Dictators take away your choice.
Or reveal your weaknesses. ¹

For Thomas Jefferson, the pursuit of happiness embraced many forms of opportunity, including the natural linkage between a general education and free enterprise. Along with George Washington, he favored Federal funding for education. He felt the future of republican government depended upon a “general education to enable every man to judge for himself what will secure or endanger his freedom.”² Within his context of unlimited territorial expansion and the ensuing Homestead Act, any American was free to stake a claim and start a farm or ranch, or to open a business or school in a growing community. Teachers from small towns like Concord or Salem could and did travel great distances to start schools in the newly opened territories. And small business entrepreneurs could open their doors to burgeoning communities spreading from the expansive plains to the Pacific Ocean. If we fast forward to contemporary America, we find an even broader opportunity landscape in which to exercise individual freedom and pursue personal happiness. The only question is whether our education system and enterprising culture present opportunities truly accessible and beneficial to all Americans. And that question presumes a politics aligned with the ideals shared by Jefferson and the signers of our Constitution.

But staking a claim on coveted opportunities is quite different now than in the 18th and 19th centuries. America began the 20th century on the wave of an industrial revolution which metamorphized into a tsunami of technological innovation. While America’s burgeoning economy was creating more career choices, it also demanded more investment in relevant education. And young opportunists required more than their native ability or physical stamina. They needed their Government to fulfill the Jeffersonian promise. Americans needed the equivalent of a 19th century Homestead Act, that is, a general education system made available to every young American. Education and a free enterprise system are intertwined in the provision of equal opportunity. It is not an accident that Jefferson conjoined “life” and “liberty” with the “pursuit of happiness” as quintessential elements of “inalienable rights.” These rights are weaved into the very fabric of a democratic state for they are essential to every individual—essential, because woven into each person by right of birth. Though no government can or should attempt to guarantee happiness, it must secure the opportunity for every citizen to pursue his/her personal path to happiness.

America’s compulsory education system, taken as just one example, is part of that government commitment. Alexis de Tocqueville shared an interesting observation about education in the nascent phase of our nation: “In the United States, education as a whole is directed toward political life; in Europe its main object is preparation for private live, as the citizens’ participation in public affairs is too rare an event to be provided for in advance.”³ Obviously, much has changed nearly two hundred years later. Contemporary America must now prepare its citizens to meet both their political responsibilities and their private ambitions. Recent political protests are expressions of our political responsibilities, as is the exercise of our right to vote. But the diversity of opportunity in a sophisticated modern economy also requires an education system that prepares citizens for both their political and private lives, to include vocational and/or academic training designed to accommodate individual career choices.

And those choices are made real by a well-managed economy, which is another part of our government’s commitment to provide opportunities for every citizen. In fact, our general and individual prosperity depends on an economic system that ensures fairness and opportunity without which there is no growth or productivity. Remember why Jefferson wrote our Declaration of Independence: amongst many grievances he specifically outlined the oppression of the colonialist economy by punitive taxes and tariffs. “No taxation without representation” and “free trade” were amongst the loudest rallying cries of the American revolution. And those rallying cries are no less relevant today. They might inspire one to question whether our tax system benefits education and the prospects for a new workforce of young professionals rather than the accumulated wealth of an extraordinarily small minority. Further, one might question how can tariff wars benefit America in a global economy that depends upon services and resources distributed across many continents. America’s economy did not mushroom in isolation but bloomed on a world stage that it both led and dominated. These questions concerning tax and trade policies relate directly to our youth’s education and job opportunities. How can we not see this nexus between education, the economy, and politics?

While the growing list of college graduates seems to promise a bright future for a new generation, actual prospects for these graduates are hampered by huge tuition debts. And entry level jobs tend to pay less in an economy that favors pre-established wealth or proven expertise. The current Administration exemplifies this predilection where nepotism and wealth appear as the primary qualifications for lucrative senior positions in the White House, while career public service jobs earn much less. As a corollary, wage increases have generally remained stagnant compared with the growth in wealth at the top of the economic ladder. And coupled with the high costs of college tuitions, sparse investments in our public k-12 education system further impede our youths’ future. Their prospects are threatened on both ends of the education ladder. Consequently, the jobs of the future are often rewarded to H-1B Visa holders with special expertise. The promise of our public education system is falling short of the demands of the job market as well as the expectations of our youth. And if college debt continues to hinder the prospects for graduates, then it becomes more likely that only those who can afford college tuition will realize the career benefits of a college education. How then can we assure that every child can pursue his/her chosen career? The answer certainly involves both economic and political components. But, unfortunately, those components are complicated and involve a panoply of obstacles to the future opportunities of our posterity.

Before Covid-19, the unusual occurrence of low inflation and low unemployment coupled with record high stock indices demonstrated what the President termed the “greatest American economy in history.” But he was very selective in highlighting just one aspect of his 2018 tax reduction act. It did positively affect corporate stock prices and reduced taxes for the wealthy and passive investors. But what he ignored in his “greatest . . . economy” braggadocio was how those reduced tax rates disproportionately favored the wealthy over the average worker. In addition, while wage growth for workers at the bottom third of the economic ladder remained stagnant, tariff wars were bankrupting a significant number of independent farmers. Moreover, the costs of imported goods, housing, healthcare, college education, and food were challenging both low- and medium-income households and increasing their personal debt. That debt and the trillion-dollar government deficits consequent to the 2018 tax reduction further clouded America’s economic future. As a result, America was ill-prepared for the coronavirus pandemic which only augmented those deficits and reduced America’s economy to a level not experienced since the Great Depression. Before this pandemic, the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing during a period of persistently low inflation and high employment economy—which is itself an economic anomaly—now provides little flexibility for countering an economic downward spiral. These conditions are not indicators of a great economy, but of an affordability crisis and of a pending debt catastrophe. Is this how a well-managed economy secures the future of American wage earners and of the next generation’s opportunities?

During periods of severe economic downturns, Americans have looked to their government and specifically to their President for recovery and words of comfort. Franklin Roosevelt responded with the New Deal and his fireside chats. Barack Obama replicated his predecessor with a financial and infrastructure stimulus package. He also briefed Americans on their government’s progress and built their confidence in a restored economy. Given these historic models, how should we rate President Trump’s handling of our current crisis and its severe impact on the lives, health, and prospects of Americans? Perhaps more pointedly, what should we expect from any President during a national crisis? Well, the answer to these questions is found in our Constitution.

Article 2 addresses the role of the Executive. But the context is presented in the preamble where it is clearly stated that “in Order to form more perfect union” we must “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” The participants in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 deliberately set out to construct a government that would do so by balancing the competing influences of its executive, legislative, and judicial branches. But they recognized that the threat of foreign intervention, influences, or even invasion, would require an executive with expansive powers to deal with all types of foreign threats, as well as any domestic threats, in order to secure the blessings of liberty for all. At the same time, they also worried whether the powers of a commander-in-chief might entice a future President to abuse those powers. Such abuse was defined as “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors,” or the use of the powers of office for self-enrichment via “any other Emolument” (Article 1, Section 4 and 1, respectively). Therefore, their Constitution provided for a Presidency that could be checked by either Congress or the courts. It stipulated that a President must take an oath to “defend the Constitution of the United States” (Article II, Section 1). Further, it demanded that any President “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” (Article II, Section 3).While they wanted to free the Presidency from frivolous entanglements, they also recognized the need to protect the republic from a dangerously rogue President. Such a President might disregard the general welfare and his responsibility to secure the “Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” in service of his personal interest or self-aggrandizement. They had, after all, rebelled against a monarch. While they recognized the need for a powerful executive capable of securing the individual liberty of America’s citizens, they also provided for impeachment of any President who assumed dictatorial power at the expense of that individual liberty promised to current and future generations of Americans. But is our individual liberty secured when an impeached President is acquitted of proven abuses of power and obstruction of justice in his attempt to serve his personal political interests rather than his oath of office, the law of the land, and the general welfare of all Americans, including their posterity? An affirmative answer to this question implies, even forebodes, an existential threat to our American republic.

The American Constitution alone cannot, as stated therein, “secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and our Posterity.” It requires the good faith support and willing adherence of an informed—that is, generally educated—polity and its elected representatives. Just as we teach our children to follow the golden rule and be good citizens, we expect our leaders to take an oath to support our Constitution and pledge allegiance to our republic. Nevertheless, political leaders sometimes seem more invested in their reelection than to either their oath of office or the welfare of their constituents. But a craven lust for office and power cannot be justification for failing to remove from office a President proven guilty of crimes and abuse of power. That spineless justification makes the current Senate’s Republican majority complicit in our President’s crimes and abuses. And it abandons the great task that Lincoln laid down for us “that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.” At Gettysburg, Lincoln was reminding us that Americans died to preserve a “nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” Their courage is belied by the Republican senators who failed their oath to be just jurors and support the dictates of our Constitution. As a result, they bequeathed the helm of our ship of state to a captain intent on steering us onto a shoal.

Acquitting President Trump of gross misconduct in office—the trifecta of using the power of office for personal gain, of conspiring to undermine a national election, and of undercutting our national security by withholding support from a foreign ally in an extortion scheme—flies in the face of every conceivable expectation of an American President. By comparison, Bill Clinton violated the propriety of his office. Andrew Johnson ignored the legislative will of the majority Party in Congress. Clinton’s lie under oath violated the law. And Johnson’s opposition to Congress’ Tenure of Office Act violated the Constitutional separation of powers. Although Richard Nixon was never impeached, he resigned rather than face impeachment for his role in orchestrating crimes, specifically a burglary and its subsequent coverup. But President Trump far exceeded these former Presidents in his misconduct, abuse of power, disregard for our Constitutionally mandated separation of powers, and violation of his Article II responsibilities to assure that our “laws are faithfully executed.” Neither the Mueller report nor the impeachment transcripts exonerate President Trump. How then can we not conclude that he is indeed an existential threat to our democracy—that is, to our individual freedom and personal prospects for ourselves and our children?

His acquittal by a complicit Senate majority has further negative consequences. He now believes he is, in his own words, “the chief law enforcement officer.” He considers himself empowered to dictate who the Department of Justice should investigate or prosecute and what sentences, if any, should be assigned to convicted felons. If he disagrees with prosecutions or sentences, he reserves the right to pardon a convicted felon or commute a sentence without any supportive evidence that might justify leniency. He reserves to himself the right of kings to administer justice and disregard any legal restraint on the execution of his office. Although the Constitution grants the pardon power to the President, it does not grant him the power to pardon or commute a felon who can incriminate him in a crime. That pardon is itself a crime. Even President Trump’s loyal and subservient Attorney General admitted as much in his testimony under oath to Congress. And yet the President committed that very crime in pardoning Roger Stone for not testifying against him, as Stone readily admitted. Does not the Senate’s acquittal further support the President’s belief that his power is unlimited, that he is above the law, and that he is the chief law enforcer in the land? His impeachment defense lawyers unabashedly argued as such. In truth, the Republican majority in the Senate is traitorous to the primary principles expressed in the Declaration of Independence and implemented in our Constitution. Our freedom and equal opportunity are now at risk to the whims, corruption, and incompetence of a rogue President who considers himself above the law. In both his words and his actions, he has demonstrated his belief that he is the state. Therefore, he feels justified in eschewing both Congressional oversight and any legal constraints.

Some believe that the President’s promise to “make America great again” is a viable political justification for his actions. In his mind, he realized that promise with the passage of tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy. And the subsequent stock market boon justified his self-proclaimed success. His tax policy’s effect on the average wage earner, however, was somewhat masked by the economic expansion he inherited from the previous Administration. Nevertheless, both his MAGA promise and the market boon ended with his mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic. While China and Europe have long since emerged from the first wave peak of the virus, America has extended its peak to new heights with no end in sight. Meanwhile, the President dismisses the virus as if it does not exist or, as he says, “it will just disappear.” True, the virus’ rampage will end when there are no more victims to infect and untold numbers have died. The President assures this bleak outcome by refusing to develop and execute a national policy for a nationwide mitigation effort in lieu of a successful vaccine that could be months or even years away. In fact, he “takes no responsibility at all” and blames the governors for their myriad and uncoordinated response to the pandemic. As a result, his personal inaction has resulted in the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. His recent promise to rebuild the economy—”I can do it again”—is only believable if you accept his fantastical premise— “it (Covid-19) will just disappear”—and disregard the facts. Should we believe the President rather than the evidence of our eyes? That belief is not justified by the facts and can be fairly characterized as truly blind faith.

Such faith in the President may be based on a cynical belief that incompetence or corruption exists to some degree in nearly every Administration. Or it may be attributed to one of his many alleged conspiracy theories, including a “deep state” conspiring against the will of the people or a malicious cabal of Democrats and “fake news” harassing a much aggrieved and innocent President. According to these rationalizations and conspiracy theories, the President has either done nothing any other elected official has done or something he self-proclaims as right and lawful, though unappreciated by his deluded adversaries. A certain plurality of Americans remains unwavering in their support for this President’s excuses, grievances, and his various conspiracy theories. And that support has granted him the power he now holds over the Republican Party. Given his impeachment, how can the exoneration of a rogue president—an active disruptor of our democratic system—benefit the American people? How could Republicans acquit him? Obviously, they feared his supporters would enact revenge in the primary elections. How then could American voters reelect them or, more crucially, this Republican President? Well, they must believe more in him than in the principles of a democratic republic. For it is impossible to reconcile his actions with those principles and our Constitution.

There never was a rational policy premise to MAGA. The President’s tax policy was tilted toward wealth creation rather than any stimulus to productivity. His promises for rebuilding infrastructure never resulted in any policy initiative. His “law and order” justification for violent suppression of largely peaceful protests and his “zero tolerance” immigration executive orders failed to preserve life and liberty for either citizens or immigrants. Instead, they were met with myriad legal challenges since they violate human decency, existing laws—such as due process, and/or other Constitutional restraints. His appointees are not “the best people” he promised, but mostly sycophants and/or wealthy supporters poorly suited to the positions for which he nominated them. Many of his cabinet appointments were not only unaligned with the departments they managed but determined to undermine their mission. It is not difficult, by contrast, to find previous Republican Presidents who would disagree with opening Federal parks to gas and oil drilling, with removing 90+ regulations—many of which secure our health and safety, with removing all scientist from the USDA, with reducing funding for public education by diverting funds to private schools, with suppressing the EPA’s work on climate change and environmental pollution, with deploying the US military or Federal officers to contain public protests, with denial of due process and mass deportation of asylum seekers, and so on. Ironically and regrettably, President Trump’s failures over his first three years in office seemed less to demoralize his supporters than to normalize his misbehavior before the general public.

For many Americans, the President’s failure to address the Covid-19 pandemic is the singular failure of this Administration. The impact on our health system, the economy, and the suffering of so many Americans—not only from sickness and loss of income, but especially from the deaths of loved ones—is more than sufficient reason to vote President Trump out of office. But the pandemic response, I would contend, is only the latest example of his disregard for the lives of fellow human beings, for their freedom, or for their futures. His handling of our nation’s pandemic response fits an already well-established norm which includes 5400 immigrant children separated from their parents—at least seven of whom died in our custody, immigrant internment camps, the Kurdish genocide, his attack on our healthcare in the courts and by executive orders, and his support for foreign dictators who unleashed their militaries on civilians in Turkey, Syria, and the Philippines. These grievous offenses against humanity offend the conscience of Americans and the very integrity of our founding principles. His tariff wars and tax cuts demonstrate a quid pro quo management style designed to demonstrate his power and make wealthy or corporate benefactors financially beholden to him. He has never shown any interest in serving the general welfare, whether it involved education, healthcare, the environment, mitigation of climate change, income/wealth inequality, or the conduct of his office in accordance with the law of the land and our Constitution. Instead, he is now emboldened to make preemptive attacks on our voting system and to suppress the vote of his non-supporters.

This last point regarding voter suppression could become an endpoint for this democratic republic. President Donald J. Trump is attempting to mimic leaders like Erdogan, Putin, or any leader where the popular vote is not permitted to represent the will of the people. Instead, it is merely a pretense used to validate the office holder’s current position in government. The President wants to manipulate the vote in the November election. If he is successful in crippling the Post office before the next election, he could limit the number of mail-in ballots delivered by November 3rd, thereby reducing somewhat the number of votes against him. Because of the pandemic, a time-consuming absentee ballot count is anticipated. Wherever vote counting significantly delays results, he could focus on discrediting vote counts, especially in contested swing states. Given the likely prospect of delayed election results and contested vote counting, he could then claim voter fraud and formally dispute key state vote counts. In this orchestrated context of disputed vote counts, he could then engage a bevy of lawyers to contest the election—as he has already prefigured in recorded statements. Then he would declare victory in the midst of the chaos he has created—as he has done so often before whether with a government shutdown, illegal use of Congressionally allocated funds, border wall construction, and so on. What he wants is not a free election but some guarantee of his hold on the Presidency. Only then could he demand the assent of the governed by use of force if he deems it necessary. Police states have long used this technique. In fact, he has already done so to “dominate the (battle) space” occupied by mostly peaceful protesters.

Consider what this President would do if given another four-year term. He would have the military, the Department of Justice, the IRS, and federal officers of various agencies at his beck and call. In the last 3 ½ years he has slowly and determinedly put sycophants in charge of all these agencies. We have already seen how he uses them to force his will on the American people and to serve his personal/political interests. Just ask yourselves the following questions: who is investigated or acquitted by the DOJ; when are peaceful protests protected or suppressed; why are legally requested tax records not provided; and how are government expenditures managed to benefit the President’s personal interests rather than the American people as required by law? You already know the answers.

Have too many Americans abandoned the lessons learned in civics class? Has the “party of no” lost the ability to overcome political differences in service of core Constitutional values that demand due process, a free press, and the rights to peaceful assembly, to petition the government, and to impeach a rogue President. The overriding goals expressed in Jefferson’s declarative statement regarding inalienable rights and further delineated in the Preamble to the Constitution must be the sole guiding principles of this democratic republic. Otherwise, we are reduced to an election where voter suppression and criminal manipulation of the vote count replace winning the hearts and minds of voters and preserving our founding ideals. “Winning” in this instance would vindicate one man’s illusion of grandeur at the expense of “the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” How many of us choose to live in an illiberal democracy ruled by Nero incarnate? At least, Nero created music, rather than cheat at golf. And, unlike Trump, he did not start the fire that destroyed the civic entity he was sworn to serve.

To foreign observers, America warrants their pity for it no longer appears to be that “city on a hill,” holding up a beacon of hope to the world. This President has exposed and manipulated political fault lines to enhance his power. He has exploited the absence of more stringent oversight laws to benefit his personal and political benefit. He has exasperated income and wealth inequality to the detriment of the hopes and ambitions of millions of Americans. He has ignored the educational needs and future opportunities of our children. He has subordinated the health of all Americans during a pandemic to personal political goals. And he has brought a great nation to the brink of political and economic collapse. The corruption and incompetence of this Administration has recharacterized the public service role of American institutions to self-serving political agencies aligned with private/special interests. His demagoguery has effectively divided our country along racial and political lines. And his foreign policy has self-isolated America from any constructive role in the global community. Unless existing in a bubble of self-deception or suffering from an acute case of apathy, you, my fellow Americans, must admit our President has declared war on America. And, worse, he has unmasked our weaknesses, thereby challenging us to respond.

Do we believe every American has a right to a general education, to advanced or apprentice training appropriate for a personally chosen career, to a tax and tariff system that favors the prosperity of all Americans, to a political system aligned with our Constitution and capable of self-correction through Congressional oversight and judicial review, and to Presidential leadership dedicated to preserving our lives, laws, values and general welfare? If so, we must reject what divides us, whether partisanship, prejudice, avarice, power mongering, or cynicism. Then we must turn away from the demagoguery and lies that promote these divisions in our culture. America was born with lofty goals. But, compared with other cultures, we have not had much time to grow out of our infancy and realize the full maturity of our founding ideals. In some sense, we are still suffering a persistent adolescence. And, like the experience of our youth, it is not unusual to confront challenges to our rights of passage like a petulant bully or the grosser appeals of our own nature—both of which inhibit our progress. Nevertheless, we must eventually pass into adulthood. This moment in our history is that coming of age point. The bully is our President who believes he has “total power” with no sense of American history, jurisprudence, or our very subsistence as a democratic republic. We must remove him from office if this democracy is to survive. And the grosser appeals of partisanship over patriotism and of power over consensus present the immediate obstacles we must also overcome to reach our maturity. Furthermore, we must remove from office any elected representative who fails to support the basic principles and Constitutional structure of our government.

It is time to resurrect our hope for change and reengage the American quest for a more perfect union. What hangs in the balance is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for us and our children.

__________________________________________________________________
¹ This quote is taken from a conversation between two popes in the movie “Two Popes.”
² Merrill D. Peterson, “Thomas Jefferson and the New Nation,” p. 961.
³ Alexis de Tocqueville, “Democracy in America,” Volume 1, p. 280.