Yes, Roberts has turned out to be a great disappointment. If there's anything we've learned over the past couple of decades, it's that SCOTUS candidates nominated by Republicans will lie their asses off to get confirmed.
Steve, I understand you as someone who wants to clear obstacles so democracy can function again. You describe how money distorts representation and how reform could return power to the people through an amendment. I read sincerity and persistence in that search.
From where I stand outside your system, I see another question rising behind it. The Constitution you want to amend was written in 1788 by men who valued autonomy and property above collective care. It gave structure to ownership, not to equality. It also secured wealthy and cemented exploitation. The later amendments that expanded rights came from outside pressure, not original intent.
What if the need for constant correction is already built into this design?
What if each reform is a way to stretch a framework that was never meant to hold relational balance?
And if the story of America grew into something larger than its legal text — shaped by hope, war, and national self-image — how might real change begin with re-examining the story itself?
I wonder whether a constitutional amendment can restore what was never truly there, or if this is the moment to imagine a different foundation altogether.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Jay. From the start, the Constitution was seen as a work in progress that would need to be updated, and that's why 10 amendments were added before it even got out the door. Yes, originally, the main aim was to protect property and wealth, but public pressure throughout our history has moved that ambition toward greater equality and opportunity. Still have a long way to go, but as the line in "America the Beautiful" goes..."America, America, God mend thine every flaw." (Yeah, that song would make a much better national anthem the one we now have that glorifies war.)
Great article, Steve. The other side of this problem is the evolution of corporations being granted the same rights as people through a sequence of SCOTUS rulings. Senator Whitehouse provides an in depth analysis of that in his book and Senate floor talk series about the corporate scheme to capture SCOTUS: https://youtu.be/mAplGu1RxPg?si=8Ww4Xe9RBXAguB7O
In 2005, W nominated John Roberts as Chief Justice. The Senate confirmed Roberts by a vote of 78–22.
Yes, Roberts has turned out to be a great disappointment. If there's anything we've learned over the past couple of decades, it's that SCOTUS candidates nominated by Republicans will lie their asses off to get confirmed.
Thank you!
Thank you for this excellent post, Steve. I signed the pledge.
Thanks, Alex!
Steve, I understand you as someone who wants to clear obstacles so democracy can function again. You describe how money distorts representation and how reform could return power to the people through an amendment. I read sincerity and persistence in that search.
From where I stand outside your system, I see another question rising behind it. The Constitution you want to amend was written in 1788 by men who valued autonomy and property above collective care. It gave structure to ownership, not to equality. It also secured wealthy and cemented exploitation. The later amendments that expanded rights came from outside pressure, not original intent.
What if the need for constant correction is already built into this design?
What if each reform is a way to stretch a framework that was never meant to hold relational balance?
And if the story of America grew into something larger than its legal text — shaped by hope, war, and national self-image — how might real change begin with re-examining the story itself?
I wonder whether a constitutional amendment can restore what was never truly there, or if this is the moment to imagine a different foundation altogether.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Jay. From the start, the Constitution was seen as a work in progress that would need to be updated, and that's why 10 amendments were added before it even got out the door. Yes, originally, the main aim was to protect property and wealth, but public pressure throughout our history has moved that ambition toward greater equality and opportunity. Still have a long way to go, but as the line in "America the Beautiful" goes..."America, America, God mend thine every flaw." (Yeah, that song would make a much better national anthem the one we now have that glorifies war.)
Thank you, Steve. I value the exchange and will let your words rest where they are.
Well said- thanks, Steve.
Thanks, Jeff. And thanks for the work American Promise is doing.
Great article, Steve. The other side of this problem is the evolution of corporations being granted the same rights as people through a sequence of SCOTUS rulings. Senator Whitehouse provides an in depth analysis of that in his book and Senate floor talk series about the corporate scheme to capture SCOTUS: https://youtu.be/mAplGu1RxPg?si=8Ww4Xe9RBXAguB7O
Thanks, John. I'll check out the YouTube. Whitehouse has been talking about the impact of Citizens United for some time now.