The
Constitution was written to provide a framework. John McCain and
many public servants like him need to ponder that.
|
John
McCain and the Constitution
He's the darling
of the media, the heroic champion of campaign finance "reform"
and the independent maverick who finally outmaneuvered the U.S.
Senate leadership to get his way. John McCain is also one of the
greatest enemies of the U.S. Constitution in any position to affect
it.
Just as McCain's
ignominious role as one of the Keating Five, his own brush with
serious ethics violations, is now rarely discussed by the media,
his ignorance of or disdain for constitutional protections arouses
little interest.
The proof, ample
and abiding, is in the record. John McCain has served two terms
in the U.S. House of Representatives and is currently in his 3rd
term in the U.S. Senate, amounting to more than 18 years in Washington.
In all that time, while he has given some requisite lip service
to other legislation, he has truly been exceptionally active in
the passage of only four bills, one of which is a story for another
day because, while quite informative about the real John McCain,
it does not impinge on constitutional issues.
Exhibit One,
not law today because the U.S. Supreme Court said it could not be,
is the line-item veto, passed in 1996. It would have provided the
President with the authority to strike individual provisions from
spending and tax bills without having to veto omnibus bills in their
entirety. John McCain had been a longtime advocate and forceful
sponsor of the legislation, which was struck down by the U.S. Supreme
Court in 1997. Justice Anthony Kennedy, in a concurring opinion
with the 6-3 majority, chided the Congress. "Failure of political
will does not justify unconstitutional remedies. Abdication of responsibility
is not part of the constitutional design," he wrote.
Exhibit Two
is the so-called "Children's Internet Protection Act,"
again championed by John McCain. Passed in December 2000, the law
mandates that schools and libraries apply filters to computers to
deny Internet access to obscene materials. Those schools and libraries
that do not comply will lose federal technology assistance funds.
In March 2001,
the American Library Association and the American Civil Liberties
Union filed separate lawsuits, likely to be combined, to have the
legislation overturned. Those groups have twice before been successful
in constitutional challenges to Internet restrictions.
Exhibit Three
is McCain-Feingold, the campaign finance "reform" bill,
for which McCain has been campaigning for years. Finally passed
by the Senate in April, the bill faces an unknown fate in the House,
but an almost certain one at the U.S. Supreme Court if it eventually
passes and is signed by the President. The weight of unconstitutional
provisions is so great that the only real question is how many lawsuits
will be filed.
That each of
these three bills championed by McCain has popularity is unquestioned,
and he has had co-conspirators aplenty in his disregard for the
Constitution. A line-item veto might well bring more cost effectiveness
to a system that is often out of control. The evil of those who
prey on children, on the Internet and otherwise, is unspeakable.
There is abundant corruption in politics. But for each of these
problems, and others, there are solutions that are sound and
constitutional.
The Constitution
was written to provide a framework, an inviolable structure for
the Republic that would persevere. The Bill of Rights was written
in recognition that the politically popular course is sometimes,
perhaps painfully, not the right course. For neither expediency
nor exploitation can any of those tenets be cast aside. John McCain
and many public servants like him need to ponder that.
Return
to Freedom Line
Archive
|