Elizabeth Ramsey

United States Government

Mr. Burnham
6 October 2014
Infrastructure and Inflation
Until I had closely studied several sections of the United States Constitution, I
had never truly realized how much the size of American government has increased
since the creation of the basic framework of the Constitution. In the Constitution, the
founding fathers outlined the basic principles of the country, placing an important
emphasis on the role of the government. However, as time has progressed, the
boundaries that were originally outlined in the Constitution have drastically changed in
regard to the government. Even after examining only a few sections of the Constitution,
the change in government power is undoubtedly astonishing.
Because the government often makes many unconstitutional choices, it
constantly violates its enumerated rights and powers given in the Constitution. There is
an extreme controversy occurring between strict constructionists and loose
constructionists, those who believe that the basic framework of the constitution should
be adjusted based on modern society. In the government, the old-fashioned method of
strictly following the Constitution seems unreasonable to control modern America.
However, as a strict constructionist, I believe that the government should function within
its intended size outlined in the Constitution, for it has become too large for America to
function successfully.

Unfortunately, the branches of the government are not sticking to their powers
that are outlined in the Constitution, creating an imbalance and making the government
powers too large. This division of the government into branches was intentionally
created to generate a well-sized and balanced government. Under this division, the
American people would live life under a controlled government. However, incidents are
occurring where these branches are increasing their own powers and causing discord,
especially the executive branch. President Obama does not have the power under the
Constitution to alter a law; however, he has unconstitutionally delayed the Employer
Mandate Law and ACA Medicare cuts until two thousand fifteen (Young; Benson). Even
though the Executive Branch is vested in the power of a President, who is
responsible for enforcing the laws, Obama is stealing power from the Legislative Branch
and overstepping his boundaries (Article two, Section One). The Legislative Branch
should be able to make all laws for the welfare of Americans without having to deal
with Obamas disrupting interference (Article One, Sections One and Seven). Clearly,
this loose constructionist type of idealism that Obama believes he can enforce upon the
country is miserably failing and resulting in an oversized government. I believe that if the
government were to refrain from its loose interpretations of the Constitution, then the
government would not act with this excess amount of power.
If the branches would simply act accordingly with their distributed powers, then
there would not be as many issues with such inescapable power inflations. According to
Article One, Section One, the President is only supposed to take care that the laws be
faithfully executed, not create or alter laws. Obama, however, sees no issue with
changing the outline of the Constitution to make the government more powerful. But in

reality, he is weakening the strength behind our government through invasive power. If
the branches are simply pushing for more power instead of completing their respective
duties and cooperating with the other branches, then this simply creates a government
that is too powerful. If a branch works only to empower itself, then this cannot result in
the ideal balanced government present in the infrastructure of the Constitution.
The government is not only increasing its responsibilities, but it is also infringing
on the rights that make America the land of the free. One of the main focuses of the
Constitution is to secure the Blessings of Liberty of the citizens of America, a task that
should be the governments main priority (Preamble). Unfortunately, the government
seems ignorant to the fact that it is not respecting many of these rights, even those
blatantly enumerated in the Constitution.
In the Wisconsin v. Yoder case, there was a government law that required
children to attend school until the age of sixteen (Wisconsin v. Yoder). Ignorant to the
value of freedom of religion in the Constitution, this law violated the Amish idea of
children not attending high school because it prohibited the free exercise of the Amish
religion (First Amendment). The Judiciary Branch that is vested in one supreme court
must especially consider cases that violate some of the most vital rights of American
citizens. The fact that the government would make a law that interfered with religion
proves that the government has grown too large and is interfering with basic
constitutional rights. (Article Three, Section One). If the government created all laws
under the strict restrictions of the Constitution, then it would not even have to deal with
cases such as this. Also, in Virginia, a judge forced a sexual predator to submit to
searches in his home, violating his Fourth Amendment rights. Even though he had just

been convicted of a crime, there were not any suspicions of illegal substances or
weapons that would give the police a reasonable cause to search his home (Virginia
Justices). The fourth amendment in the Constitution emphasizes that it is the right of
the people to secure their houses (Fourth Amendment). Yes, he may be a criminal,
but did the judge have any right to search his home without a cause? No. If the
government were still the intended size implied and outlined in the constitution, then it
would not be imposing on the rights of the citizens under any circumstances. Another
issue arose with a government violation of fourth amendment in the lower court case
Riley v. California. The court ruled that a police officer could not only collect a criminals
cellphone after committing a misdemeanor, but also search through its content without
any warrant (Riley v. California Article). The governments idea that it can just simply
adjust certain constitutional rules under circumstances is the reason that the
government power is becoming to big.
It is now hard for me to imagine America when the Constitution was first signed
and the government acted accordingly to its duties. Instead of living under the
overbearing invasions of the government, the American people were able to live freely
without the fear of their rights being violated. The loose constructionist idea that the U.S.
government has adapted today has allowed the government to grow into an invasive
power instead of a protector of our rights.

Works Cited
Young-http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/obamacare-employermandate_n_3536695.html
Benson-http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2014/04/08/surprise-wh-delaysobamacares-medicare-cuts-n1820395
Wisconsin v. Yoder article from class

Virginia anonymous author-http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/local/va-justices-waiverof-th-amendment-unreasonable-in-hanover-case/article_bd217859-69fe-5dfe-adbf01257957e2a7.html

Riley v. California case-http://epic.org/amicus/cell-phone/riley/#background