Who, and what, the “Lion of the Senate” really was

Two of our best friends in law school were Tom and Mally Pitaro of Brockton, Mass., home of the Brockton Brawler, Rocky Marciano.  Tom was a working class Italian  Catholic, and a staunch Democrat.  Like virtually all Massachusetts Catholics, he idolized the Kennedy family.  Tom was a very bright guy, and I thought this devotion a little strange.  But to him and his family, a Kennedy could do no wrong.

“Chappaquidick” is the best film I’ve seen in years, and Bruce Dern deserves an award for his portrayal of Joe Kennedy, Sr.   Seeing a movie like this is almost enough to restore a little respect for Hollywood.  They got everything right.

I guess you had to have been alive when Jack Kennedy was President in order to really understand the career of the runt of the litter, Teddy.  As President, with brother Bobby as Attorney General, the last thing Kennedy wanted was his youngest brother running for a Senate seat that he was totally unqualified for.  But old Joe insisted.  Teddy wanted to be famous too, so Jack and Bobby  had no choice but to go along with it.

This movie is so good that it even makes you sympathize a little with Teddy.  If you had three older brothers like Joe Jr., Jack, and Bobby, all of whom were true American heroes, killed in service to their country, you might not turn out so well yourself.

He couldn’t fill their shoes.  Few men could.

Here’s the question. What’s the answer?

I’ve gone through both volumes of “The Debate on the Constitution; Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters During the Struggle Over Ratification”, compiled by the eminent historian Bernard Bailyn.

There is no reference from this record to any understanding of the Amendment Power which is other than an equal division of it between the Congress and the states.  The ratification generation understood the two modes to be equivalent.

It was a misunderstanding, and a failure to appreciate the practical significance of the 2/3 quorum required for the states to meet to consider an amendment.

It was a fatal flaw.  The unchecked abuse of power by Congress is the consequence.  The remedy is clear.  A technical amendment only, agreed upon in advance by 2/3 of the states, is required.

Are we, as state legislators, capable of this?  Or are we so fearful of each other that we can never assemble to consider any amendment?  If we are too timid to protect our liberties, perhaps we don’t deserve them.

That is the question.  We’ll soon find the answer.

From “A Landholder”, Oiver Ellsworth

He was a lawyer, a drafter of the Constitution, United States Senator from Connecticut, and the third Chief Justice of the United States.  From the Connecticut Courant (Hartford) December 3, 1787

“I am sensible that speculation is always liable to error.  If there be any capital defects in this constitution, it is most probable that experience alone will discover them.  Provision is made for an alteration if on trial it be found necessary.”

Experience has discovered a capital defect in the Constitution, in that the power of the states to originate amendments has never been capable of exercise.  This part of the Constitution has been on trial for 231 years, it has been found wanting, and it is necessary to alter it.

Federalist LXXXV (Hamilton), New York, May 28, 1788

“We may safely rely on the disposition of the state legislatures to erect barriers against the encroachments of the national authority.”

That reliance was misplaced.  The encroachments of the national authority are legion, and the state legislators are incapable of erecting the needed barriers.  That incapacity is a result of a technical error in Article V, requiring 2/3 for a quorum.  Correct the error, and the erection of the barriers can begin.

The voice of “An American”, Tench Coxe

Coxe was a Pennsylvania merchant, delegate to the Annapolis Convention of 1786, and the co-author, with Alexander Hamilton, of the Report on Manufactures (1791).  He wrote an address to the members of the Virginia ratification Convention, in the Pennsylvania Gazette of May 21, 1788, closing as follows:

“They will remember the provision to obtain amendments, and will recollect that the power will continue with the people at large in all time to come.” (Italics in original.)