What will happen on Jan. 20, 2017?
Will, as Democrats contend, President Trump begin a Gestapo-style purge of illegals living in this country? Will an unhinged megalomaniac start World War III, delivering the nuclear armageddon we should be yearning for after this election? Or will a corrupt and vindictive President Clinton, miraculously still not trailblazing in orange jumpsuit chic, continue the Obama administration’s legacy of using the IRS to target political rivals? Will she continue Obama’s proclaimed pen-and-phone unilateralism, expanding executive power in unthinkable ways?
Regardless of who wins, that these are legitimate fears held by Americans is de facto proof of concept for Constitutional principles, namely a limited, well-defined role for government and divestment of power at the federal level.
Consider first the fears most often voiced about a Trump presidency; namely, that such a person would launch a global conflict at the slightest insult.
The Constitution is clear on this matter, with Article 1 Section 8 specifically vesting in Congress the power to declare war. Only after decades of executive usurpation of this power did a fulfillment of this fear become possible.
If our government operated as the founders intended, it would take an explicit declaration of war from Congress for military action to occur, instead of the vague, unauthorized “police actions” we have become accustomed to today. The executive giant would be much less limber in this regard.
Likewise, other fears about President Trump show the enduring wisdom of the Constitution. Fears of persecution of Muslims would be mitigated had religious liberties not been subjugated to the whims of social policy. Trade wars would not be a realistic possibility had Congressional treaty powers retained their intended scope.
Nightmares of the abuse likely under a President Clinton too are fueled by our current Constitutional unmooring as well. Obama has personally set such a tone.
Bureaucrats run roughshod over the law and, when caught, hide behind executive privilege, as with the Fast and Furious debacle, or sandbagging and blame shifting, as with the IRS targeting of conservative groups. One can only speculate with horror how this poisonous precedent will be twisted by a truly corrupt President Clinton to fatal effect.
If the rule of law still triumphed, rather than the law of a man with media favor, such crimes could be dispatched early on.
If faithful execution of the law were still a requirement for the Oval Office, one with scandals and crimes as deep as Clinton could not have become a nominee, let alone a frontrunner.
What should one take away from what has been an all-around disappointing election? Individual candidates and their personal characters’ matter, but the system in which they exist matters more.
Bad people will slip through the cracks at all levels, including, inevitably, the highest ones. Therefore, it is imperative Constitutional order be restored to protect against any and all such abuses.
zaochamb@indiana.edu
