[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 8003-8005]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        ``WE THE PEOPLE . . . THE CITIZEN AND THE CONSTITUTION''

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. EARL POMEROY

                            of north dakota

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 29, 1999

  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, on May 1st through 3rd of this year, high 
school students from across the country will compete in the national 
finals of the ``We the People . . . The Citizen and the Constitution'' 
program. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the 
students of Flasher High School of Flasher, North Dakota, who will 
represent my home state in this event. These students have worked hard 
to reach this stage of the competition and have demonstrated a thorough 
understanding of the principals underlying our constitutional 
democracy.
  We the People is the most extensive program in the country designed 
to teach students the history and philosophy of the Constitution and 
the Bill of Rights. The three-day national competition is modeled after 
hearings held in the United States Congress. These mock hearings 
consist of oral presentations by the student participants before a 
panel of adult judges. The students testify as constitutional experts 
before a ``congressional committee'' of judges representing various 
regions of the country and appropriate professional fields. The 
students' testimony is followed by a question and answer period during 
which the judges test students on their depth of understanding and 
ability to apply their constitutional knowledge. The knowledge these 
students have acquired to reach the national level of this competition 
is truly impressive. Mr. Speaker, I ask that a copy of the questions 
posed to the students at these hearings be included in the record.
  I would also like to especially recognize our talented 
representatives from Flasher High School, of Flasher, North Dakota. 
This is the first year that Flasher High School has competed in the We 
the People program, and after months of hard work and preparation, all 
31 students in the senior class will be coming to Washington to 
represent North Dakota in the national competition. In just over a 
month, these students raised $17,000 to fund this trip. I would like to 
recognize by name the dedicated students from Flasher High School: 
Ashley Bahm, Lori Boeshans, Cheryl Breiner, Nikki Erhardt, Scott 
Fisher, Nadine Fleck, Nicolle Fleck, Joe Fleck, Sherry Gerhardt, Albert 
Heinert, Amber Heinz, Nathan Honrath, Sylvia Koch, Randy Kovar, Jody 
Kraft, Jessy Meyer, Adrian Miller, Justin Miller, Sunshine Schmidt, 
Travis Schmidt, Dan Schmidt, Brielle Schmidt, Joy Schmidt, Keesha 
Stroh, Brent Ternes, Kyle Ternes, Kevan Thornton, Mitch Tishmack, 
Thomas Tschida, Paul Wienberger, Steve Zeller.
  I would also like to recognize and thank their teacher, Michael 
Severson, for his critical role in these students' success and their 
interest in American government.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome the student team from 
Flasher High School to Washington, and wish them the very best of luck. 
They have made all of us in North Dakota very proud.


[[Page 8004]]

            We The People--The Citizen And The Constitution


           national hearing questions, academic year 1998-99

Unit one: What Are the Philosophical and Historical Foundations of the 
                       American Political System?

       1. The U.S. Constitution guarantees Americans a 
     ``republican form of government.'' Republicanism, however, 
     has taken on different meanings in different times and 
     places. What did the phrase mean to the Framers of the 
     Constitution?
       How was their understanding of the term different from that 
     of the ancients?
       What specific provisions of the U.S. Constitution help us 
     to understand the Framers' definition of republicanism?
       2. Two of the three monuments erected to the Magna Carta at 
     Runnymede in England are American. A copy of the Great 
     Charter now resides alongside the documents of our nation's 
     founding in the National Archives. Why has this document, 
     above all other legacies of British constitutionalism, been 
     so cherished by Americans?
       What impact did the Magna Carta have on the founding of the 
     American colonies? In the events leading to the American 
     Revolution? On the U.S. Bill of Rights?
       What tenets or principles are embodied in the Magna Carta 
     and why were they important to the development of 
     constitutional government?
       3. At the time of their independence from Great Britain the 
     American people could call upon over a century of experience 
     in self-government, especially in the management of local 
     affairs. Many historians believe that this colonial legacy 
     was crucial to the success of the new nation after 1776. What 
     were the most important principles, practices, and 
     institutions of this legacy?
       What examples can you identify of written guarantees of 
     basic rights in colonial America? Why were these written 
     guarantees important to the colonists? How did they influence 
     the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights?
       Many of the new democracies of the post-Cold War era have 
     no such experience of self-governance on which to draw. How 
     might this affect their chances for success? What special 
     burdens or needs does this lack of experience place upon 
     them?

         Unit two: How Did the Framers Create the Constitution?

       1. George Washington, James Madison, and other Framers used 
     the word ``miracle'' to describe the accomplishments of the 
     Constitutional Convention. Historians since have suggested 
     that much of the success of the Convention had to do with 
     timing. They have pointed out that what the Framers were able 
     to accomplish in the Philadelphia summer of 1787 would not 
     have been possible a few years earlier or later. Do you agree 
     or disagree? Explain your position.
       What circumstances and developments helped to create a 
     window of opportunity in 1787?
       In what ways did the American experience with state 
     governments and constitutions between 1776 and 1787 influence 
     the drafting of the U.S. Constitution in 1787?
       2. One of the arguments used by the Framers to reject the 
     creation of a monarchical executive was the belief that 
     kings, unlike their ministers, could never be impeached. 
     Monarchy was rejected and provision for the impeachment of 
     presidents included in the Constitution. But only two of our 
     nation's 42 chief executives have been impeached and none 
     have been convicted in the course of 210 years. Does this 
     suggest that Americans have, in fact, elevated their 
     presidents to a status not unlike that of a monarch? Why or 
     why not?
       Because U.S. presidents are heads of state as well as chief 
     executives, should the bar of justification for their removal 
     from office be higher than that for other public officials? 
     Why or why not?
       Should a national recall vote be substituted for Senate 
     trial in the case of impeached presidents? Explain your 
     position.
       3. In the debates over the Constitution's ratification, the 
     Federalists argued that the Constitution was a true and 
     proper culmination of the American Revolution. The 
     Constitution, they claimed, brought to life the basic 
     principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence. What 
     arguments did the Federalists use to support such claims? Do 
     you agree or disagree with their position? Why?
       Do you believe that the decision of the Framers to scrap 
     the Articles of Confederation, establish an entirely new 
     government, and lay down the rules for its implementation was 
     consistent or inconsistent with the principles of the 
     Declaration of Independence? Explain your position.
       Why did the Framers insist that the Constitution be 
     ratified by popularly elected state conventions?

     Unit Three: How Did the Values and Principles Embodied in the 
        Constitution Shape American Institutions and Practices?

       1. A modern biographer of our country's first president has 
     argued that if Washington ``had been taken by smallpox or 
     dropped by an Indian bullet as a young man, the future United 
     States might well have come into being in some form or other. 
     But it would have been harder, and it might have been a lot 
     harder.'' \1\ Do you agree with that statement? Why or why 
     not?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     \1\ Richard Brookhiser, Founding Father: Rediscovering George 
     Washington (New York: Simon & Schuster), 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Where do you believe Washington's contribution was the most 
     crucial: in securing independence from Great Britain, in the 
     drafting and ratification of the Constitution, or in the 
     implementation of the executive branch?
       Washington's contemporary admirers spoke of the man's 
     ``majestic fabrick,'' ``commanding countenance,'' ``martial 
     dignity,'' ``graceful bearing,'' and ``wonderful control.'' 
     How important are style and charisma to political leadership? 
     Would you put such qualities on a par with consistency or 
     purity of principles? Why or why not?
       2. The Federalists argued that a bill of rights was 
     unnecessary in a constitution of enumerated powers, checks 
     and balances, and popular sovereignty. Why did they believe 
     these features of the Constitution would protect individual 
     rights?
       How did the Anti-Federalists and other advocates of a 
     national bill of rights respond to such arguments?
       The Federalists and some constitutional scholars have 
     argued that the original constitution as drafted in 1787 was 
     itself a ``bill of rights.'' What basis did they have for 
     making this claim?
       3. In Federalist 81 Alexander Hamilton argued that the 
     authority of judicial review can be deduced ``from the 
     general theory of a limited constitution.'' Do you believe 
     his deduction is correct? Why or why not?
       What specific provisions of the Constitution provide the 
     basis for judicial review?
       Does Chief Justice John Marshall's statement, that ``it is 
     emphatically the provenance and duty of the judicial 
     department to say what the law is,'' mean that 
     representatives of the other two branches of government do 
     not have the authority to interpret the meaning of the 
     Constitution? Why or why not?


    Unit four: How Have the Protections of the Bill of Rights been 
                        Developed and Expanded?

       1. Both George III in 1776 and Abraham Lincoln in 1861 
     rejected the right of rebellion. Lincoln argued that no 
     government on earth could function if it recognized a right 
     of rebellion. Compare the positions of the British monarch 
     and the American president. How were they alike? How were 
     they different?
       Why would George III have rejected the arguments of the 
     Declaration of Independence? What might have been his reply?
       Why did Lincoln reject the attempt of the Southern states 
     to apply the principles of 1776 to their secession in 1860-
     61?
       2. Reconstruction's attempt to secure equality of 
     citizenship for African Americans was in large measure a 
     failure. The civil rights movement of the middle decades of 
     this century (sometimes referred to as the ``Second Era of 
     Reconstruction'') has achieved a large measure of success. 
     How do you account for the failure of the one and the success 
     of the other?
       What does a comparison of these two series of events 
     suggest about the abilities and limitations of constitutional 
     solutions to the nation's problems?
       What remedies other than constitutional amendments or laws 
     might reduce or prevent discrimination? What are the 
     advantages and disadvantages of each of these remedies?
       3. In 1972 Congress approved and referred to the states the 
     Equal Rights Amendment, specifying that ``equality of rights 
     under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United 
     States or by any State on account of sex.'' Approved by 35 
     states, three short of the necessary two-thirds majority (a 
     few states subsequently rescinded their approval), the ERA 
     failed ratification. Is there a need for such an amendment 
     today? Why or why not?
       Do you believe that the Fourteenth Amendment argues for or 
     against the need for such an amendment? Explain your 
     position.
       How have developments in the quarter-century since the ERA 
     was first introduced affected this issue? Do you believe that 
     such an amendment is more or less necessary than it was in 
     1972? Explain your position.


        Unit five: What Rights Does the Bill of Rights Protect?

       1. Although the right of association is not mentioned in 
     the Constitution, courts have ruled that it is a right 
     implied by the enumerated rights of the First Amendment and 
     by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. What 
     is the basis for this implication?
       What role has the right of association played in protecting 
     other individual rights?
       Under what circumstances do you think restrictions on 
     freedom of association can be justified? Explain your 
     position.
       2. In 1956 Justice Hugo Black declared that ``there can be 
     no equal justice where the kind of trial a man gets depends 
     on the amount of money he has.'' \2\ Do you agree

[[Page 8005]]

     with Justice Black's statement? Why or why not?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     \2\ Griffin v. Illinois
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       How have the nation's courts attempted to reduce the 
     disparities of justice between rich and poor?
       Should the courts' objective be equality of legal resources 
     or assurance of access to minimal legal resources? What's the 
     difference?
       3. The Fourth Amendment is said to be both one of the most 
     important protections of individual liberty and one of the 
     most troublesome provisions of the Bill of Rights. Why was 
     the Fourth Amendment added to the Constitution and what 
     rights does it protect? Why has determining what is an 
     ``unreasonable'' search and seizure proved to be so 
     difficult?
       How is the Fourth Amendment related to what courts have 
     said is an individual's ``legitimate expectation of 
     privacy''?
       Given the variety of activities for which Americans use 
     their cars and the amount of time and money they invest in 
     them, should vehicles be accorded the same degree of 
     constitutional protection as residences, i.e., should the car 
     as well as the home be regarded as a person's ``castle''?


   Unit six: What Are the Roles of the Citizen in American Democracy?

       1. The Founders believed that republican self-government 
     required a greater degree of civic virtue than did other 
     forms of government. Why did they hold that belief? How did 
     they reconcile it with their belief in the natural rights 
     philosophy?
       How was Tocqueville's view of good citizenship different 
     from that of the Founders?
       To promote good citizenship the Founders supported both 
     religious instruction and civic education. What purposes did 
     they believe each of these experiences would serve? Are those 
     purposes still important to good citizenship today? Why or 
     why not?
       2. The Internet has been called the ``electronic 
     frontier.'' The current absence of government regulation of 
     this new world of cyberspace is similar in certain respects 
     to Locke's state of nature. How might Locke and the other 
     natural rights philosophers have resolved the issues of life, 
     liberty, and property as these rights exist on the Internet?
       Should government regulate freedom of expression in 
     cyberspace? Why or why not?
       Has the potential of the Internet fundamentally altered the 
     nature of representative government? Why or why not?
       3. American constitutionalism, especially its principles of 
     federalism, and independent judiciary, and fundamental 
     rights, has had a major impact on the development of 
     constitutional democracy in other countries. The American 
     form of government, however, has not been widely copied. Most 
     of the world's democracies have opted instead for a 
     parliamentary form of government rather than one of shared 
     powers among three coequal branches of government. What are 
     the relative advantages and disadvantages of these two 
     different systems?
       Do you believe that the American system of divided 
     government has become impractical in the complex, fast-paced 
     world of today? Explain your position.
       What constitutional reforms might you suggest to improve 
     the effectiveness of our form of government?

     

                          ____________________