Jesse Jr.'s frontal assault on federalism

I am only a little surprised that the Democrats have become as blunt in their disdain for federalism as was expressed by Jesse Jackson, Jr., at a press conference by the Congressional Black Caucus following the debate on the objection to Ohio's electoral vote Thursday. His remarks at the press conference are stated with even more force in this press release.

Jackson states,

"Today's objection is not about an individual, but our institutions. It is not about Republicans, but our Republic. It is not about Democrats, but our democracy. It is not about an election result, but our election system - it is broken and needs fixing. The fundamental reason is this: Americans don't have the explicit right to vote in their Constitution. . . . One-hundred-and-eight of the 119 nations in the world that elect their public officials in some democratic manner have the right to vote in their Constitution - including the Afghan Constitution and the interim document in Iraq. The United States is one of the 11 that don't! Shouldn't we be one of the 108 that do? As the greatest nation with the greatest democracy in the history of the world I think so. We need to build our democracy and our voting system on a rock, the rock of adding a Voting Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that applies to all states and all citizens. We need to provide the American people with a citizenship right to vote and provide Congress with the authority to craft a unitary voting system that guarantees that all votes will be counted in a complete, fair and efficient manner. It's the only foundation upon which we can build a more perfect Union."

Well, then. Congressman Jackson would completely jettison two hundred sixteen years of our nation's history -- the nation he acknowledges "as the greatest nation with the greatest democracy in the history of the world" -- and claims that the election system is broken on the apparent basis that the Democrats have lost two consecutive presidential elections. I suppose he doesn't believe that it is possible that the greatness he rightly ascribes to the strength of this country might remotely be related to the manner in which the Framers designed the Constitution?

He is right on this point -- the Constitution does not grant individuals the right to vote for president; that is a duty assigned to the state legislatures, who, at their discretion, may allow individuals to select electors for president and vice-president. But the question raised by Congressman Jackson is even more fundamental.

The Constitution was not entered into by individual Americans, but by the separate states. It concludes, "done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth." The Constitution was then submitted to the States for ratification in Convention. Fortunately, the only manner in which the Constitution may be changed also runs through the state legislatures. In short, the Constitution is a compact between the states, not between and among individual citizens. I have previously discussed the history behind this here and here.

The disdain for this Constitutional system, which has served the country well even by Jackson's admission, is troubling. Democrats do not wear losing well.