Coincidental to the 150th anniversary of the first battle of the Civil War, there is an increasing uproar about Presidential powers -- who should have final say about the Federal Budget and by whom, who should have been consulted about Libya, and who should have the final say about Health Care.
Everyone agrees the budget needs to be cut, but no one wants to cut that from which they benefit.
Due to extreme and growing polarization within our congress, there has been increasing stagnation, paralysis and total inability of our government to address any of the myriad of pressing problems facing out country.
Neither side will budge. The most current threat is the shut down of the Federal Government.
I invite you to review this fabulous 1-1/2 minute long analaysis of the Federal Budget, featured in a previous post. It is a good understanding about the complexity, size and scale of our budget; and how much of it is not flexible but fixed in stone. It emphasizes how the curent congress created a salemate from what is less than a drop in the bucket. (Although I suspect the REAL stalemate was and/or is about the underlying issue -- the relationship Planned Parenthood vs. Roe v. Wade.)
If we end up in an expensive stalemate, the country will suffer (NOT Congress) and perhaps a President will be provoked to take action to save the "Union." I do hope our elected officials will not push things to this extreme.
WGBH has been running its award-winning detailed documentary about the Civil War. Previously, I was not aware of how much Lincoln overstepped the contitutional boundaries of Presidential authority. Perhaps most outrageous and unconstitutional was Lincoln's deicison to issue an arrest warrent for Supreme Court Justice Roger Taney after Taney issued an opinion that only Congress, not the president, can suspend the writ of habeas corpus.
However, at the end of the day, Lincoln is considered by most to be one of the greatest Presidents ever. First, because he successfully held together the United States of America as we know it today. Secondariy, for the end of slavery (originally NOT his motivating factor.) He made the decision to declare war against those many states that wanted to secede from the Union.
This resulted in our Civil War that arguably had the highest number of casualties than any war in our country's history (exact numbers most difficult due to lack of records from Confederate Army, as well as a huge number of post-war lingering deaths from disease and wounds).
FROM THE WEB SITE "HISTORY COMMONS" -- "President Abraham Lincoln, responding to a Confederate attack on Fort Sumter in South Carolina, does not wait for Congress to begin its next session to make his response. Instead, Lincoln, wielding powers that the Constitution does not grant him and without a formal declaration of war, drastically enlarges the Union’s army and navy, blockades Southern ports, spends money not appropriated by Congress, and arrests Northern citizens suspected of being Confederate sympathizers. All of these steps exceed his authority under the Constitution and under federal law. Lincoln addresses Congress as soon as it reconvenes, admitting that he has exceeded his authority (see 1787 and 1793), and refusing to argue that his actions are lawful based on any “prerogative of power” inherent to the presidency. Instead, he explains that he felt he had to respond immediately to the sudden crisis, and asks Congress to retroactively authorize his emergency actions. He says, “These measures, whether strictly legal or not, were ventured upon under what appeared to be a popular demand and a public necessity, trusting then, as now, that Congress would readily ratify them.” Congress gives Lincoln the retroactive authorization he seeks. [Savage, 2007, pp. 16-17]"
The controversy about whether Lincoln was a "bad guy" or a "good guy" for over-stepping his power to prevent the disolution of the United States -- the end justified the means -- is well captured in many comments responding to an artistic tribute video [CLICK HERE] posted on YouTube:
"...I never fail to live a day in my life without being grateful our country and our government endured."
"I'm a historian, and after reviewing the comments before me, I am simply reminded how much a momentous time in our country's history can bring out the best, and the worst of each of us. We are all entitled to any opinion we wish, but negativity and scournful remarks towards one another only jeopardizes our freedom and patriotism. It does not enstill it."
"It's unfortunate that emancipation had to be achieved this way, but guess what; it was worth it. Whether you like it or not, the unsurpassed racial equality of this nation was precipitated in large part by Lincoln."
"I think Abraham Lincoln was elected at the right time for presidency. He did what he thought was right for the divided nation and will go down in U.S. history as one of the greatest leaders of all time."
"Abe Lincoln was the man for the job. He was the only one who could have pulled us through and caused for the reuniting of this divided nation. Even his death was something that was necessary for all this to have worked out. We learned our lessons as a country. We prevailed; for a short time, we were the model that all other societies desired to be. But it took much bloodshed and much suffering to achieve this. Pray for strength now. We need it more than ever."
And from the other side, those who believe Lincoln was a very bad president (erroneously believing the Civil War was only about slavery) comes this sophisticated comment: "why do americunt f--kfaces worship this mass-murderer who made war on his own people to free a bunch of apes so they could end up in prison and raping everyone?"
A Lincoln supporter or, as per the last person to comment, a Lincoln hater, I don't think anyone would like to push (or trust) any president to feeling, as did Lincoln, that he or she is provoked into seizing such absolute power in order to save the union from itself.
In my opinion, as a country, we are behaving increasingly like the polarized nation that precipitated the Civil War. If our elected officials can't come to agreement on a such a relatively small budget cut, what will they do with the big picture issues? What kind of stubborn elected officials do we have in Congress? Elected officials still get paid in a government shut down of their making, and there is no punishment -- therefore no incentive -- to work out a compromise and allow our country to function.
They don't pay the price if they take their toys and go home. Maybe, in addition to the Federal Government, members of Congress should have their salaries "shut down" whenever they refuse to do their jobs.
Will it take a Civil War for the members of our Congress to realize that their commitment to partisan politics no matter who it hurts, is not good for the country? Do we really have to shut down our country's government BEFORE we shut down congressional salaries? Is Congress behaving in such a childish, selfish manner that another President will feel compelled, as did Lincoln, to overstep Presidential boundaries just to prevent a collapse of the Union? I hope not. But somebody in Washington has to be The Grownup and act quickly to take the power away from the children who continue getting paid -- for the rest of their lives -- whether or not they do their jobs and play nice in their expensive sandbox.
Recent Comments