If there was a New Constitutional Convention, whom would See as Delegates?

[lawrocket 3]

A post about the pardon power got me thinking about this. The Philadelphi Constitutional Convention of 1787, which met for four months, had leaders from the respective states (except Rhode Island) that were thought of as the best and brightest.

Among them were such well known figures as George Washington (President of the Convention), James Madison (kinda the father of the Const), Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and George Mason. Other important figures like Governeur Morris and Roger Sherman.

They were highly regarded, but came from some pretty different backgrounds, once you set aside the commonalities of white, male and Christian. Though most were lawyers (hey, we are good for some things, or at least we WERE) there were doctors and farmers and military guys, too.

These guys were able to rewrite the system through a mixture of forward thinking, aggressive marketing, delegation of key tasks and - above all - compromise. For example, Roger Sherman made the big compromise of having a House AND a Senate, the role of the Senate to equalize power among all states regardless of population.

What does compromise include? It means nobody is perfectly happy with everything in it. In fact, there were plenty of delegates who refused to sign it, i.e., George Mason.

But Ben Franklin summed up the Constitution and the compromises as follows:

"There are several parts of this Constitution which I do not at present approve, but I am not sure I shall never approve them. ... I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain, may be able to make a better Constitution. ... It therefore astonishes me, Sir, to find this system approaching so near to perfection as it does; and I think it will astonish our enemies..."

---

Now, who would I see as some people that I would like to see as part of the Constitutional Convention, if one were called. I must honestly say that not many people come to mind nowadays as particularly spectacular. But here's a list of some of them:

1) All the living ex-presidents (even Gerald Ford who is technically alive) - they've been there and done that

2) Judges - All of the Supreme Court, as well as some other judges, like Alex Kozinski of the 9th Circuit, and Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit.

3) Politicians -

4) Economists - you'll want a broad spectrum, with guys like Galbraith (even though he's Canadian) and Friedman.


Of course, some folks like Jesse Jackson and Pat Buchanon would demand to be involved. I think these idealogues should be kept off of the convention. There are plenty of people out there who can see, understand and explain their points of view without the vitriol.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

politicians, judges and economists? for me that reads like: telephone cleaners, makeup artists, television network programming directors

I'd like to see: Farmers, small businessmen, engineers, doctors, teachers, soldiers

but then they would also have to pass an IQ test as well as a temperament test, and not smell too bad.

But that's what I'd like to see in congress also for reluctantly accepted short terms....

The difference is that I believe back then they really were attempting to define what's best based on their experience. Today, I don't think any group will be as selfless about defining government based on freedom and morals. We've had generations now where people look to other governments as better, we've had generations where government is used to move wealth from one special interest group to another (up and down and across the class chain). For a government design/intended to profess equality, it's turned into one of preference for this group or that.

Jockeying for preferential benefit is what all our people have "lived and done" with our current government. That and an overabundance of "all or nothing" attitudes. I'd be hard pressed to think of any contemporary groupings of people that would be up to the task.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Tink1717 2]

I think the best solution would be to exclude all present figures in the government. The inherent conflict of interest would be insurmountable. Also, exclude ALL religious figures (they've done enough damage). Next, construct a convention that proportionally represents the various strata of society. Laborers, military, public safety, educators, etc..., a true cross section. Then hammer out a document that protects the rights of the individual, at all costs, limits the powers of the state, and assures a truly independent courts and removes money from the electoral process, and see what happens. Should be interesting.

Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717

[pajarito 0]

That's a disturbing question. I wouldn't trust anyone in our current government. They're all too easily influenced by money and power. The common person used to be able to serve in high office. When they finished, they'd go back home to their farms. I think there was much more of a sense of duty and honor back then. Not as much of that going around today I think.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

That's a disturbing question.

That's why I asked it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

That's a disturbing question. I wouldn't trust anyone in our current government. They're all too easily influenced by money and power. The common person used to be able to serve in high office. When they finished, they'd go back home to their farms. I think there was much more of a sense of duty and honor back then. Not as much of that going around today I think.

you just said in 3 lines what I was fumbling to get out - but I would extend some of that cynicism to much of the common person today also

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[gemini 0]

Quote

I think there was much more of a sense of duty and honor back then. Not as much of that going around today I think.

Blue skies,

Jim

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

A post about the pardon power got me thinking about this. The Philadelphi Constitutional Convention of 1787, which met for four months, had leaders from the respective states (except Rhode Island) that were thought of as the best and brightest.

...
Of course, some folks like Jesse Jackson and Pat Buchanon would demand to be involved. I think these idealogues should be kept off of the convention. There are plenty of people out there who can see, understand and explain their points of view without the vitriol.

Are you sure you're not looking back in history with rosy glasses? Or merely a tautology of greatness. We've been programmed from the beginning to view the Founding Fathers as a collection of great wise men, and I'm pretty sure that generalization is crap. Based on their behavior during the first few presidencies under the new Constitution, they sure acted like a bunch of idealogical assholes. I doubt they were any better during this convention, which was try #2 for a working government.

So go back 5 years, and definitely you'd have Jackson and Buchanon. Today, I'm less sure since both have become fairly irrelevent.

[pajarito 0]

Quote

you just said in 3 lines what I was fumbling to get out - but I would extend some of that cynicism to much of the common person today also

True

[SpeedRacer 1]

I'm inclined to agree with kelpdiver. We're taught in school about how great & noble the Founding Fathers were, but the truth was probably a bit murkier than that.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[akarunway 1]

"Though most were lawyers (hey, we are good for some things, or at least we WERE)" --------------Fought a case (People vs. Kevin) the last couple months playing my own lawyer. Beat it. Surprised to see alot of people (sheep) plead to the same charges I beat. All about money folks. Didn't mean to hijack but I had to

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

So go back 5 years, and definitely you'd have Jackson and Buchanon. Today, I'm less sure since both have become fairly irrelevent.

And thank God for that!!!! (no pun intended)

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"whom would See as Delegates?"

Vinny the Anvil, someone has to stand up for...
Tequila!

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson