- Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
- Atlas Network
- Atlas Society
- Austrian Economics
- Austrian Economics Newsletter
- Bankrupting America
- Bastiat Institute
- Bastiat Society
- Cato Institute
- Center for Constitutional Rights
- Center for Freedom & Prosperity
- Center for Individual Freedom
- Economic Freedom
- Economic Liberty
- Economic Noise
- Emergent Orders
- Financial Sense
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Goldwater Institute
- Hoover Institution
- Institute for Justice
- James G. Rickards
- Jason Lewis
- Kahn Academy
- King World News
- Knowledge Problem
- Learn Liberty
- Liberty For All
- Library of Economics and Liberty
- Ludwig von Mises Institute
- Manhattan Institute for Policy Reasearch
- Mark Steyn
- Mark Steyn
- Mercatus Center
- Richard A. Epstein
- Russell Roberts
- Spontaneous Order Audio
- Spontaneous Order Video
- Swift Economics
- The Federalist Society
- The Freeman
- The Future of Freedom Foundation
- The Independent institute
- The Locke Institute
- The Mont Pelerin Society
- The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics
- The Review of Austrian Economics
- Thomas Sowell
- Uncommon Knowledge
- University of Common Sense
- Victor Davis Hanson
- Walter E. Williams
Monday, May 13, 2013
How our Economic Constitution Has Deteriorated
Many people think of the Constitution as essentially unchanged, yet today’s document bears little resemblance to the original of 1787 in its relation to the economy. The original words remain, but they have been formally amended in critical ways; and reinterpreted by the Supreme Court so that their practical effect has become almost the opposite of the intent.
The original Constitution promoted economic development in many ways. For example, it resolved the disputes over the West by providing for the admission of new states on equal terms with the old, thereby fostering settlement of the vast interior. Provision for duty-free interstate trade increased productivity. The Constitution made state governments less intrusive by prohibiting their issuance of paper money and their passage of laws impairing the obligation of contracts.
By the mid-19th century, rapid economic growth had become the normal condition of the economy. But under the surface, an irresolvable contradiction was growing. The lump that would not digest was slavery.
In view of its importance in the southern economy and the deep disagreements between northerners and southerners about it, slavery received scant mention in the original Constitution. (The words “slave” and “slavery” do not appear at all.) Congress could not interfere with the international slave trade for 20 years; slaves escaping into free states had to be returned; and three-fifths of the slaves were counted in determining representation in Congress. Otherwise the Constitution left slavery to the states.
For seven decades, a succession of political compromises kept the conflict between North and South from boiling over, but finally either the will or the ability to fashion acceptable compromises ran out, and the Civil War ensued.
In the war’s aftermath the old Constitution was fundamentally altered. The Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery. The Fourteenth guaranteed to all citizens, including the freed slaves, protection from state actions that would abridge the privileges and immunities of citizenship, deprive them of life, liberty, or property without due process, or deny them equal protection of the laws. The Fifteenth Amendment guaranteed the right of the freedmen to vote. The amendments of the 1860s transferred power from the states to the national government. Though disputes over states’ rights persisted, claims of dual sovereignty lost most of their force.
During the post-civil War era, Americans enjoyed unprecedented economic growth, an achievement favored by the Supreme Court’s insistence that due process of law included protection of economic liberties—rights of private property and freedom of contract. Then, government actions caused the economy to plunge into deep depression in the early 1930s. Governments at all levels responded by expanding their powers over economic affairs. At first the Supreme Court resisted many of these measures. Starting in 1937, though, the Court reversed so many important decisions on economic matters that its turnabout must be considered a constitutional revolution. The heart of the Court’s new position was a broad reading of the Commerce Clause. Practically everything, no matter how manifestly local, was seen as part of interstate commerce and therefore subject to regulation by Congress and its agencies.
During the past 50 years, the United States has developed a welfare state not much different from those of Western Europe. Economic affairs, once overwhelmingly private, have become pervasively politicized. Taxes now equal 40% of the national income—up from 13% as recently as 1929. The free-market economy has come to be regulated in minute and expensive detail, with the costs born largely by consumers. Citizens have lost much of the economic liberty their ancestors esteemed.
American traditions and political pressures have kept the government from totally destroying all private property rights. But the Constitution, which formerly served to guarantee economic liberties, no longer provides much if any substantial protection. One may well doubt whether the economic dynamism that made the average American rich by world standards will prove permanently compatible with a constitutional regime so permissive of governmental intrusion into economic affairs.
But the Constitution can be changed, as it has been changed before. In 1865 the Constitution gave the slaves freedom from their masters. We can hope that someday the Constitution will be changed again to give all Americans economic freedom from our masters in Washington.