Do you believe in the Constitution?

By Timothy Braatz
Reader Staff

The U.S. Constitution, written in 1787, is a brief instructional manual, sketching out a federal government, what it can and cannot do — a barebones blueprint. Not much to “believe in.”

The creation of the Constitution — by 55 men, almost all wealthy — was a balancing act. For selfish reasons, they wanted a central government powerful enough to enforce laws regarding taxation, trade and finance. But they did not want a ruler too powerful to control — no king, please. Their solution was to divide power among three branches of government: legislative (Congress), executive (president) and judicial (courts). 

The legislative branch held most of the power. Only Congress could pass laws, control finances, create courts, declare war and raise an army. The president’s job description was small: 1. ensure that Congress’s laws were “faithfully executed”; 2. command Congress’ military; and 3. negotiate foreign treaties, subject to approval by Congress.

“Believing in” the Constitution, then, means valuing the rule of law, including the federal separation of powers, as opposed to the dictatorship of one person. 

In 1933-1978, Congress created a larger federal government to stabilize the economy. Before that, corporations were free to abuse workers, cheat investors, pollute communities and rig prices — anything to maximize profits. This antisocial behavior led to frequent financial collapses, a miserable workforce on the verge of revolution and a toxic environment. 

New government agencies had the task of enforcing federal regulations to clean things up.

Some people call these agencies the “deep state,” implying that federal workers are engaged in conspiracy. In fact, the federal government employs more than 2 million civil servants, including financial experts, scientists, security agents and medical personnel. 

If you board an airplane, visit a national park, apply for disaster relief, mail a letter or request a passport, you are relying on civil servants. If you expect that food ingredients will match the labeling and your bank deposits are insured and public buildings have wheelchair ramps and workers will get paid extra for overtime, thank a federal inspector. 

These jobs are so critical that Congress passed a series of laws to ensure federal employees were hired and retained based on their abilities. Before those laws, a new president had dictatorial power to fire all government workers and replace them with his friends, campaign donors and party loyalists.

Which brings us to the current Trump presidency, consisting of two elements: 1. Trump’s very fragile ego, which fears appearing “weak,” hides behind dishonesty and demands revenge for any perceived slight, and 2. political operators who manipulate Trump’s ego to achieve their goal of dismantling federal programs.

Why would anyone want to destroy federal programs that promote health and safety, economic stability and scientific knowledge? Without government oversight, large corporations — including banks, insurance companies, agribusiness, fossil fuel extractors and retailers — can behave like they did before the 1930s. 

This explains why the world’s most extreme hoarder of wealth, Elon Musk, bribed Trump (with flattery and massive political donations) to place him (a private citizen) in charge of firing federal workers.

Trump’s team also wants to eliminate the independent status of the Justice Department, the FBI and other federal enforcement agencies. They want those agencies to serve the president personally, not all citizens equally. In short, they want a dictator in the White House — one that places corporation profits over human well-being — and Trump is happy to play that role.

The average Trump supporter is now in a difficult position: Do you believe in the Constitution, which requires separation of powers and a limited president? Or do you believe in Trump, who is betraying voters by allowing Musk and others to destroy federal agencies and create unlimited presidential power? Do you enjoy democracy, or do you prefer billionaire tyranny?