THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT

THE THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT

By

Fay E.A. Reid

It is no secret that our democratically run Representative Republic has three distinct and separately operating branches. But a too large number of our citizens are unaware of this fact. Including, to the disgrace of the Senate and the State of Alabama, the recently elected Tommy Tuberville, who responded when questioned; the Senate, the House, and the Executive. This was better than the ignorant citizen who responded:  Republicans, Democrats, and Independents.

Tuberville, exemplifies why we must have requirements (job descriptions) for all persons appointed or elected to any government office at any level. Can you imagine a major American Corporation hiring as a civil engineer, some guy with a BS in physical education, whose only prior experience was as a college football coach?  But that is who Alabama sent to represent them in the Senate.

The main problem rests with the Constitution. Being written in the late 18th Century, a time when very, very few men received a College education - maybe 1 to 3%, 5 % at most. By 1860 just 2% of white males aged 15 to 19 attended any school.

For this reason it is understandable the only requirements in Article 1, which outlines the Legislative Branch, for the House of Representatives: they must have attained the age of 25, be a citizen of the United States and each term was for two years. There were no term limits. For the Senate they must have attained the age of 30 and be a citizen of the United States and the term is six years.

That’s it. And this, my friends, is how we get the Tommy Tuberville’s. We’re lucky if they know how to tie their shoelaces.

Flash forward to 2024. For the vast majority of United States citizens we know how to read and write and maybe some basic arithmetic. But around 37.7% have graduated from college.  That gives us a relatively large pool from which to choose.  We don’t need to stick ourselves with semi-literate morons like trump and tuberville. We can expect and demand more. Nor do we need to require college education that could just be the icing on the cake.  But we can certainly set minimum standards from candidates for either appointive or elective office.

First, this Country of Ours is a Constitutional Democracy, therefore I submit, anyone who wants to govern us should have read the Constitution AS IT IS WRITTEN - okay, in modern English - not 18th Century English, but with comprehension. And, that person should be able to pass a test at least on the level of the test administered to Naturalized Citizens. [Disclosure, I am a Naturalized Citizen].

Second, members of both Houses should have an understanding of basic economics, at least at the level of college introduction to economics. Nobody elected to any level of Federal Government should believe tariffs are a tax on foreign governments, when in fact they are a tax on consumers in our Country.  Tariffs do have a place in government, when the government is trying to protect an industry from unfair competition due to low wages or shoddy production of the same article from a foreign government. But only for a limited time to the point where our industry is making a fair profit (not price gouging). They don’t have to be economists at the level of Maynard Keynes or Kenneth Galbraith. Just an intelligent understanding so they can protect us, their constituents from scams, fraud, and outright theft.

Third, they should be persons of integrity. For this they should supply a minimum of three character references. None of the references can be related to them. But former teachers, former employers, or if they owned a business, employees. Volunteer services. Or if they previously were in Local or State elective office, from other legislators or constituents.

Fourth, they should know the duties of the office to which they are appointed or hope to be elected.  Newly elected members are given an orientation, but I doubt it is comprehensive.

Fifth, All elected officials should have frequent contact (minimum four times a year) with their constituents. This can be town halls, newsletters, emails, meetups. And not with their biggest donors, but all interested constituents

Sixth, they should be aware of all industry in their District or State (if they are a Senator)

I’m sure there are other qualities and requirements I’m missing but this is a start. Sections 8, 9, and 10 of Article 1 layout specific duties of the House of Representatives and Senate. They should at least know where to find them.

Moving on to Article 2, the Executive Branch. Section 1 goes all the way to the 6th paragraph before giving the qualifications for the President. The President must be native born, not just a citizen, but born in the US. and they must have attained the age of thirty-five and have lived here 14 years.

One would think the Framers might have expected more of the Presidency than age and place of birth. After all, these were ‘gentlemen’ meaning men of property. However, George Washington never graduated from college. In total 12 of our Presidents either withdrew, or never attended college. Which of course shows that it isn’t necessary for persons of high intelligence to perform great deeds. Abraham Lincoln was among those who never attended School.

I still think today we need some more qualification than just age and birth. So, I would list a college education as preferable, but high intelligence qualifying

The President (and Vice President) should have had prior experience in governing at either Federal, State, or local level.

Then, since this Country of Ours is a Constitutional Democracy, therefore I submit anyone who wants to govern us should have read the Constitution AS IT IS WRITTEN - okay, in modern English - not 18th Century English, but with comprehension. And, that person should be able to pass a test at least on the level of the test administered to Naturalized Citizens. 

The President should have a good grasp of basic economics, at least at the level of college introduction to economics. The President and Vice President should be able to select an economist who agrees with their vision of economics for the Country and be able to tell when the economy is hurting average citizens. Under no circumstance should the President allow an economic theory that concentrates most of the wealth to any specific segment of our citizenry at the detriment of other portions of society. I am not recommending a ‘classless society’  There never has been nor never will be such a community. But a broad bell curve is much more agreeable for all than what we have today with way too much wealth concentrated in very few while more than 90% of us struggle to make ends meet. I just don’t think those classes should depend on the color of one’s skin, the language they speak, whom they love, or which if any religion they embrace

Above all the President and Vice President should be persons of integrity.These people, but especially the President represents us to the world. We as a nation should never have to feel embarrassed by their behavior, or know that other nation’s ridicule them. Persons of integrity don’t brag, belittle others. Show favor to dictators or bullies. No matter what you may personally think, in public, you behave as the representative of us all. to which they are appointed or elected.

The President should know the duties of the office. It is probably the most gruelling job in the world. It is NOT a 9 to 5 job. You are on call 24/7. A a human being the President needs time off to revitalize, but spending 4 of 7 days on your personal golf course is not reasonable.  Therefore the President and Vice President have to be in very good mental and physical health.

Both President and Vice-President are also expected to be leaders in diplomacy. This requires both intelligence and tact.

Again I’m sure there are other desirable qualities and requirements we would ask. 

For all three branches there should be one code of ethics and there should be written penalties for abrogating ethical behavior. Just as no one in America is above the law, no one can be excused from being unethical.

Article 3 is absolutely vague. There are no qualifications, no age requirements, not even citizenship. The only mention of any requirement even hinted is: “the Judges, both of the Supreme and Inferior Courts, shall hold offices during good behavior” They don’t even define what ‘good behavior” means. Don’t spit on the floor? Tip your hat to ladies? Don’t take bribes?  So here we can write a whole list of qualifications and requirements.

1. They should have graduated from an accredited school of law

2. They should have passed the Bar exam

3. They should have a minimum 2 years experience in a judicial position

4. They must know and understand the Constitution as it is written

5. They must not make any new laws

6. If they repeal existing law, they must have reference to the Constitution as it is written, not what they ‘think’ the framers really meant.

7. They must uphold the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the land (Article 6, Section 2)

8. They must be persons of high integrity

9. They must not allow their own beliefs to interfere with their judgement.

10.  They must respect the opinions of other Justices on the Court whether in assent of dissent.

The reasons given for three distinct and separate Branches are for checks and balances.  

Only the Legislative Branch can write laws. Only the House of Representatives can write laws (bills) for raising revenue.  Any law written in either house that has an expenditure is supposed to say the source of that expenditure. 

The Executive Branch has the right to approve or veto all and any legislation. Regardless of campaign promises the President cannot write any legislation to pass those promises, the President can only request that a bill be written. If the legislative branch sends a bill with which the President disagrees the President can veto that bill.

But ⅔ of the House that originated that bill can overrule the veto.

The President has the job of seeing that all approved legislation is enacted. For this purpose the current Presidents have a myriad of Executive offices to put the legislation into action.

The main job of the Judicial Branch is to uphold the Constitution, then of other laws of the land.

Okay, that’s what the Constitution given us, so what can we do about it? We can of course write Amendments, but as America stands in the year 2024 we have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting it ratified.  Job descriptions and qualifications, I believe could be written and enforced. The Heritage Foundation and Federalist Society will probably yell foul, but tough patooties, there are more of us than them. 

We could start with Article 3 which is so vague as to be unenforceable. For instance these Supreme Court Justices just magically appear in the Constitution. Section 1 of Article 3 just assumes they are there.  How they got there?????? Traditionally the President has suggested someone and the Senate confirms or rejects the choice. This worked fine in the beginning. There were damned few people in the Country and only landed white men counted so that made the choices easier.

The landed white men were of high principle (viewed in the 18th early 19th centuries) They expected men of their class to behave honorably, and mostly they did. [Yes the indigenous people, the African slaves, and the laboring class were treated abominably and I won’t argue that that was alright, it wasn’t. But from the period of time, that was acceptable behavior and no one expected better].

Even so, they made a lot of bad selections to the courts.15 Federal judges were impeached,. 7 convicted (the last in 2009) Compare that to Presidents, 3 have been impeached, one twice and none convicted.

So we could get a law passed changing the way Judges are appointed. Instead of political cronies we could appoint a special branch of the Civil Service or we could publish the list of requirements and qualifications and allow judges who wanted to move up to the Supreme Court or from Municipal or State Courts to Federal Courts apply for the position(s) Vet them; present that list to the President from which to choose.  That certainly seems more logical than Article 3 Section 1 where they simply appear. 

Likewise, when someone wants to run for public office they have to sign up in the County in which they live. If there was a prepared list of qualifications and requirements, including knowledge of the Constitution, that would beat the hell out of the lies and exaggerations they spew before the primaries. Right now depending on the State, the prospective candidate has to present a list of supporters and some money to get on the ballot. I’d rather know they passed some requirements.

This should be the job of the DNC, DCCC, and DSCC but apparently all they do now is collect money.

I would love to see a group of citizens write the list of requirements and qualifications and another group write the Universal Code of Ethics for all three branches.