European Constitution Rejection

European Constitution Rejection

Europe's ratification process should be tabled to spare its expense and returned to the communications drawing board. Europe is not dead ... but the constitutional restatement has floundered. That it is a restatement and new constitution as same, was part of this American's perception of the European member states communication of the constitutions purpose. Americans may recall a similar experience with a major codal reform and reconsolidation bill in Congress called 'S-1'. That bill was mainly an overhauling and modern restatement of American criminal law - which bill unfortunately wwas sponsored and led by Senator Kennedy (that's one 'anti' motive for many) and miscommunicated as a new strong federal crime law --rather than as a consolidation of the law. Yes there are new elements in the European Union Constitution -- but most as the link above shows (see Fact Sheets) when read restated itself in Articles correlated to the originating treaties of the European Union - its basic organic law for its institutions. New powers and less ambiguously stated rights clauses or new ambiguous rights & powers etc., should have been separately referenced and debated to the publics - with a polling as to the vote on the institution generally. Most people in good times or bad modernly, do not want more government -- which is a wonderfully healthful Roussean & Lockean reception to the revised charter. And many Europeans read the referendum on their Union's constitution that way. Save Mr. Blair and the Labour Government need the measure -- Britain should temporarily can it; and spend funds on a new campaign of awareness of the instrument and its purposes. By contrast the American homogenous constitutional proposition in 1783 took more time (five years) after a highly intellectual public debate.