Many today are talking about a Constitutional Crisis that is happening in America today. Is the immigration ban, alternatively called the Muslim Ban, Constitutional? As a nation we want a clear understanding of the limits of the Presidency to make these decision unilaterally especially without consultation of our vast security departments within our government? Additionally at what point will his Executive Orders be looked at as a method of legislation versus giving direction to his executive departments in order to execute the laws of our legislature?


As many of us know, our founding fathers were reluctant to have large central government and were proponents of strong state governments. Unfortunately the Article of Confederation, our first constitution shall we say, focused almost completely on giving each state the right to determine its laws. The problem with this is that it did not provide a process in which a governing body above the states could settle disagreements between the states and that issues of trade for example became problematic.

Brave representatives from each state met in Philadelphia to negotiate new terms to fix these issues that resulted in the destruction of the Articles of Confederation for a New Constitution for the United States of America. There were several interesting debates held in these meetings. One was that they did not what a big Central Government but since one was needed that it needed to include a checks and balance system so no one part of this central government could over step the bounds of its responsibilities. By doing this they broke it up by having a legislative branch, an executive branch and the judicial branch of government. Simply put the legislative branch would make the laws, the executive branch would enforce the laws, and the Judaical branch would oversee that these laws were followed.

Generally, after ratification, this worked fine. The United States began to flourish but we had some destabilizing forces of our own in terms of the industrial revolution in the north and the development of Abolitionists who would eventually push the South to pull from the Union of States and start its own confederacy based on the economic value of its cheap work force in the Slave Trade.  Civil War broke out and President Lincoln was able to save the union and emancipate slaves from the states that were in the Confederacy through executive order.  That still did not grant all slaves freedom and it was not until the ratification of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that eventually abolished slavery. Economic times after the war was hard. Africans brought to this country now free had to find work and shelter and were still treated unfairly under Jim Crow Laws. They were allowed to vote and participate in the process but voter suppression was rampant and kept many from participating in their rights.

But again we continued forward. (Going to put a pin in Voter Suppression and African American history for another post). Our nation continued down the path of industrialization and new gilded age of prosperity was born. Was this felt everywhere, no. Many immigrants looking for work would flood in through Ellis Island and other ports of entry to find work and find there American dream only to live in squalid tenements and working conditions. As a result of accidents such as the triangle shirtwaist fire, the expose of Upton Sinclair in his book The Jungle, and the photographs of Jacob Riis, our government moved to create reforms to protect child labor, to create OSHA to protect the worker, and to provide opportunities for all in America.

1929 the stock market crashed, the biggest to this day economic fall in our history. Work, money and resources were scarce and drastic measure needed to happen to build back our great nation. This is where an interesting turn in our nations history happened. People looked not only to their state governments for relieve but to the federal government for relief and that came in the form of the New Deal. The new deal was a departure from small government to a larger government and it stretched the bounds of each branch of government. More social programs were put into place to protect the citizens just in case this were to happen again.  Social Security and FDIC programs being two of probably the biggest movements for protections. Additionally we saw an investment of our federal government into infrastructure and the protection of our national history through the WPA (Works Progress Administration). This allowed the government to hire the out of work to give them wages while investing in new roads and bridges. Photographers were sent out to document the changing nation.

Of course as we are moving out of this depression we become involved in WWI followed by WWII. Wars and international conflicts can stabilize a countries economy. More jobs are needed for the creation of weapons and provisions for our military and those of our Allies and after a war a nation needs to be rebuilt. Interestingly enough, I think it was Dwight D. Eisenhower who warned of a developing Military Industrial Complex and relying on them too heavily to boost our economies. Through our involvement in a movement against communism through much of the 20th Century we became greatly involved in conflicts throughout the world including Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, and a Cold War with Russia. We provided weapons to Afghanistan to provide support in a conflict with Russia. The Military Industrial Complex continued to grow. Our nation became a military leader that would influence our Allies as well as our enemies which today has grown into a terrorist threat against ourselves.

Unfortunately we had a second fall in our economy that could only be described as the Second Great Depression in 2008. Jobs were lost, businesses were closing and we are  no longer a manufacturing industrial country and participate in a more global economy. Much of this came from growing debt and frustration in our participation in the war in Iraq based on information that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. President Obama with congress (although defiantly a contentious relationship) push through economic policies to lower our reliance on the Military industrial complex by suggesting that as we are withdrawing from Iraq and Afghanistan that we cut our spending back to pre WWI days and focus on our industries by bailing out the car industry which was suffering greatly but was also a great source for economic development of jobs. Under President Obama, other issues such as immigration reform and health care reform took the forefront of his Administration. While it is still probably to close to call how history will see the Obama years, what we do have are facts and those facts between President Bush's era, Obama's era and Trumps era are going to be continually looked at in terms of how we have gotten to the present day.

Unfortunately while there has been little blood loss between the Bush and Obama era in terms of not blaming each other for how 2008 economic fall in the Executive Branch that can  not be said in the legislative branch of our government.  Divisive views were taken, lines drawn as well as comparisons that continues today. President Trump has no issues calling out the actions of President Obama, which out our respect was never really done by incoming and outgoing presidents. This civility has been said to be so damaged by the Trump administration that it is unlikely that be a recovered tradition. That said with the continuous executive order given daily for the first two weeks of his presidency, I think the question we need to be asking is he over using them to create law and policies instead of what is job is, which is to direct the departments of government to follow the laws of the legislature? Additionally we need to be looking at the legislative body because the contentions views of Republicans and democrats has created a polarizing effect that does not allow for a bi-partisan cooperation, collaboration, and communication that is needed for healthy debate on issues and to come up with policies that make sense for America today. Thomas Jefferson was so not a fan of a two party system but that is how this legislative body developed. We need to be holding not only the president to task for overreach but also a non functioning legislative body. Could you image what would have happened if in Philadelphia at the Constitutional Congress the Federalists and Anti- Federalists just drew a line in the sand and said we are just not going to participate with one another? There needs to be a meeting of the minds that it is not the responsibility of the legislature to keep the party lines but to really listen to the people. The organic protests are not just angry at Trump for his executive orders but also at a Congress that can't meet in the middle. The people I think have spoken what they really want is to be heard in Washington D.C., and "We the People" are just not seeing evidence of that.

Written by V. Hildebrandt

In a recent interview with Bill O'Reilly, President Trump equated American actions with that of Russia by saying that America is not innocent either. To some degree I think that he may be correct but I think the discussion needs to be deeper than that by digging into the ideas behind intent. Most of American policies and efforts are put forth for a need to keep America or its allies safe. In general it is not our intent I believe here in the the 21st Century to invade and colonize another country. I think that colonization is a practice from the past that is just not the same today has it was up to the middle of the 20th Century. Our presence in the world is more of a global effort for generally keeping peace throughout the world in conjunction with our Allied nations and the United Nations. Together they impose sanctions on countries that don't follow international laws, treaties and agreements.

America maintains military bases throughout the world in order to help deter efforts that go against these international laws but I can't equate these bases, contained spaces that they are and usually in agreement with the nations they are in, as a method of colonization.

Russia, on the other hand, has in the recent past and continues to have sanctions put upon them for the meddling in the Ukraine by trying to destabilize the area, annex Crimea and, meddle in the functions of other governments through the use of cyber espionage and hacking. The intentions here are much more dangerous in terms of destabilization of the world rather than to find peace and help Allies. There is much debate currently whether or not Russian and Iran have teamed up to be a positive or negative influence in Syria where thousands of civilian refugees are literally running for their lives. The question is, has I have heard it on the news, is President Trump excusing these influences, encouraging  Russia to continue its destabilization plan or is he trying to find a meeting of the minds in which we can work together with Russia to fight terrorism in the Middle East?


I plan to look at our history, which is a lengthy process to look at American values and our intent when it comes to our home security, economic growth, and foreign relations.

What Goes Around, Comes Around

So Monday Chuck Hagel recommended that the U.S. military should be downsized to Pre-WWII size. This move could be pretty significant in American Military Policy by setting new precedence for the demobilization of Military Defense after war. Some could see this move as an evolution in our standing Federal Forces by which Hagel recommends concentrating forces to tactical special force units and  cyber security which are truly 21st Century  concerns.  As a curious historian I am particularly eager to see what the narrative is going to be in Congress when it comes to Military appropriations and whether or not they will follow the recommendations of the Secretary of Defense or to maintain a steady course. The implications of a military downsize will certainly have an effect on our Military Industrial complex and our economy. I am reminded of Dwight D. Eisenhower who spoke of the dangers that were inherent in a powerful "Military Industrial Complex" in his farewell speech to the United States. He suggested a balance approach that not only considered the here and now but the preservation of democracy for generations to come.

CNN Blog about the proposed cuts by Chuck Hagel
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2014/02/24/hagel-cuts-would-reshape-military-after-longest-war/

Broadcast of Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWiIYW_fBfY

Just finished reading Fail Safe by Eugene Burdick and Harvey Wheeler for my Military History Course. What a great read. The last several chapters had me in such suspense. It was quite a comment about the possibility of  accidental nuclear war during the Cold War. If you are interested in fictional books about political and military strategy defined by the Cold War this is a must read.

Curatorial Internship at the Supreme Court

For those of us who are interested in archival work, there is an opportunity to intern at the Supreme Court this summer.

Sibling fight over MLK Jr.'s Bible and Nobel Peace Prize

This is the first I have heard of issue between Martin Luther King Jr.'s children on how to handle  his estate. From the article it has not been the first time the siblings have disagreed on how to handle his estate.  What would you do with the items if you were in there shoes?