Revision — From the February 2014 issue

Dissolve Congress

A cure for constitutional crisis

Download Pdf
Read Online

Over the past five years, every industrial nation has had its own version of the same economic fight: champions of austerity on one side, advocates of social spending and economic stimulus on the other. It’s tempting to view America’s ongoing political dysfunction as merely one version of this fight, and thus to dismiss it as an aftereffect of the 2008 financial collapse. But the peculiar form the fight has taken in the United States — threatening every few months to hobble the economy with a government shutdown or a debt default — suggests that the country’s institutional dysfunction is no longer a consequence of perpetual crisis but rather its cause. Other democracies have been faced with debt fiascos even more acute than those in the United States, but they have not experienced America’s institutional breakdown. Recognizing as much, some citizens have blamed America’s unique pathology on partisan squabbling, gerrymandering, or special-interest spending. In doing so they ignore the true source of the problem, perhaps because it also happens to be a long-standing source of pride: a nearly 230-year-old constitution stretched past the limits of its usefulness.

There is nothing more tiresome to an American than to be lectured by a Frenchman — a fact on unmistakable display during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But it happens that the nation of Lafayette possesses a curious loophole that might help the United States stop making a fool of itself. In 1815, on the heels of revolution and a subsequent turn to empire, France drafted a new constitution. Many of our political leaders — from Talleyrand to Chateaubriand — had already lived for a time in exile in the United States and were familiar with its relatively youthful institutions. They were drawn more to the British model. To this they added a crucial feature: when the government reached an impasse, whether due to a disagreement between the executive and legislative branches or to the inability of one coalition to obtain a legislative majority, the president could call for elections. Instead of waiting months, or even years, to weigh in on the handling of a crisis, voters could have their say immediately. This Charter of 1815, which has served as a template for subsequent parliamentary regimes, allowed the chief of state to dissolve the lower chamber and organize new elections. This is what took place on September 5, 1816, when Louis XVIII observed that the Ultraroyalist majority (the Tea Party of its time) was blocking the passage of government initiatives and sending the country toward crisis. Instead of resting on the laurels of “checks and balances” while waiting for passions to cool, it goes straight to the heart of things and holds the government accountable to its voting citizenry.

Previous PageNext Page
1 of 2

You are currently viewing this article as a guest. If you are a subscriber, please sign in. If you aren't, please subscribe below and get access to the entire Harper's archive for only $45.99/year. Or purchase this issue on your iOS or Android devices for $6.99.

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Download Pdf
Share
is an essayist and historian.

Get access to 165 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

  • BabsNH

    It appears that Mr. Immarigeon feels that plunging the country into chaos, through the call of immediate elections, is better than temporary crisis. The main fallacy with this essay is the implication that Americans can only have their voices heard every two years when they vote. In fact, Americans can and should have their voices heard on a regular basis. We have free speech here, and freedom of the press. Americans voice their opinions through media every day, all day long. In addition, Americans can and should call and write their Congressional representatives to express their opinion. Americans can now petition for change through a White House website. In addition, the US has NOT forbidden change and adaptation, as we have what is known as the amendment process. We are not “chained to an ancient text.” We have a livable, workable Constitution. What is needed is an active, involved, informed citizenry, and a return to civil discourse.

    • michael_carr

      If one reads the essay without rose colored lenses, the take-away is that the system is utterly broken. Our supposedly “free” speech is obscured and obfuscated from top down by paid corporate speech that dominates the narrative, and is utterly enabled by a fawning, castrated media obsessed with the horse race… Purportedly presenting the false equivalency of “both sides,” a fabricated construct that only preserves the status quo. I live in the media bubble that is New York City, yet I’m surrounded by people who are socially liberal, but are firmly entrenched as misinformed citizens via the opinion pages of the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal. These are not avenues of “civil discourse,” and rather quite accurately support the argument for revolution.

THE CURRENT ISSUE

August 2015

In the Shadow of the Storm

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Measure for Measure

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Trouble with Israel

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

A Camera on Every Cop

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content
Close

Please enjoy this free article from Harper’s Magazine.