Fareed Zakariya does not understand the USA

 
I usually enjoy his Sunday program.  It is generally well informed, worldly and not overly self-absorbed.  His public persona is a little strange.  He is by origin an Indian Muslim whose father is a religious scholar.  He was educated in various elite western schools and inhabits the somewhat isolated metro areas favored by the coastal elites.  I would be curious to know how much time he has spent with ordinary Americans out there in the "flyover"country.

Today he quite reasonably suggested that the way out of America's deficit nightmare is for "Simpson-Bowles" to be enacted in its entirety and that the Congress should cancel the Bush taxcuts.  He said that this would largely solve the defict problem and restore sanity to our fiscal situation.  He did not mention the needed reduction in military expenditures and only vaguely referred to needed changes in social entitlements.  Nevertheless, on the whole it was quite rational.

Unfortunately, it was also quite unrealistic.  He knows that.  He said that our political system prevents such a solution.  Correct.  This is a back-handed reference to his complaint a couple of weeks back that the Constutution of the United States is not to his liking and that it should be modified substantially by amendment to make the states administrative districts devoid of sovereignty.  Jeffrey Toobin, the lawyer consultant for CNN agreed with him.  Yup, yup went the lawyer.  He and Zakariya smiled at each other secure in the modern sophistication of their collective thought.  The amendments they had in mind would abolish the electoral college and apportion senators by population.  What a grand idea, they exclaimed.  After all, they observed, one can drive down the interstate highway system and see that there are no longer any real differences between the various states.  Are not all strip malls and fast food joints the same?  How are New Jersey and Texas different?  And if they are, should they be?

They have missed something.  The United States is a federal union of the states, not a pure democracy and a lot of Americans who vote out there in the hinterland want it to remain such.  It was for that reason that the federal constitution was structured as it is.  The smaller states had the option of not joining the Union when the present constitution was adopted.  To induce their ratification, they were offered the compromises that insured them a more than equal "say" in the federal government.  Those guaratees of state sovereignty still exist.  Lawyer Toobin must know that.  Zakariya must know that as well at least at a theoretical level of "knowledge."

That being the case do these two marvels of elite culture really think that the states will ratify amendments that reduce their power as sovereign  entities?

If they do think that, then they need to "get out more." 

They might consider more likely solutions for their discontents:

- secession of New York and California

- a new constitutional convention.  it would be amusing to see how that would develop.  It is often said that such a convention could be limited to consideration of the "issues" favored by people like Toobin and Zakariya.  Really?  pl

 

Comments

[Fred]

JT,

"God" was in there from the start, too, in the Declaration of Independence:

"...and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,..."

The founders saw fit not to define 'Nature's God'.

[JTCornpone]

PL

I agree but don't tell that to my Town Council.

JT

[J]

Colonel,

What do you make of George Will and his statement that our Constitution is 'anti-evolutionary'?

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/07/george-will-the-constitution-is-an-anti-evolutionary-device/

[Hank Foresman]

Patrick

I am not surprised that Messers Zakariya and Toobin hold the beliefs they do regarding the Constitution. Many educate elites have looked at distain for years at the electoral college, the equal representation of the states in the Senate and the sovereignty of the states. What they fail to understand is that each of these were parts and parcel of the great compromise which is the glue that holds our republic together.
I have mixed feelings about a Constitutional Convention as I trust the will of the people but given our twenty four news cycle and the dearth of learned and serious minded politicians like Mr. Madison I would fear what might come of it.

Hank

[confusedponderer]

Re: the pledge being nationalist exhortation - that appears quite true - check Wikipedia for a graphic example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellamy_salute

[Lars]

If the US Senate is abolished, I am all for it. At a minimum, the government should be operational. The Senate makes is much less so. Elect 1/3 of the Legislature every 2 years from homogenous districts and have adequate recall provisions. Let the President serve 6 yrs, no re-election.

[William R. Cumming]

Strangely IMO there are few real experts on federalism in the USA which is of course a nation-state whose charter is founded on that doctrine. I have no answer why but I have repeatedly suggested on my own blogs that the Congress should establish a Joint Committee on Federalism which like other joint committees, Tax, Intel, would produce analysis on federalism issues from time to time and like the Congressional Budget Office issue for each piece of federal legislation a federalism analysis. One key but overlooked power of the states is issues of balloting and voting even for federal officials. This power often abused is one reason why the often corrupt states have assisted in ensuring that federal corruption is perpetuated.

[Trever]

Why are we not pushing to expand the House? Seems the precedent is there and the institution already in place, we just need to demand for it.

[mbrenner]

This is from David Bromwich at Yale (is New Haven the coastal Northeast? or 'upper-Virginia'?):

"We are divided between two parties: one that thinks government should be used for nothing but wars, another that thinks government should be used for wars (whether justified
or not) in order to prove the value of government for other purposes as well." Huffington Post today

Also, from an Arab friend in the 'Forbidden Zone' - otherwise known as the Middle East: "We all now have lost 'The New World;' America has lost the advantages and opportunities of being 'The New World."

[The Moar You Know]

"There is a group in California, the central valley cities, that want to secede from Calif and make a 51 state."

Nancy K: I read about that the other day. The gentleman (I use the term loosely) who proposed the arrangement is a legislator from Riverside County, notable for it's vast swathes of foreclosed, vacant homes and their ungodly number of methamphetamine addicts. The group of counties that he wants in the new state include both Orange and San Diego counties. This is not an accident; of the ten counties he cited, San Diego and Orange counties are the only two that generate any income whatsoever. The others are impoverished to an extent that you might not believe possible in a state as wealthy as California.

San Diego and Orange are conservative, but not stupid. And we're not terribly charitable. I think the good legislator who proposed this arrangement will be waiting until the proverbial freezing over of hell before he sees his vision come to pass.

[Stanleyhenning@mac.com]

All I can say at this point is that "i am an American" and, while I am very dissatisfied with America's so-called leadership at this point, I also would like to see America emerge from the trash pit we have dumped ourself into to the America that we really should be and we can do this if we really try -this means cutting the conservative-liberal crap and looking at what it really takes to bring us back out of the abyss into which we have fallen. We are at a serious crossroads and if we do not come together to cross it to the benefit of greater America (the average citizen in conjunction with the economic establishment), then we may be doomed to demise while we watch China and others take over. Come on! Let's cooperate and graduate!

[Jackie]

Stanley,
I like the concept and I'm willing to cooperate, I'd just like to see some recognition that republicans can get along and don't value the Presidency so much that they will do whatever they can to derail a President who is not of their party.

[bill roche]

would you all
prefer a world in which China had hegemony or Islam?
Face it; western civilizaion has had its day and it was magnificent. The west today does not have the will to defend itself. It has lost its religion, its drive, its purpose. It is a pity. For my money...send out for Chinese
Meanwhile, maybe a new Constitutional Convention would let Americans redefine themselves. I suspect that the liberal elitist intellectuals would not be satisfied with the result.
Bill Roche

[omen]

it's our trade policy that's killing us.

[omen]

"The amendments they had in mind would abolish the electoral college and apportion senators by population."

i don't support either of these things. but there is something wrong when the city of los angeles alone has roughly 2 million people uninsured. 2 million people. that is more people than the entire population of either dakotas, wyoming, idaho or montana. senators from small, sparesly populated states get to lord over and dictate policy and determine what happens to millions. this is a case of the few controlling the many. how is that not elitism?

[Patrick Lang]

omen

Your position assumes that the US is one,unitary country like France. Many of us do not want that nor do we accept the idea. pl

[Patrick Lang]

bill Roche

In re a new constitutional convention. I suppose that you are aware that the first constitutional convention was called to write amendments to the articles of confederation and decided to create a new government instead. pl

[omen]

my question was is the current system elitist? of course it is.

many of us do not want either a government controlled and manipulated by corporate interest. there is nothing we can do about it. congress wont even pass a bill requiring full disclosure for campaign funding.