Non-Democratic Aspects of the American Constitution

The American political system is broken. The current state of our democratic republic is a blatant reflection of the obvious defects in the founding document(s) we so often rely upon for guidance, wisdom, and enlightenment. Our founding document, the Constitution, establishes a conventional substructure for an effectual administration of a nation in which its people are permitted to exercise their natural human rights in accordance with the law and pursuit individual happiness. The Constitution expresses a deep understanding that equality, liberty, and opportunity are fundamental rights; that government depends on the will and consent of those governed by it, and that the powers bestowed upon the government should not exceed its appropriate capability and thus should be organized in a way that ensures the rights of the people. We have no nobility here, rather we embrace the idea that opportunity and access to opportunity should be equal; that a truly democratic society is one in which everyone, regardless of religion, gender and ethnicity, has the right to freely express their opinion without the fear of reprimand, openly believe in a divine force and the right to associate with a group & collectively act to pursue the interests of those within the group. And yet despite the progressive ideal in which it was founded upon, the Constitution is flawed.

The founders themselves had very little to no faith in the power of ordinary people, in the power of the common whole; they were to put in simple terms, motivated by elitism. The United States of America wasn’t founded as a democracy but as a republic. The people are not directly involved with politics rather designated ‘representatives’ are. The representatives are by no means bound to loyally uphold public opinion and sentiment, but instead to exercise their own judgment. The founders feared civic uprisal and therefore wanted men, at all times, to mediate between the public and the nation. The electoral college itself stems from republicanism rather than direct democracy. The electoral college elects the president and vice president of our nation. Which only brings us back to the bigger issue: how much power do the people really have? It’s reiterated time after time that the future is in our hands, that our voice and votes matter because we are the ones who put the head of state in power. That’s a lie. When voters go to the polls, we are actually “voting for the slate of electors vowing to cast their ballots for that ticket in the Electoral College” (History, Art & Archives, 2018). Each state is designated a number of electors that is in par with the number of senators and representatives in their respective jurisdiction. These electors, are the ones who vote to choose who the next president will be. If there’s a tie, then the House of Representatives selects who the next president will be. A candidate can lose the popular vote, but still, win the election.

The practice itself is undemocratic. Democracy is supposed to be of the people, by the people and for the people. In 1824, John Quincy Adams was elected president despite not winning either the popular or electoral vote. In 1876, Rutherford B. Hayes won the presidency but lost the popular vote to Samuel J. Tilden. In 1888, Benjamin Harrison became president despite losing the popular vote by more than 90,000 votes (FactCheck). In 2000, George W. Bush became the 43rd president despite Al Gore winning the people’s vote by more than 540,000 (FactCheck). In 2016, Donald Trump won the electoral vote over Hillary Clinton despite Hillary receiving 2.9 million more popular votes than Trump (FactCheck). Another undemocratic aspect of the Constitution rests on Judicial power. Judges are appointed not elected to serve for life. They have the power to rule any law or regulation passed as unconstitutional, even if the own president and legislature approved it. Additionally, every state gets two senators regardless of the population. States like Wyoming, Rhode Island and Maine get the same amount of senators as states like Texas, New York, and Florida. Wyoming has a population of 572,381 (World Population Review). Texas has a population of 29,087,070 million (World Population Review). Maine has a population of 1,342,097. Florida has a population of 21,646,155 (World Population Review). Now the controversy surrounding this is that, why should a state smaller in quantity be held up to par with a state with a much higher population? Is assigning two senates per state really working for our democracy?

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

The Bicentennial Speech, delivered by the Former Associate of the Supreme Court Thurgood Marshall, counterattacks those who praise the founding fathers for their ‘genius’ writing by reiterating how the defective document they created needed, “several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation” (Marshall, 1987) to attain a system of “constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms” (Marshall, 1987). The first three words, “We the People” did not include the majority of American citizens. On the matter of having the right to vote, “negro slaves were excluded” (Marshall, 1987), despite them being counted as “three-fifths each” for representational purposes. As a means of raising earnings, the tax imposed on slaves transported across international lines was “up to ten dollars per slave” (Marshall, 1987). Despite, the understanding of the role of involuntary labor and the enslavement of African Americans would play in creating the nation we are today, moral principle and responsibility were compromised with “no explanation of the conflicting principles for which the American Revolutionary War had ostensibly been fought” (Marshall, 1987). The war had been fought in defense of the idea that “all men are created equal” and yet that equality seemed to only apply to particular individuals. They had for “more than a century been regarded as beings of an inferior order” (Marshall, 1987), unfit to be of the same value and importance as the white man. A negro of the African race was property, and bought, and sold as such. Out of the delegates who were present at the Constitutional Convention, about 25 owned slaves. Take a brief moment & read that again.

It took a civil war and the 13th amendment to abolish slavery. To finally, reject the old philosophy of “separate but equal” and embrace a philosophy that concurs each individual the right to be treated with dignity, respect, and equality in the eyes of the law; disregarding external appearances and ancestral lineage. Despite blacks participating, “to the developments of this country’s magnificent wealth” (Marshall, 1987) it took yet another century for them to “share equally such basic opportunities like education, housing, and employment” (Marshall, 1987). To be considered of substance and worth. They were “enslaved by law, emancipated by law, disenfranchised and segregated by law” (Marshall, 1987) and finally they gained equality by law. The people were no longer enslaved and it was not thanks to our founders. It was thanks to those who refused to accept old fashioned opinions on who “liberty, justice, and equality” pertain to.

We’re progressing towards different times. We’re growing into a nation with various ethnicities, religions, and socio-political ideals. This is not a homogenous republic. If we seek progressive social, cultural and economic growth as a nation, the decisions taken to ensure the stability and fairness of our legal system by no means, should be tightly bound to the outdated words of men who lived in a different time and were not exposed to modernized ideas and ways of thinking. The Constitution should be utilized for partial guidance, it should not be the sole dictator and decision-makers in situations dealt with in the present. While the argument is not to completely disregard the Constitution, there’s no denying that it certainly can be reformed so our American values of liberty, justice, and equality for all can revitalize. An effective constitution will: effectively protect the rights of the people, promote fairness, solve problems democratically, and foster prosperity.

References

1. Marshall, Thurgood. 1987 (May 6). Remarks of Thurgood Marshall.
2. At The Annual Seminar of the SAN FRANCISCO PATENT AND TRADEMARK LAW ASSOCIATION. Maui, Hawaii.
3. Gore, D'Angelo. “Presidents Winning Without Popular Vote”. FactCheck.org, 23 Dec. 2016, www.factcheck.org/2008/03/presidents-winning-without-popular-vote/.
4. “US States- Ranked By Population 2019”. US States - Ranked by Population 2019, worldpopulationreview.com/states/. September 15, 2019.
5. History, Art & Archives, U.S. House of Representatives, “Electoral College Fast Facts”, https://history.house.gov/Institution/Electoral-College/Electoral-College/ (September 15, 2019).