FIrst and foremost, we disagree on political positions. That’s true for every administration. You disagree with the positions and policies when Democrats are in charge, and I disagree with the positions and policies when Republicans are in charge. The party out of power has disagreed with the party in power going back to before this nation was a nation. So let’s set that disagreement aside, for now.
I do hope we can agree with one thing: The Constitution should be the supreme law of the land. We got rid of kings and monarchs when we established this nation, and no matter how much we love a particular politician, we don’t want that politician to be an all powerful king (or dictator). We want the Constitution to be supreme, and we agree that we must follow that Constitution, messy as it is. That also means we have to deal with things we don’t like. You may not like freedom of speech or religion, and I may not like the right to own guns, but they are in the Constitution, so we somehow make it work.
Thus, with respect to an administration implementing their policies — whether or not we agree with those policies — that implementation must be constitutional. It must be in accordance with the words of the Constitution. It must follow the laws established by Congress, for the Executive Branch does not create laws — it ensures that congressionally-created laws are faithfully executed. If it doesn’t like a law, it works with Congress to change the law. Oh, and regulations? Those need to be the executive branch filling in the details regarding a law that Congress has passed. They should not be, essentially, new law.
We have three parts of government to explicitly prevent Kings. Congress makes the laws. The Executive ensures those laws are executed (and takes care of foreign policy, subject to congressional approval). The Judiciary determines whether actions taken by Congress or the Executive are Constitutional and in accordance with the laws passed by Congress (if those were Constitutional).
Alas, this is where we are running into a problem with the 45/47 administration. They are ignoring the constitution, which requires due process for anyone in the country (not just citizens). They are trying to suppress freedom of speech, and trying to impose particular religious views on everyone. They are thumbing their nose at judicial decisions. They are trying to govern by Executive Order. Out of a hatred for particular groups, they are declaring things as foreign invasions that are not invasions; and they are using the media they control to create a false narrative of fear. These are problems.
There is no problem with removing undocumented immigrants. HOWEVER, they must be accorded due process. They must be given the chance to show they are truly undocumented, for America is a nation of its word: If we have given legal permission for someone to be here, we should honor that. Right now, the administration’s ICE enforcement is deporting people without due process, and in doing so, they are expatriating US citizens and legal residents — hard-working Americans, not criminals — with the undocumented. They are not giving them the right to challenge their deportation, or to challenge their imprisonment. That, my friends, is unconstitutional.
The administration is also, intentionally, treating these people with hate and violence. They are grabbed, with no time to inform their family, no way to communicate. Small children are taken to holding prisons, and not given any support or help to navigate the system. Treating people with respect has been a hallmark of America. Are we abandoning those ideals to behave like a tin-pot dictatorship?
The administration is violating law by sending the military to our cities, creating violence where there was only peaceful protest. They aren’t asking the state governments. They are just ordering troops. This, also, is unconstitutional. States control their national guard unless there is a demonstrable invasion.
They are also creating a culture of fear, and disrespecting Congress. They are handcuffing and throwing to the ground members of the US Senate, simply for asking questions (which is their congressional duty). They are disregarding elected leaders of the community, with members of the Executive Branch saying “We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor placed on this country and what they have tried to insert into this city.”. No, folks, it was the people that elected this leadership, and government MUST be responsive to the people. This is not a dictatorship; it is a representative democracy whose authority is the Constitution.
So, to the 45/47 supporters out there: While I strongly disagree with your leadership’s policies, as the elected leaders, they do have the authority to work to implement them (just as the other side should have the ability to peacefully protest them). HOWEVER, that implementation MUST be Constitutional. It must come from Congress, and it must accord due process, follow the laws and funding enacted by Congress, and must be humane. It must respect leaders elected by the people.
Here’s a simple test: If the party you don’t like was behaving like this — that is, governing by Executive Order, disrespecting Congress, ignoring the courts, disappearing people without due process, cutting programs and agencies that they didn’t like without congressional approval, assaulting congressional leaders, putting the military in cities without the governors approval to enforce their power — would you find it acceptable? If the answer is no, then that answer applies whomever is doing it. If you find it acceptable, I submit you would be more comfortable in a dictatorship, not a constitutional republic.
The mention of funding was there for a reason. Constitutionally, it is the Congress that has the power of the purse. They are the ones that allocate funds, and the Executive Branch is charged with executing the funding priorities established by Congress. This administration is ignoring that. They are ignoring congressional mandates on how funds are to be spent. In doing so, they are destroying American’s leadership position in science, health, and research. Administrations can change directions — that’s their prerogative. However, they must do it in accordance with the Constitution: They must convince Congress to rescind funding and change the laws regarding how those funds are spent. The Executive Branch cannot govern by fiat and executive order, acting as if it was led by a King or Dictator.
America is a constitutional republic with three EQUAL branches. We’ve been lazy, and have allowed the executive branch to grab too much power. That’s bad when the party you don’t like is in power, and, truthfully, it is bad when the party you like is in power. We’ve also allowed the two-party system to usurp the voice of the people: Our leaders in Congress should be more responsive to what their constituents are saying than what party leadership is saying. Party leadership’s goal is to stay in power, not to do what is right for the nation.
We need Congress to represent the people, and to work together for what their constituents want. Right now, we have members of Congress that are scared to listen to their constituents. They pledge allegiance to what the President says and what the Party says, for that’s what keeps them in power. They don’t listen or care about the impact of those positions on the people they represent. That’s wrong — whichever party is doing it.
In summary, I hope we can all agree that recent administrations have drifted away from Constitutional norms. Congress must listen to and represent the people, and work in their interest (and not be rubber-stamps for a political party or specific leader). The Executive Branch must not make laws by fiat, but must faithfully execute the laws Congress establishes, within the Constitutional boundaries. The Judiciary must be respected and non-partisan, interpreting the law and ensuring it is followed.
Here in California (and in Los Angeles in particular), we have an election coming up. You know what that means: Every election, I do a detailed ballot analysis of my sample ballot. This is where I examine each candidate and share my conclusions, and invite you to convince me to vote for the other jerk. Because this is a long ballot, I’m splitting this analysis into a few chunks (note: links may not be available until all segments are posted):