a dead issue unless of course you are a Repub without any new ideas, then just resurrect something that sounds good but actually does nothing to control the rising costs.

But I digress, the subject of this post is the resurrection of the tired old issue of TABOR…Taxpayers Bill Of Rights….

The Taxpayer Bill of Rights (abbreviated TABOR) is a concept advocated by conservative and free market libertarian groups, primarily in the United States, as a way of limiting the growth of government. It requires that increases in overall tax revenue be tied to inflation and population increases unless larger increases are approved by referendum.  (Thanx to wikipedia for the definition)

With rising deficits in the national programs and the state’s dwindling revenue, I look for the TABOR to make a comeback and comeback strong as a way to try and find the funds for the state’s and its programs.

The name sounds like a good thing , right?  A Taxpayers bill of rights…..a great selling point….anytime you invoke the Bill of Rights you have got a winner especially when dealing with people that have no idea what they are voting on.  TABOR is just such an issue.

But how has the past TABOR’s done in helping the state’s fund their programs?  According to the Economist magazine:

The experience of states around the country with constitutionally-mandated taxation limits has been pretty disastrous. California, whose Proposition 13 pioneered the genre, is on the verge of bankruptcy 30 years later, unable to raise the taxes it needs to cover annual expenses because voters refuse to acknowledge that they must pay for the public services they receive. The effect has been particularly devastating on public education. But, you know, why not try it out? Maine’s not Colorado or California, and maybe it’ll work for them.

Everyone hates to pay higher taxes…it is American to do so……in the same breath I ask…..do they want programs like education to be funded?  The Oregon Center for Public policy wrote this in a paper on TABOR:

During recessions (we have that now) …..TABOR’s revenue limit for future  years gets ratcheted back.  When the economy starts to recovery, state government cannot readily restore services  to pre-recession levels, because the new base for determining  spending growth is the low revenue level from the recession.  Thus any cuts in services are basically permanent.

Under TABOR, tax breaks and loopholes cannot be reduced or eliminated without a vote of the people.  Present and future tax loopholes and breaks are effectively locked into place…….

In short, TABOR is a bad idea….sounds like a good idea only because they will package it with the words “Bill of Rights” and we all think that is a good idea…If they, the tax reform people, are trying to sell this idea in your area….do some research, do not just take my word, do some research and see if it is everything they promise….you will find it is NOT!

Have Gun–Will Travel

Just like the 60’s western, some people travel with their gun to make a point…

I have heard all the news and debate about the guy who was outside the Hew Hampshire townhall….that he was on private property…..that he left before the pres arrived…..that he is a libertarian…….that he was exercising his 2nd amendment right (that I am still working on).  He was also holding a sign that said the tree of liberty needs watering….with a don’t tread on me snake adorning it.  I also heard the argument that he should have never been allowed to a tense situation with a gun.

No matter what the opinion of my reader is about the gun issue there is something that has been left out of the debate.  In an article written by Robert Anglen for the Arizona Republic, there is more to this guy and the story:

William Kostric, 36, formerly of Scottsdale, stood outside the New Hampshire meeting on health care with a gun holstered at his thigh and holding a sign proclaiming that “it is time to water the tree of liberty.” State law permitted Kostric to openly carry a licensed handgun.

The quote, often referenced by those in separatist and militia movements, refers to Thomas Jefferson’s famous call for vigilance: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of tyrants and patriots.”

Web sites indicate that Kostric is a “team member” of the Arizona chapter of We the People Foundation, which has a stated goal of “returning America to its founding principles.”

On its Web site, We the People’s founder Robert Schulz says, “Our recent initiatives have focused largely on questioning the federal government’s abuse of its Constitutional powers to incur debt, tax labor, create currency by fiat, conduct war and police the peace.”

The group maintains that it is not concerned with politics or personalities in office. But Schulz supports the so-called birther movement, which promotes the idea that Obama wasn’t really born in the United States and shouldn’t be president. We the People joined a lawsuit that unsuccessfully challenged Obama’s presidency based on the citizenship claim.

So as usual, there is always more to the story than the beltway pundits want to include into the conversation.  This guy may have attacked in a civil and peaceful way, but how will the next gun nut act or recat to the situation?  It has been reported the Obama gets between 20-30 death threats a day….who is to say if the next wingnut will not act on a threat?

Happy Birthday, Bill Of Rights

Most calendars don’t denote today as a special one that requires some sort of observation or celebration. If anything, a quick look at the calendar serves only to remind most of us that Christmas is 10 days away.

But Dec. 15 is a day of great importance to all of us. It is the day we observe as Bill of Rights Day, and today is the 217th anniversary of the day those rights officially became the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution and the law of the land.

For that, we have George Mason to thank, and we’re talking about the man rather than the distinguished university that bears his name and is known by some for sometimes having a decent basketball team.

Mason was one of the founders of our country and was active at the 1787 Constitutional Convention that drafted the Constitution, although he later refused to sign it and opposed its ratification because he thought it ignored individual rights and didn’t sufficiently limit the power of the federal government.

Do you know what those rights are? …..pause for thought…..Do not hurt yourself….

I. Ensures freedom of religion, speech, the press, peaceable assembly and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

II. Establishes the right to bear arms.

III. Protects people from being forced to house soldiers in their homes, except in time of war.

IV. Protects the public from unreasonable searches and seizures.

V. Guarantees due process of law and protects against self-incrimination and double jeopardy. Establishes private property rights.

VI. Guarantees the right to a speedy and public trial before a jury and the right to defense counsel.

VII. Establishes the right to jury trial in civil cases.

VIII. Prohibits excessive bail or fines and cruel and unusual punishment.

IX. Establishes that a guarantee of rights by the Constitution doesn’t deny to the people other individual rights not included in the document.

X. Establishes that powers not delegated to the federal government nor denied to the states by the Constitution are reserved to the states.

Take a moment today to think about your rights and what they mean,,,,and a silent “thank you” is in order.