Chad's Constitution Blog

Articles, Radio Segments, and More!

Constitution Revolution: Interpretation 101

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

This post is the continuation of a weekly Constitution Revolution series that will cover the entire Constitution and many of the principles it was founded on. Click here for last week’s lesson.

Imagine that you want to buy a house from me, so you and I enter into a contract to transfer ownership of the property.

If you and I agree that the purpose of the contract is for you to purchase the house from me, what is one thing we can assume to be true about each individual part of the contract? We can assume that each of those parts was intended to help achieve the overall goal of you buying the house from me. To assume anything else would be foolish.

It makes to sense to believe that one individual part of our contract would have a meaning that would completely defeat the entire purpose the document was created for. What logical reason would you and I have for including a clause that did that? None.

It’s no less ridiculous to argue that a given clause of the Constitution has a meaning that completely defeats the purpose that the document was created to serve. That is why, as I mentioned this weekend on TheBlaze Radio’s Chris Salcedo Show, we need to keep the purpose of the Constitution as a whole in mind whenever we are interpreting it:


Read more at TheBlaze…

Constitution Revolution: Why the Constitution is Dead

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

This post is the continuation of a weekly Constitution Revolution series that will cover the entire Constitution and many of the principles it was founded on. Click here for last week’s lesson.

Since the beginning of the year, I’ve been covering a variety of the principles that our Constitution was built on. The last stop on this journey before we can get into the actual text is to discuss how we should interpret the Constitution. No matter how brilliant our Constitution is, we have to interpret it properly or it will never be able to protect our freedom.

As I discussed on TheBlaze Radio’s Chris Salcedo Show, in legal and academic circles the most popular approach for interpreting the Constitution is the idea that it is a “living document”:

You’re also smart enough to realize there there’s at least a chance that the bankers would use this power to do some very bad things to you.

Now think about this: If we can’t trust bankers with a living mortgage, what reason do we have to trust our politicians with a living Constitution? After all, we would only be giving the bankers power over our house and our money. We’re giving the politicians power over something even more precious: our rights and our freedom.

Read more at TheBlaze…

10 – Constitution Revolution: My Confession

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

This post is the continuation of a weekly Constitution Revolution series that will cover the entire Constitution and many of the principles it was founded on. Click here for last week’s lesson.

I have a confession to make: I have absolutely no musical talent whatsoever. It’s embarrassing. I can’t even clap with a beat.

At different times in my life, I have tried to learn some of the basic aspects of music but I just can’t do it. If you gave me a song to play, it doesn’t matter how much time you gave me or what I tried, I wouldn’t be able to play it well. And I definitely wouldn’t be able to play it as well as someone who actually has musical talent.

For whatever reason I wasn’t wired to be musical. If I want to be successful, I need to stick to the few things that I have talent for and leave the music to people who are better suited for it.

The same is true with government. If we want our federal government to be successful it needs to focus on doing those things that it does well.

This weekend on TheBlaze Radio’s Chris Salcedo Show, I talked about what it is that our federal government does well:

So there you have it. Large, centralized governments like our federal government are very good with external issues like national defense and foreign diplomacy. But because of the huge number of people and the massive area of land they are governing, those types of governments are terrible at dealing with domestic issues.

By contrast, small republics are often very good at addressing their domestic issues. But because of their smaller size they have a difficult very time defending themselves.

Our Constitution was designed to get the best of both those worlds.

Read more at TheBlaze…

9 – Constitution Revolution: The Forgotten Check and Balance

By | Uncategorized | 2 Comments

This post is the continuation of a weekly Constitution Revolution series that will cover the entire Constitution and many of the principles it was founded on. Click here for last week’s lesson.

I have devoted my last few Constitution Revolutions to discussing why the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances in our Constitution are extremely effective methods of limiting the power of government. But in the real world, our federal government is getting bigger and more powerful every day with no end in sight.

That begs the question: If these two ideas are as brilliant as I say they are, then why aren’t they working?

As I discussed last weekend on TheBlaze Radio’s Chris Salcedo Show, the problem is that we have completely abandoned perhaps the single most important aspect of our system of checks and balances – Federalism:

In order for our system to work, we have to divide up power not only among the three branches of our federal government, but also between the federal government and the state governments. The only way we can effectively limit the federal government is to ensure that the state governments have the tools they need to act as a check on its power.

Read more at TheBlaze…

8 – Constitution Revolution: Does Obama’s Net Neutrality Power Grab Matter?

By | Uncategorized | No Comments

This post is the continuation of a weekly Constitution Revolution series that will cover the entire Constitution and many of the principles it was founded on. Click here for last week’s lesson.

-

Recently the Federal Communications Commission adopted new rules (commonly referred to as “net neutrality) that will allow the government to regulate the internet as if it were a public utility.

In other words, the FCC decided to grant itself control over the internet. For any clear thinking person, this type of policy making is obviously a part of the legislative function of government. Despite that, President Barack Obama pushed to have this decision made by the FCC – which is a part of the executive branch.

The question now is, will either of the other two branches step in to stop this power grab?

As I explained on TheBlaze Radio’s Chris Salcedo Show, each branch of government has a set of tools they can use to reign in the other two branches. You’ve probably heard this referred to as our system of checks and balances:

Each branch of government has a set of tools they can use to reign in the other two branches; and tools are meant to be used. That’s especially true when it comes to the system of checks and balances. Let me show you why.

Read more at TheBlaze…

Schedule Chad for Your Event Book Now