the Founders of our country did not believe in monarchy. They put up with one king for a while and didn't want to have to put up with another one down the line. Meeting in Philadelphia about 220 years ago, about 30 miles from my home in Wilmington, DE, our Founding Fathers did not invest all power over national affairs in our national destiny in the hands of any one person. Rather, they created a separation of powers. They created, as we all know, three coequal branches of Government. I don't sit down every day or night and actually open the Constitution and read it. But every now and then I think a review of some of it and its parameters is instructive. For those who take the time--particularly looking at the debate we have had in recent days on whether it is appropriate for us to provide some guidance and expression with respect to the expenditure of these moneys in the supplemental appropriations, especially in Iraq--it is helpful to look at the Constitution and get a sense of what our Founding Fathers had in mind. In looking at article II in this copy of the Constitution, section 2, there is about a sentence where it talks about the power of the President. This is what it says: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States. That is what it says.…
Tom Carper: “the Founders of our country did not believe in monarchy. They put up with one king for a while and didn't want to have…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the separation of powers and the role of the President in relation to the Constitution.
Share
More from Tom Carper
Yes. To assist Congress in understanding the extent and nature of exports to countries that have not ratified International Atomic Energy Agency safety and security protocols, the Commission must notify Congress if the NRC determines that…
I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from West Virginia. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Yes. The update to the mission statement does not compel the NRC to update its approach to determining how to set safety standards beyond what is required by current law.
To have vacancies that may be not just months, but in some cases years to that have been filled, that justice delayed is justice denied.





