Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Balkinization

Legal Commentary

: Balkinization

Aren't you glad our Constitution requires a fixed-term presidency?

By Jack M. Balkin

A poll just released by the American Research group finds Bush to have an overall approval rating right now of 19%, with 17% expressing approval of his handling of the economy. More to the point, perhaps, is that 76% "disapprove" of his overall presidency, and 78% disapprove particularly of his economic prowess. But, of course, thanks to our defective Constitution, we are stuck with this incompetent and incurious dolt until January 20, 2009, and we simply have to pray that Henry Paulson, with his $38 million salary from Goldman Sachs before he became Treasurey Secretary, has the brilliance, together with former Princeton Professor Ben Bernanke, to save us from the "cataclysm" foreseen by Warren Buffet but not by the free-market-can-do-no-wrong-thaht-isn't-self-correcting ideologues who have been running the government for the past seven years (not that some of them weren't also well-represented in the Clinton Administration as well).

Perhaps the events of this week prove that we don't really need a president at all, so long as we decide to treat the Treasury Secretary and head of the Fed as all-wise (or at least wise-enough) father figures who will save us from the monsters underneath our beds that threaten to devour our savings. But, on the offhand chance that it matters who is President, can be there the slightest scintilla of doubt that George W. Bush would (and his chief henchman/control Dick Cheney) would be out of office, with Republicans taking the lead in trying to find an acceptable (Republican) substitute (and, recall, I would not allow a Democrat to become President without the legitimacy of an intervening election)? What would be interesting is whether knowledgeable Republicans would pick the economically ignorant and psychologically mercurial John McCain as their new champion. On the latter, see today's Washington Post column by George Will, titled "McCain Loses His Head," which castigates McCain for his "off with his head" demand that SEC Chair Chris Cox be fired. It concludes as follows:

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

People all over the world are correctly deciding that unregulated cowboy capitalism has serious problems. They have also long since decided that our constitutional structures, which, among other things, give tenure in office to patently incompetent and untrustworthy leaders (whether or not they merit the appellation "constitutional dictators") is also not for them. Perhaps we're beginning a great national conversation about the former, but, alas, I still see no sign of any discussion about the latter. Instead, partisans of both McCain and Obama believe that the cure for what ails us is a better president with a better vision and "leadership." I'm not against that, of course, but that scarcely suffices as a full response to our present ills, any more than simply getting better leadership at AIG would make things all right again.

[UPDATE: I note a recently posted NYTimes article, "At U.N., Bush Reassures Leaders on Economy." I also note that at this moment the Dow is down around 160 points and NASDAQ around 25 points. Perhaps this suggests that no one, whether "leaders" or investors, is reassured by Mr. Bush's reassurance that "his administration was taking 'bold steps' to staunch the economic crisis in the United States." (I use "Mr." rather than "President" in order to underscore the point that it is not at all clear how "relevant" his occuping the Oval Office at this instant, as against, say, Secretary of Treasury Henry Paulson and head of the Fed Ben Bernanke.) Perhaps they's be more "reassured" if the United States could replace Mr. Bush immediately..... I'll bet that would send the market soaring.]

Full post as published by Balkinization on September 23, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.

Lawsuits and Settlements

State Farm Undercompensation
alleging compensation for totaled vehicles is less than California law requires.

Texas, USA
alleging the Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform Act of 2003 violates several provisions of the Constitution.

Pesticides
Long-Term Exposure Linked to Diabetes

Long-Term Insurance Suit
Settled for $15 Million

UnumProvident
for allegedly denying long-term disability claims.

Indianapolis
alleging the city's police are overly aggressive against the homeless in violation of the protection of free speech and unreasonable searches guaranteed in the US Constitution.

Related Searches