LET’S START OVER
68
I think it’s time we looked at what we need to do to get the U.S.A. back on track. A lot of folks seem to think we should go back to the original days of the Constitution, where it all started and the original intent of the Founding Fathers. The original hand written Constitution was done by Jacob Shallus and adopted by the Constitutional Convention in Philedelphia, Pennsylvania on September 13, 1787 and was then ratified by each state in the name of ”We the People”. Let’s imagine we could go there and start over again. A new country and Government for the people and by the people.
SEPTEMBER 1787
The British empire was still the ruler of the roost. The Founding Fathers were all gentried gentleman, land owners and considered well to do in the Colonies. They were all white men, women really had no “rights” so to speak of. Kind of like Saudi Arabia is today. There were no “common” men involved since only landowners had the right to vote, so I would say we compare relatively well to the Founding Fathers since the more money you have the more voice you have in the Government today. The newly formed Supreme Court didn’t have time yet to make Corporations people with the same rights as humans. As a matter of fact they would not have even conceived of an idea as ridiculous as that. They did come up with one novel idea, the slaves (similar to us working people today) were counted as only 3/5ths of a real person with no rights at all. This must have been the brainstorm of a precursor to the far right of today.
MORE GOOD NEWS
No taxes! They had just fought a war with England over taxes and freedom. Since all men (not women) were created equal, (except for those poor 3/5ths folks) taxes were looked down upon. The states would take care of the bulk of duties and the Federal Government would handle Security, the mail, print money, foreign affairs and that’s about it. Most of the citizens were on their own to rise and fall on their own, survival of the fittest. How unfortunate for the disabled, the starving the non land owners etc. of course at that time this country was a good god fearing nation that took care of the poor and weak and handicapped, like we do ……. Well not really. Today there is the concept of “throwing them under the bus”, in other words survival of the fittest, just like the old days. So you see we aren’t so different now than the Founding Fathers.
NO SOCIAL WELFARE!
With no taxes and no money the federal government couldn’t be asked to do anything more and the States would have to decide on what if any social programs to administer. Since we had no educational system, energy grid, transportation systems, railroads, parks, etc. etc. We had no worries and all we need to do is just get rid of all the agencies and regulations we have now and we can be right back in the 1700’s.
A FEW SACRIFICES
Of course we would need to make a few small sacrifices to get back to the “good old days”. We would have to go back to the rule of “caveat emptor” or buyer beware since there would be no regulations on anything. So if lead paint works for children’s toys then, there you are. If the mega oil companies want to form a cartel like OPEC and charge $20 a gallon, well it’s worth it. If large food manufacturers want to add a little “filler” well what’s to stop them? As long as the fatality rate stays within accepted parameters. See we can get along without all these rules and regulations, can’t we trust all the big corporations to look out for the common interest? After all if they kill too many of us who will buy their products, right?
 | Amazon Price: $0.00 |
 | Amazon Price: $4.46 List Price: $6.50 |
 | Amazon Price: $2.59 |
BACK TO BASICS
So lets get back to the 1780’s where we started and eliminate all this so called “progress” and let people and companies be free of the restraints they have been put under and let them make it or fail miserably under the competition from bigger and wealthier businesses. Folks who don’t own land and women don’t need to vote anyway we’ve been doing OK without them in the mix and those 3/5ths people aren’t smart enough to vote but work real hard. All the people calling for strict constitutional application of the laws seem to think we can live like this, so why not give it a try. It would probably only take us another 235 years to catch back up if we’re wrong.
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (3)
- Funny (2)
- Awesome (2)
- Beautiful
- Interesting (3)
CommentsLoading...
Howard what are you doing up so late? Glad to see you though, I'm trying to be diplomatic but you know that could be hard to uderstand for some. They may get what they ask for but not the way they think. Good comments as alwasy Howard, Thanks,
Peter
Excellent thoughts Peter! To paraphrase...History is the first casualty of an ideological war...thanks for shining a poignant, albeit, diplomatic light to the subject. Sadly, the message will be missed by far too many.
Unfortunately TS I would have to dumb down the story to far to make sure the right folks would get the message. I think that diplomacy beats cursing and swearing as a comunication technique, but I may be wrong. Thanks for the comment and for stopping by,
Peter
I think a return to civil dialogue is perhaps our only chance out of this mess. Thank you for your efforts in that regard. I look forward to future postings.
And thanks to you for your equally important comments, maybe we can influence a little dialogue. Peter
If I could go back with a pen and ink, I'd write in term limits. It would have prevented the amount of corruption that has permeated the halls of Congress over the years.
The Frog
Roosevelt (FDR) wanted to change and update the constitution a full year before he died. I think what people are really saying is that they just want things to be more fair. Like I said in an earlier hub, charge everyone the same percentage across the board, that way everyone would share and retain the same Amount of however big their "pie" is. No loop holes for the poor or the rich.
You know Frog there was no term limits for the President until FDR. So why can't we add the rest of the bunch now? It can be done. Thanks for coming by I always appreciate your input,
Peter
KT, fair is good. If it was fair then I think everyone would be happy. But what is being forced on the country is not fair. Why do we have to pass laws to force the Congress to be fair? That is part of their job! Hopefully the country will demand fairness and stop this ruinous bickering, Thank you for contributing to this discussion, your opinion is important,
Peter
The Founding Fathers afforded us two opportunities to amend the constitution. The first…passage in both Houses of Congress (by two-thirds) and ratification by the states (by three-quarters); the second called for Constitutional Conventions to be called in two-thirds of the state legislatures and then eventual ratification by the requisite three-quarter of the states.
Of the two, only the former has been used with the latter left to languish in the murky land of constitutional theory. Although the Congress cheerfully forwarded the 22nd Amendment to the states for ratification, as it involved limiting the power of the Executive Branch…I don’t see them working that hard to emasculate their own power.
Today it is unlikely to get the Congress to do anything except give themselves a raise (which they just did). So even though it is possible to have a term linits amendment it is highly improbable, Thanks TS for the reality check, Peter
No worries...can you wait to cash that reality check until Friday?
It's already Friday where I am. A holiday, the Queens Birthday!
Peter
lol...enjoy the holiday!
Peter. it is interesting how sometimes the "dream" solution to a problem, evolves over time to become a "nightmare." Good hub my friend.
Peter - The Founding Fathers didn't exactly foresee these career, pick pockets settling in for a lifetime ride on Capitol Hill.
I am TS
Mike sometimes when we wish for something we don't realize what it is we wishing for. It is a nightmare.
Frog the founding Fathers would turn over in their graves if they could see us now.
Thanks for the input I really look forward to it,
Peter
Peter - I just think I heard them flip when they passed the debt ceiling increase without meaningful spending cuts
I thought it was a thunderstorm Frog!
Peter
Good Hub Peter
Let's see, I'm white, I own property and I have a couple of bucks in the bank. Yay Founders, your world was designed with me in mind. So, where do I sign up to enslave my black neighbors?
As I recall it was none other than George Washington who warned us against political parties, faction and professional politicians. Of course Washington's ideas are not as popular with our "strict constructionists"
Like many religion's "true believers" these people only believe the doctrines that serve them personally.
I would write more but as a modern 18th century man I have slaves to beat and women to master.
Up and Awesome my friend
Lee
By George I think You got it Lee!! I don't think the folks professing to want the "good old days" back would last very long in that environment. The only thing good about 1787 is that it was a long time ago. Thank you for your valuable additions, your friend
Peter
Peter, many things about the good old days were not that great. I often wonder if the people who lived back then ever wished for the good old days? I think that is just a part of being people.
Hi Mike, I guess humans will always wish for a better time, we alwasy see the greener grass and wish we could be there. I believe it is the people that make "the good old days" and that we are in the good old days right now but we won't realize it till later. Thank you my friend for your truthful assessment, Your friend Peter
Do you move forward or do you move back? The constitution was a starting point not a finish line. I wonder what the document would look like if our "leaders" today were writing it from scratch? Good hub!!
I think Frog Prince makes a good point. Much of our political woes over time have come from the complicating of things related to the Constitution. Much of that coming from "career politicians." While I do not agree with the mores of the times...a part of the heritage that came with Americans to the new land, we have over time examined them and rectified much of it without significantly attacking the original document. I do believe, for all their flaws, those who participated in the startup and configuration of this country knew that the core which remain simple and provide only basic guidance in a particular situation...a center line for which to return to when we are lost. I am not sure that we can ever legislate away the flaws of human nature and the mistakes that come with it and expect to produce guiding documents which are as simple and straight forward as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. If we started that process today, the document which is referred to as "ObamaCare" would be considered small at 2000 pages when compared to what we would produce...and no one would be sure what was in it because none of our elected officials would have read it before voting it into law...this is where we have come to in 235 years. The founding fathers recognized that provisions for tolerance could and should be made within the framework of a relative simple document of governance. Over the years, we have seen that happen time and again. But, today, we are at a different juncture in history. We now have a country in which groups from many other parts of the world want to come to America and fundamentally transform it into something it was never intended to be from conception. The intent in "coming to America" is to embrace those values held by Americans as a basis of commonality and focus. We cannot turn America into an Islamic state and expect that it will function the same, or a socialist European country for that matter. As we do, we slowly throw the founding documents down the drain without replacing them with anything except "exceptions". Soon, as a nation, we no longer have a "centerline" to return to when things go dark. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights speak for themselves..."this is who we are and this is our intent". I think that is fair and adequate for all who seek to live here. WB
GNelson I would to see what our constitution would look like if it was written today. It might loo k very similar if the same people wrote it but not if the current group of dummies in pwer did it. We might as well just let Grover Norquist and the Koch Bros. write it. Thenks for your input, Peter
Wayne a very eloquent speach and I think what I was saying in my HUB with my tongue in my cheek. We had a great starting point but things change and adapt sometimes good sometimes not so good. But whatever we stick with it and make it work. The big problem we have today is the influence of money on the people who a running things. The money talks now and they do what they are told or they don't get the money. Not an insurmountable problem but the American people must recognise it and take it into account when they vote. Frog is right about the term limits, it would surely help drain some of the money out of politics. So it seems we are all on the same side and need to stick together to rid our country of these vermin. Thanks Wayne, Peter
Great Hub Peter! The constitution is fine in my opinion. They just need to quit changing it. And trim government control, the government shouldn't have its nose in everything. I do agree with The Frog Prince, congress should have a 4 to 6 years term. Those positions were not supposed to be for life, they were for men who showed leadership, that knew what was going on, that wanted to help this great country and its people.
DK, thanks for your comments and your observations. There are some things that were meant to be changed and some that weren't but we need to make sure we don't lose our liberty in the process.
Peter
Peter, This is a good hub and made me think. Thanks.
Barbara I am from Michigan also as are you and I think we may have a little different view of the world than most of the folks in this country. I thank you for commenting and hope you will come by often, Peter
![On Principle and Pragmatism Vc: What Does Limited Government Really Mean - On Limited US Government? [100]](http://s2.hubimg.com/u/5736185_50.jpg "On Principle and Pragmatism Vc: What Does Limited Government Really Mean - On Limited US Government? [100]")
HSchneider Level 6 Commenter 9 months ago
Great Hub Peter. Your sarcastic wit will be totally lost on those strict constructionists. You know the ones. They believe that Paul Revere made his ride to save our guns or that the Founding Fathers ended slavery. The original Constitution allowed slavery and did not directly vote for Senators. Also only propertied white men could vote. Enough said.