A Bad Document’s Good Ideas

The Southerners who gathered in Montgomery, Ala., a century and a half ago saw themselves as the true inheritors of the original Founding Fathers. Indeed, the Constitution they approved — its sesquicentennial is today — was more imitation than innovation. “We the people of the Confederate states,” said their preamble, “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”

Despite the familiar ring, there were important differences. In trying to build their own version of a more perfect union, the secessionists protected “the right of property in negro slaves.” In doing so, they rendered their entire project suspect, both then and now.

Yet the authors of the Confederate Constitution were serious, learned men who thought hard about the principles of democratic government and sought ways to improve on the original document. They also came to their project with something that their forebears in Philadelphia lacked. In 1787, James Madison may have had clear notions about the operation of American government. The men of 1861, though, could draw from three score and fourteen 14 years of actual experience.

And, in fact, parts of the Confederate Constitution improved on the original. One section gave the president the ability to delete parts of spending bills, for example. Today, most governors possess the same authority. The Confederates’ objectionable views on slavery should not automatically invalidate their opinions on unrelated matters. It’s hardly racist to think that Americans would benefit if President Obama also had a line-item veto on the budget.

Read the rest here.