• Front page
• Receive this content on your RSS reader

By Wm. David Lytle, Pueblo

Our U.S. Constitution turns 220 years old today. When the founders of our country were writing the Constitution, they turned to history for examples of the kind of government they wanted and the kind of government they wanted to avoid. They believed that a government works best when its power is shared and not concentrated in a single authority.

Not only did the framers of the Constitution want to keep any one individual from having too much power, they wanted to make sure each branch of the federal government had some control over the other two branches, to keep any one part of the government from becoming too powerful. Their aim was to establish what John Adams considered the very definition of a republic: “a government in which all men ... are equally subject to the laws.”

They carried out their vision through a constitutionally established series of checks and balances. In its most basic sense, separation of powers means the legislative branch makes laws; the executive branch carries out those laws; and the judicial branch determines if the laws as enacted, or applied, are constitutional.

Although the responsibilities of each branch of government are outlined in the Constitution, each generation struggles to define how the three work together. One of the strengths of our Constitution is how it adapts to changing times and situations while maintaining its integrity.
Institutions outside the government also serve as checks and balances on the powers of the government.

We have a free press that can investigate and report on government actions; nongovernmental organizations that advocate for different interests; and the power of “we, the people,” in whom government authority ultimately rests.

Lawyers have a special responsibility and relationship with the Constitution. At their swearing-in to the bar, they affirm their support for the laws of the United States established by the Constitution, so that supporting the law becomes the guiding principle of the profession. We refer to this as following the “rule of law.”

Sept. 17 is the day formally set aside as Constitution Day, marking the date in 1787 when the U.S. Constitution was signed by the Constitutional Convention. The Constitution, however, continues to work for us every day. We can thank the framers of the Constitution, and the generations before us, for that
.
Let us remember to not take for granted what has been given to us. It is unique, it is powerful, and it deserves our attention and protection.

Wm. David Lytle, president of the Colorado Bar Association, is a managing member of Altman, Keilbach, Lytle, Parlapiano & Ware PC in Pueblo.

READER COMMENTS

Hank, why not a government monopoly instead on an insurance industry monopoly?

This is in response to the 9/17/07 OP-ED piece “Founders' genius: leave power widely dispersed,” by Colorado Bar Association President Wm. David Lytle.

With all due respect to Mr. Lytle, he demonstrates the same depth of understanding of the Constitution that I would expect to see in my daughter’s 6th grade Social Studies homework.

In the past 6 and ½ years President Bush has: in the case of at least one U.S. Citizen, Jose Padilla, suspended Habeas Corpus (the one individual right that was so universally agreed upon by the Founding Fathers that it was put in the body of the Constitution itself, rather than in the Bill of Rights); ordered warrantless domestic spying on U.S. citizens; used so-called “presidential signing statements” to ignore laws passed by Congress; and, relegated political protest to so-called “free speech zones.”

On Constitution Day, 2007, we, as Americans, find ourselves in the middle of a true CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. Mr. Lytle, as President of the Colorado Bar Association, should be educating the public about the grave, hopefully-not-irreversible, damage that has been done to the Constitution in the name of fighting the “war” on terrorism, not reminding us that there are three branches of government.

Stephen A. Justino
Attorney at Law

So Hillary, why won't the above also work with healthcare? Why the government monopoly?

In Mr. Lytle states that one of the "strengths of our Constitution is how it adapts" to changing times. The notion that a written document can "adapt" is preposterous. As is true with any written document, absent an amendment, the words today must mean exactly what the text meant when it was written.

Perhaps what Mr. Lytle meant to say was that the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution has been known to adapt over time. Inasmuch as this statement is true, it is to the detriment of this country. Whenever a majority of the Supreme Court unilaterally “adapts” the Constitution to changing times, this country subjects itself to the tyrannical will of five unelected activist judges with life tenure. As Mr. Lytle rightly points out, the framers intended the democratically-elected legislature to make laws to adapt to changing times. The Constitution, though, does not adapt.

Great article... Republicans take heed.

POST A COMMENT

• It’s open enrollment time: Could consumer-driven health plans be the right choice for you?
• Rural Revitalization or deeper distress?
• No more ‘Mr. Nice Guv’
• In Pakistan, or U.S., lawyers make a stand
• First lesson in Disability 101: Treat me like a regular person -- because I am
• A few questions about abortion
• GUEST COLUMNIST: A new Russia emerges
• Returning veterans need support