By Don Keelan
“Many years ago, my college history professor compared the Constitution’s intent to a three-legged table. He said, ‘Just as each of the legs of the table must not be shorter or weaker than another, likewise, the three branches of our government must always be equal to each other, if they are to survive.’
For generations, the Constitution of the United States has steered us on a steady course. It has also guided us through dark periods of our history, i.e., the Civil War, an economic depression, presidential assassinations, civil riots, and, more recently, a crisis in the Executive Office commonly known as Watergate.
The Constitution has protected us for 200 years. The question is, can we protect the Constitution for the next two hundred years? We will not, if we continue to change this precious document with endless amendments to accommodate today’s issues that seem unresolved in the legislative arena. Our elected and appointed leaders can learn a great deal, not only from the document itself, but also from the process leading up to its signing.
This process involved the courage of one’s convictions; respect for a point of view, even if contrary to one’s own; a command of the language and the skill to use it effectively; and most of all, an ability to see beyond tomorrow, next week, or even next year, but for generations ahead. The real meaning of the Constitution was set by those attending the Convention in 1787 and their ability to resolve the issues in spirit and in fact.
Today, we have the benefit of history that the Constitution creators did not have. Let us hope that today’s leaders use this perspective as wisely as our Founding Fathers used their foresight.”
Now, full disclosure regarding the authorship of the above; yes, I am the author. The piece was written in June 1987.
Back then, my wife and I were still part-time residents of Vermont. I noted a request for essays from the Manchester, Vermont NewsGuide on what one thought of the U.S. Constitution’s meaning. I took the time to pen some words, submitted my 250-word essay, and moved on.
On a sunny Saturday morning, in July 1987, my wife and I were outside our home washing 48 windows. An official from our town’s local school came to the house and informed me that I was required at the Fisher Elementary School’s athletic field. The governor was waiting for me.
The Town of Arlington, where we resided, was in the midst of a celebration commemorating the Constitution’s 200th Anniversary. Arriving at the field, dressed only in a t-shirt and shorts, and before approximately 1,000 folks, Governor Madeleine Kunin called me to the podium. She had just read the above essay before a sundrenched audience and presented me with a letter acknowledging my first place in the essay competition. She also presented me with a $200 check (about $500 today). I humbly accepted, thanked her for the prize, went back to my car, and returned home.
My wife, still engaged in washing our home’s windows, saw me, all smiles and waving a $200 check. I told her what had occurred. Her response was simple: “That’s great. Now, get the Windex and take care of the second-floor windows.”
This story is personal and not that important. What is important is the statement I made in the essay: “Our elected and appointed leaders can learn a great deal not only from the document itself but also from the process that led up to its signing.”
250 years ago in Philadelphia, those who met had to process issues that were of far greater substance than what our present Congress so helplessly contends with today. What was present then and is missing today is the willingness and courage to adopt compromising positions. By failing to carry out its role, the three-legged table has lost its integrity and been damaged. And so has the country.
The author is a U.S. Marine (retired), CPA, and columnist living in Arlington, VT.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary
The founders did have the benefit of history. They were steeped in the history of the failed Democracies of Greece and the Republic and Empire of Rome as well as the works of Locke and Montesquieu. The founders knew about the human capacity for stupidity and barbarism but perhaps were too hopeful in thinking future generations of Americans might take to heart the gift they had given to them.
Great article Don.
I have been reading “The American Miracle,” by Michael Medved, and have learned that the creation, writing, and ratifying of our Constitution was nothing short of miraculous.
The point Mr. Keelan makes in this article: “Our elected and appointed leaders can learn a great deal not only from the document itself but also from the process that led up to its signing,” is spot on and cannot be overstated.
I never knew about this process, but recently learned that it took four months of daily knock-down-drag-out argument and debate in a terribly hot and humid Philadelphia summer. Some delegates dropped out before the process was completed, but eventually concord was achieved among those who remained.
The turning point in the whole ordeal, when it appeared to have reached a frustrating impasse, and was nearly abandoned, was when Benjamin Franklin read before the entire assembly words he had just penned. It’s too long to include here, so I will provide the link to where you can read his extraordinary speech.
https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/benfranklin.htm
This was the turning point for the convention, and the atmosphere immediately shifted for its remainder to one of much more peaceful and harmonious collaboration leading to consensus and our Constitution’s completion.
Our leaders would do well to learn this history and to employ the wisdom the venerable Benjamin Franklin courageously exhorted his fellow statesmen to practice through his speech. I dare say it would change eveything.
Re: The Constitution has protected us for 200 years. The question is, can we protect the Constitution for the next two hundred years?
It’s called the 2nd Amendment. Against all enemies foreign and domestic.
Don, What did you mean by “ We will not, if we continue to change this precious document with endless amendments to accommodate today’s issues that seem unresolved in the legislative arena.”? The last two amendments, 26 and 27th, were ratified in 1971 and, after your article, 1992 respectively.
Given the current composition of the congress, a 2/3 agreement on any topic seems absurd. The other option allowed by Article V to propose amendments is in today’s terms a convention of states.
At such a meeting, proposals for term limits, limits on taxing, spending, and borrowing could be approved and sent to the states for ratification.
Chances for this happening are high given that 80 percent of the population supports term limits.
We the people can make this happen by convincing state legislators to pass a COS resolution. Supporters can help by signing the petition at conventionofstates.com/&ref=1102