In commemoration of Constitution Day, students and faculty discussed whether or not they would sign the U.S. Constitution last Tuesday at the Cross-Cultural Center. The event was the first in a series of annual events meant to inform and educate San Diego State students about the Constitution.
Presented by the Center for Community Based Service-Learning, the dean of students and the dean for student affairs, the discussion was facilitated by political science department Chair Ronald King who, in turn, invited fellow political science Professor Edward Heck and history professor Eve Kornfeld to speak as part of the panel.
"Every regime propagandizes its citizens," King said, as he initially addressed a substantial turnout of students and faculty.
His remark was part of a larger discussion focusing on the original purposes, strengths and shortcomings of the Constitution, which allowed those in attendance to ask themselves whether or not they would sign it if presented with the 218 year-old text.
Kornfeld outlined specific motives for and against ratification considering pertinent issues of the time, helping audience members gain a relative level of insight regarding the historic environment into which the Constitution was born.
"You might have been worried then about whether the United States, a collection of colonies that really did not know each other and did not share much economically, socially, or politically - whether they could stay together," Kornfeld said.
She said at the time of ratification, many occupying the government's tiers of power felt a written constitution would solidify unification of the varied interests and respective political identities of the colonies.
Proponents of the slave trade railed in opposition to the prospect of constitutionalism on the grounds that the slave-driven economy of the South was not suitably protected within the proposed document, Kornfeld said.
"When you think about whether the Constitution is a document you could be willing to sign, you should think along the lines of, 'which constitution - when?'" Heck said.
He also reminded the audience of the many positive amendments to the Constitution since 1787.
He explained various fundamental problems of the original Constitution as he perceived them, especially the tolerance of slavery, the lack of provisions for women's suffrage and the electoral college system.
"I don't think it is very easy to defend the electoral college," Heck said.
Although by 1870 the Constitution made great strides for the time and would have been easier to justify signing, he said.
Within the context of the discussion itself, however, there was no shortage of diverse viewpoints.
"Not only wouldn't I have signed the Constitution in 1870, I would not have signed it today," King said.
He used England as an example of a country without a written constitution and said the U.S. Constitution is essentially illegal based on the rules of the Continental Congress.
A brief question and answer session ensued after the discussion, during which students were able to delve deeper into the issues surrounding the Constitution. It was clear that not all agreed with King's view of the framers' intent, however, and there was some outspoken dissent.
"I used to teach constitutional law ... and I just disagreed with his position on democracy," philosophy graduate student Judith Abeles said.
Events such as these "increase civic engagement and participation among our students," said Stephanie Brown, faculty director of the Center for Community Based Service-Learning. Moreover, recent legislation has required that SDSU sponsor educational Constitution Day events.
Be the first to comment on this article!