The Constitution Pros And Cons

The United States Constitution is a very controversial document, concerning the laws and power distribution among the different levels of government. The people thought the Constitution was a way to slowly revert back to a monarchy - a government system that they had fought hard against. Even George Washington thought that this system would not last past twenty years. However, despite Washington’s claim, a lot of the delegates writing the Constitution believed that it was flexible enough to last through centuries. Former President Woodrow Wilson would go as far to say that “in its elasticity lies its chief greatness.” When something is described as elastic, it means it does not break easily under different levels of pressure. The goal of the

Constitution, like any other, was to have it last for centuries, meaning it needed to be malleable enough to stay relevant as the culture changes and as the government is put under pressure.

Unfortunately, there comes a point where a rubber band breaks because it is unable to stretch so far. The purpose of the Constitution was to set down multiple laws for an entire country during a specific time period, so it would not turn to chaos; therefore there had to be a limit to its resilience. Despite that fact, though, the Constitution has lasted until today making it flexible to a certain extent. Although there are parts of the Constitution that have to be resistant, it is overall a very elastic document due to how different situations shape the laws.
The Constitution’s flexibility is demonstrated in the implied powers to the federal government. Article I Section 8 of the Constitution states that the central government can “make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper” in order help the execution of powers clearly stated in the Constitution. This

is formally known as the Necessary and Proper Clause or otherwise known as the Elastic Clause. This clause allows for implied powers meaning not every single power needs to be explicitly stated in order to be considered valid while also allowing laws to be expanded upon. It also makes it easier to get multiple jobs done in a timely fashion to keep up with the fast pace and changing culture. An example of this clause being executed is when the Founding Fathers were first dealing with the controversial issue of national banking. Alexander Hamilton said in order to carry out other laws such as the ability to collect taxes, borrow money and provide a military and public welfare, they needed a national banking system. However, Thomas Jefferson argued that it was not absolutely necessary to have national banking to tend to these laws so it should go to the states under the reserved powers stated in the Tenth Amendment. In the end, the power was left up to the federal government and the national bank had pulled the country out of most of their debt (Kauffman). This proves that even though the law was not explicitly stated, enough was laid out in the Constitution for it to be a delegated power. It solved the problem occurring at the time efficiently without the need to pass another amendment. This clause allows for individual laws to be extended even further to cover more ground on different problems, making the Constitution amendable enough to last through many trials and tribulations to come.
The Constitution’s elasticity is also defined in the Judicial branch's ability to make varied interpretations on different laws. Due to the vagueness of most of the laws, they are mostly up for interpretation based on different opinions. There are a lot of loopholes or there is unusual wording in quite a few of them which can lead to conflict. This is demonstrated during the trial of Kelo versus The City of New London. New London wanted to place buildings on the private property and while most people were willing to give up their land, some did not budge. In the Fifth Amendment, it states that private property cannot be used for “public use” unless it is justified. Susette Kelo, the owner of some of the property, claimed that this would be a violation of that Amendment. This would be true except but the term “public use” and what is considered justified has been interpreted differently by several sets of Supreme Court Justices. The clarity problem was that although the project was not open to the general public, it had a public purpose, therefore it could go either way depending on how the court interprets it. In the end with a five to four decision, the Supreme Court decided that even if is considered to be for public use, it is justified because it would help the local government economically (Entin 109-112). The Constitution allows for various interpretations among different people and situations. Even the court was almost evenly split. Almost nothing is strictly said in the Constitution because it is understood that different situations mean different solutions. To solve this they put a very broad plan to deal with these types of problems so that they can be dealt with accordingly. Therefore flexibility of the Constitution is shown in the broadness of their laws.
Despite the fact that the Amendment process is a lengthy and tedious process, just having one is very flexible.

In Article V it states that in order to place an amendment you need two-thirds of Congress agreeing with it, have two-thirds of the states call conventions concerning it, and then have three-fourths of the states need to ratify it in order for it to be considered a part of the Constitution. Due to this, there have only been twenty-seven amendments since the Constitution was ratified. According to this, the Constitution, while a flexible document, is not flexible to change. However, the fact that the government is able to change laws at all makes it very flexible. In fact, there was an alcohol amendment placed in the Eighteenth Amendment that prohibited alcohol throughout the country but was then amended later in the Twenty-First Amendment which gave states power over alcohol laws. This proves that the Constitution was made to keep up with the popular demands of the time. Additionally, if making amendments were easy, then there would be a lot of unreasonable changes leading to tyranny. If the government could amend whatever they wanted without restrictions, then there is a chance that most of the states would not be happy. Therefore it is necessary to make sure a fair majority of the population agree with the change. It is not restrictive, but a smart and proactive way of thinking. Therefore, despite the amendment process of the Constitution being restricted, the

fact that there is a process makes the Constitution flexible.
In short, although sections of the Constitution cannot be complaisant to all matters, it remains to be a very lenient document. The Constitution is an outline for the country rather than a strict set of guidelines. Especially in the American culture, everything is face-paced and always subjected to change and the Constitution needs to reflect that. A good constitution lays down a set of laws while a great constitution additionally is able to grow and develop alongside the country it serves for. When a person is described as stubborn, it is usually has a bad connotation to it because being flexible is valued in our country - hence why the Constitution being flexible is very important to the government. President Woodrow Wilson was right - “The Constitution was not made to fit us like a straitjacket. In its elasticity lies its chief greatness.”