The European Parliament needs independence and a strong voice

Euro-Federalists (as I will dub you all) need not reinvent the wheel — The United States, has dealt with and solved some of the very same issues which are presented here : Equal representation, institutional independence, and political stability. The Convention of 1789 remedied (to a certain extent) these problems with the Constitution. The Economist had a good article not long ago on the Charlemagne blog (Charlemagne : 1789 and all that | http://econ.st/10gxOvj) I wanted to expand on some of these ideas and issues, so at the risk of taking a historical analogy too far, I will endeavor to help put in perspective the challenges the European Parliament faces in light of similar challenges the United States has faced trying to create a “more perfect Union.”

1. The philosophy of limited government was almost universally shared by the framers of the US Constitution, and that philosophy guided the whole process. I highly recommend this approach.

2. The United States solved the dilemma of equal/proportional representation with a bicameral legislature (the Senate & the House), which have equal-representation as well as proportional-representation, respectively. This measure was instituted to prevent largely populated States (such as New York) gain more power proportionally over smaller States (like Rhode Island). This would be extremely interesting to see effectively implemented in the European Parliament, especially considering the diverse size and population of European nations represented at the EP.

3. As to the all-important issue of sovereignty, let us listen to what Alexander Hamilton postulates in the Federalist #32 :

“An entire consolidation of the States into one complete national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts ; and whatever powers might remain in them, would be altogether dependent on the general will. But…the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, EXCLUSIVELY delegated to the United States. This exclusive delegation, or rather this alienation, of State sovereignty, would only exist in three cases : where the Constitution in express terms granted an exclusive authority to the Union ; where it granted in one instance an authority to the Union, and in another prohibited the States from exercising the like authority ; and where it granted an authority to the Union, to which a similar authority in the States would be absolutely and totally CONTRADICTORY and REPUGNANT.”

Of course, there are a myriad of problems the European Parliament faces in terms of addressing the issues stated and omitted above. The point of this commentary is to encourage European Federalism, because anything is better than the political and financial chaos that Europe is experiencing these days.

The most important step for Euro-Federalists will be to call for a Constitutional Convention. However, a clear plan must be already in the minds of those attending, as to what they (and their constituents) would like to see in the new constitution. This will be exceedingly difficult, but its really the only way to go about getting the reform the European Parliament needs — 1) Figuring out the sovereignty locus of the European Parliament, 2) Establishing equal *AND* proportional representation models, 3) Ensuring institutional independence.

That's all for now.

Best Regards, Matthew David Albritton @MDavidAlbritton www.diogenesticker.blogspot.com

Recommended Reading : The Federalist(http://avalon.law.yale.edu/subject_…)

The European Parliament needs independence and a strong voice - commentaires

The European Parliament needs independence and a strong voice