The phrase, "Rule of Law" slips off our tongues as if we all know what is meant. But, do we? What is meant by the word, "rule"? Without resorting to dictionary definitions, I believe that we would all agree that this word relates to a set of established processes and procedures that we agree to follow if we are participants in the activity so governed. Our Constitution provides the umbrella of understanding that we base all our laws upon. However, we have drifted so far from the original intent of the writers of our Constitution that we must seriously question whether or not it is still relevant. Literally millions of "laws" have been enacted since our Constitution originated over 200 years ago. The Federal Tax laws, for example, encompass many thousands of pages and they are so complex that especially trained tax consultants are required to avoid paying taxes.
Every state has enacted so many statutes that pertain to almost every aspect of our daily lives that we cannot understand, let alone adhere, to the unenforceable rules of the game.
Worst yet, the legislators who enact the rules generally do not bother to read them prior to their approval. They simply follow the orders of their political party leaders and vote yes or no when told. We are so engulfed in laws that it is impossible for anyone, even the most astute legal expert, to comprehend their meaning. Today we have constitutional scholars arguing over the original intent of the framers of our constitution. The "Rules" that we are expected to adhere to as we attempt to live a civil life have become as contentious as our relations with government officials often are.
Is there any wonder that we question the actions of political and government leaders as they continually perpetuate a morass of rules that few of them understand, and generally none of the citizens can expect to comprehend either. "Exceptions to the "Rules" often seem to have more merit and authority than the "Rules" themselves. We must, therefore ask if the "Rules" are but relics of a system that is no longer manageable. Has our form of government outlived its usefulness? Are we unable to conduct our lives as our founder's anticipated that we would? Are the "Rules of Law" beyond our comprehension because of the web of complexity and obscure interpretations that seem to obstruct their uniform application and enforcement? Has the time come for us to scrap all the rules and start anew? If so, should we scrap the so-called democratic principles for some other bases of governance?
The most fundamental rules of law are those derived from spiritual and religious precepts such as those stated in the Ten Commandments. Others are derived from the underlying basis of government included in such documents as our own Constitution and the much earlier foundation of democracy, The Magna Carta. An examination of any of these immediately reveals that we have virtually ignored their basic teachings as we continue to proliferate law after law, while ignoring the moral basis of all law.
A recent US Supreme Court opinion pertaining to the development of wetlands is an example of the inadequacy and irrelevance of laws as they pertain to environmental protection.The Supreme Court argued and decided that wetland cannot be protected from development by imposing a uniform rule. Such a rule of law has been enforced by the Army Corp of Engineers and most state environmental agencies under the Clean Water Act of 1972, but now this seems irrelevant. The reason for the protection of wetlands is simple. All wetlands, whether ephemeral or permanent provide an essential filtering mechanism that helps prevent contamination of ground water and our aquifers. We all want and need uncontaminated drinking water. Legal definitions and rulings will not alter this basic need. Yet, the Supreme Court in all its wisdom wants to defy science and the need for pure water by allowing some development of wetlands if some suitable legal wording can be used to justify the action. The fundamental need for pure water is subverted by legalese to satisfy the greater commercial desire to develop wetlands.
We living in Door County are all too familiar with the trashing of protective wetlands for development. As the legal allowance of wetland destruction continues, we will all be harmed by worsening water contamination. The underlying moral basis of environmental protection for the benefit of all is made subservient to the interests of developers and local planning authorities. The Rules of Law are manipulated to allow those in power to do as they desire while the majority of us become the victims of the immoral Rules.
At every level of government we encounter abuses by those entrusted to govern. The laws that are the bases of all human interactions are corrupted by those we entrust to protect our rights and public health. We seem to have lost our moral compass and the needle is whirling around in a morass of laws that are expedient, but not moral, rather than steering a true course for human betterment for all.
--
Zeep
No comments:
Post a Comment