Our perfect constiitution? What should we be teaching ourstudents?

[Miguel Schor]

Bobby's point is a good one but the answer is not making it easier to 
turn presidents out of office.  Since the advent of democracy in Latin 
America in the 1980s, at least fifteen democratically elected presidents 
have been ousted from office before their term expired without 
noticeably improving the quality of democracy in the region.  Changing 
presidents in mid-stream can deepen rather than ameliorate crisis.  
Besides, there are important extra-institutional avenues for checking 
the president that are only beginning to bear fruit.  Politicians listen 
if enough citizens lose faith in government.  Miers's nomination was 
yanked because the president's support is eroding.  The president's 
falling poll numbers may yet change the calculus in Washington.  The 
real short run lies in the first amendment because it allows for 
extra-institutional avenues of change which are key to the long-term 
success of any government.  The point is that democracies have a number 
of self-correcting mechanisms that are more important than wholesale 
institutional change. Miguel

RJLipkin at aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 11/6/2005 8:55:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> mschor at suffolk.edu writes:
>
>     Winning an election (as Eugene points out) is critical in the
>     short run. 
>
>         Is the electoral process the shortest "short run"? What about 
> circumstances in which an executive takes us to war based on what 
> become demonstrable lies, which become widely demonstrably false only 
> after his reelection? (I am not asserting this as a fact; rather I'm 
> hypothesizing this scenario, so let's not get bogged down in whether 
> it reflects present circumstances). Suppose further that the 
> leadership in this hypothetical is determined to dissemble in order to 
> retain power and that when push comes to shove they simply refuse, 
> against their own political interests, to take action, so impeachment 
> is unlikely. How does winning election provide a remedy for this 
> situation in the short-short run? Perhaps, there's no solution to this 
> problem. But if so, I suggest it's far better to bemoan the lack of 
> solution than suggest we have one. Maybe there's so solution, but as 
> Solon replied when told his tears will not bring back his dead son, 
> "that's why I'm crying."
>  
>         My own view is that complacency and reverence for the status 
> quo become enemies of solutions.  And the fear of "[w]hat you get if 
> you change a major element of the system may be worse than what you 
> began with" is true of course. But when is the severity of the 
> problems worth the risk? 
> Bobby
>  
> Robert Justin Lipkin
> Professor of Law
> Widener University School of Law
> Delaware

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: mschor.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 225 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20051106/295b39da/mschor.vcf