| The Way We See It |
| Cover |
| Arts and Entertainment |
| Culture & Fashion |
| Economics & Money |
| Philosophy & Literature |
| Politics & Law |
| We the People |
| Science & History |
| The Way They See It |
| Psychology Research Network |
| The Way You See It |
| Travel Blogs |
 |
By Jaci Rodgers 
At the heart of their presidential campaigns, beneath their stances on individual issues, lie Ron Paul's and Dennis Kucinich's perceptions of the constitutional presidency which dictate how each feels the government has failed and how it should be fixed.
At first glance, Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul seem to have little in common other than their interest in the Presidency. But as the dark horses of their respective parties, they serve an important purpose. While their chances for securing the nomination are slim, their presence at debates and campaign events have raised some interesting issues due to these candidates' unique perspectives. Both Kucinich and Paul criticize the current administration and their leading rivals for departure from true Constitutional values, although each has a slightly different interpretation of the term 'constitutional.'
|
"Kucinich intends to stand for
a reinvigoration of popular democracy, to destroy the smoke and mirrors used by the Office of the Presidency" |
Kucinich vehemently draws connections between the President and many current elected officials and the likes of kings and tyrants. The Unitary Executive Theory, a doctrine Kucinich labels as dictatorial, has been refined and widely cited by the Bush Administration. It holds that, due to the President's duty to execute the laws, he has the right to interpret the Constitution and act accordingly, regardless of conflict with other branches. In the past, this has applied to the creation of executive departments that hold 'quasi-legislative' or 'quasi-judicial' duties, but assist the President in the execution of certain laws. President Bush has used signing statements, attached to newly created laws, as tools to demonstrate his interpretation of the law and how he intends to react to it. Many find this doctrine controversial and also accuse Bush of tyranny. "The United States does not elect kings," Kucinich's website states, which is followed by an excerpt of Article I of the Constitution, which reads:
Every candidate should review Clause 8 of Section 9 of the United States Constitution which reads: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State
But what Kucinich fails to realize is that this quotation, though it adds to the dramatic presentation on his campaign site, does nothing to support his point of view. He intends to stand for a reinvigoration of popular democracy, to destroy the smoke and mirrors used by the Office of the Presidency to annex certain powers granted to the public or the other branches of the government. But the self-proclaimed carrier of the Constitution should recognize two facets of this particular quote: it appears in the article that relates to Congress, not the presidency; and that what he is accusing this President and his constituents of is not electing a king, but submitting to the fear and propaganda of a perilous age. This may seem like an issue of semantics, but both are important distinctions in constitutional interpretation. Constitutional issues often boil down to shades of meaning of a single word or phrase, and thus the context of the excerpt is important in drawing the intent of certain statements. Plus, even the Founding Fathers recognized that in times of crisis and conflict, national attention and obligation would fall naturally on the President as the only nationally elected official. They granted the office of the President the ability to act efficiently specifically for that purpose, although they could not foresee how global events such as the World Wars, the Cold War and the 9/11 attacks would affect our perception of crisis and conflict.
|
"Ron Paul's 'Hope for America' echoes
the Anti-Federalist voices of long ago." |
On the other hand, Ron Paul's 'Hope for America' focuses on securing certain freedoms and privacies for individual Americans, which echoes the Anti-Federalist voices of long ago. Paul's campaign site quotes him as saying, "The Constitution was written to restrain the government, never to restrain the people," which is a widely accepted belief. However, the Constitution also grants power to the government to govern its constituents, and it is that power that it in turn limits. But that does assume that the government must provide some guidance to its citizens in the form of laws in order to facilitate their interaction with one another and with the government as an entity. As a member of the House of Representatives, Paul participates in the use of that power, and purports to remain loyal to his values in allowing as much freedom as possible for Americans in their every day lives, rather than allowing the federal government to intrude. Similarly, he advertises distrust in global organizations that attempt to provide the same facilitation between nations and other global entities, because he sees them as a threat to American independence. However, this 'whistle-blowing' campaign tactic seems a bit counterproductive. Paul has consistently fought against executive power through out his legislative career, and has introduced numerous bills in support of his values. But that says nothing about his ability as a President, an office that requires much more creativity in powers of persuasion than Congress. In creating a negative image of our national executive and our participation in global organizations, Paul's perspective appears to be closer to a conspiracy theory than a vision of hope.
Additionally, both Kucinich and Paul should remember that the framers of the Constitution did not create a democracy, they created a government which combined elements of both a democracy and a republic. That government was created to provide a service and leadership to the American people, and the way they participate in it and benefit from it is important to what they look for in a President.
Works Cited:
http://www.dennis4president.com/
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/
Return to Top