The political science department, in conjunction with the College of Social Sciences and Student Affairs, held a special panel discussion on Monday in honor of Constitution Day.
Constitution Day is a national holiday that celebrates the adoption of the U.S. Constitution.
The panel discussion, held in the Satellite Student Union, largely focused on the upcoming presidential election, with presenters explaining the history of the Electoral College, President Obama’s first term in office and the chances of him being elected to a second term.
Organizing events such as this is vital for the university community, according to Jeff Cummins, associate professor in the political science department.
“There is considerable lack of knowledge of how our government was designed and why it is unable to deal with some of our most pressing issues, such as immigration reform and the national debt,” Cummins said.
“These are issues that will affect students and their children for decades to come since our government’s apparent inability to address these problems has led to questions about whether the Constitution still works.”
David Schecter, faculty member and chair of the political science department, presented his case for Obama’s reelection with a slideshow entitled, “50 Days to Go: How the Electoral College will Help President Obama Win Again”.
Schecter’s argument discussed the “arc” of campaigns, voter impressions and how a quick glimpse at some very simple math points toward an Obama victory on Nov. 6.
Through the use of “primary data,” Schecter pointed at several recent polls indicating the positive and negative percentages of each candidate, with Romney currently at a disadvantage.
Schecter also highlighted the deep political divide among states, comparing election maps from previous years and the stagnation of states choices since Al Gore lost to George W. Bush in 2000.
“It’s just New Mexico and Iowa. Those are the only two states that changed between Bush’s election and Bush’s re-election. America has not changed that much in the last decade, it’s still very much polarized.”
The electoral maps from 2000 to 2008 remained so close that it would be a surprising to see it change much this year, Schecter said. The 2012 election, at least according to Schecter, will be decided by a small portion of Americans living in the swing states. Swing states, such as Ohio and Nevada, shift their votes election to election and aren’t as concrete in their voting as California and Texas.
While Schecter argued the inevitability of an Obama re-election, Yishaiyah Abosch questioned whether or not the president in fact deserved a second term.
Abosch argued that the Obama administration has been acting unlawfully, bypassing Constitutional laws when they deemed them unnecessary in cases such as the military intervention in Libya, drone use and hit-list killings of Americans abroad involved with terrorism.
“The sight of a president compiling a list, independent of a potential check-and-balance, let alone due process”” a list that includes American citizens for immediate assassination”” is scary,” Abosch said.
“Rather than getting into the weeds with all those specifically Constitutional questions, I want to stick to policy. There are many reasons not to re-elect Barack Obama, it’s hard to know where to begin.”
The panel ended with questions from students in the audience.
William S. • Sep 19, 2012 at 11:50 pm
How constitution day is connected to the re-election of Obama escapes me. If the argument is that Obama has operated outside of constitutional law then this is a legal issue for the courts to decide based on allegation merit.
It is rather ironic that Mr. Cummins would point out a widespread lack of knowledge concerning how our government was formed and its perceived inability to deal with something as basic as the national debt, and then question the workability of the constitution. Does ignorance of government somehow validate ineffectiveness of the constitution? That would be like throwing away a brand new car simply because the operator isn’t familiar with the maintenance manual. Our constitution does work when representatives choose to read and understand it. How many youtube videos are there of elected leaders unable to say what is in the constitution, or how often have they misquoted it?
I propose the chief reason that ignorance prevails among educated Americans concerning our founding and the constitution are due to college-based attacks on our founding fathers as “rich, white slave-owners” who built this nation on the backs of minorities. Who is going to study and love the constitution with that backdrop? I have challenged professors on this view. If not for these men then who? Who else would have taken up arms against the British? Poor minorities?
It is time for college professors to drop the bashing stereotype of our founding fathers, recognize the context of the world they lived in, and hail their accomplishments that put this country on the correct path of individual freedom and liberty for all. Because of our constitution these victories have come; the end of slavery, voting rights, workers rights, civil rights, and a host of others all proving the constitution works for all people when we allow it. I know this might rile those stuck on the idea on “rich white men” but no nation has ever been founded in perfection, as perfection in the affairs of mankind is a false goal. Humans are imperfect by design. It is time to recognize that it is the pursuit of perfection our constitution and declaration has given us. And for that we should be eternally grateful.