During the Federal Convention of 1787, the Founders argued over every conceivable aspect of the document they were creating. Some, being from England, argued against a single person as the Chief Executive. Others, from the smaller states, insisted on enumerated, clearly defined and limited powers for the central government. The great majority, though, had no objection to what has become known as the "seperation of power". In fact, the concept had been written into the Constitution in a haphazard manner, but was added wherever it was missing and in a more bold and intentional way before the document was signed. Indeed, the seperation of powers of the three branches of government had been the very framework upon which the founders acted, albeit in an eerie and unconcious way.

The seperation of powers, these words are not in the Constitution, was the method used by the founders in the attempt to prevent our elected officials from creating a tyrranical, elitist despotism in government. Madison defined tyranny as all powers, legislative, executive, and judicial, being in the hands of one group or person. The seperation of powers was to prevent that from happening.

Not only were the powers of the branches strictly defined but auxilliary checks were given to each branch that would limit the autonomy of the branches. For example, the executive was given the right to appoint his cabinet members, diplomats and ambassadors, and justices to the Supreme Court. But all of these appointments were to be subject to the approval and advice of the Senate. Congress was given the huge power of writing all of the nation’s laws, subject to the veto power of the executive and the ratification by the Senate. Congress, by a two-thirds vote, could override the president’s veto and pass the law. The founders wisely did everything they could to limit the possibility of one person or branch becoming all powerful.

It was this seperation of power that overcame many popular objections to the Constitution during the ratification by the states. It was also one of the main reasons the people have come to believe that the Constitution is their document, their insurance of their rights being protected.

Today, the seperation of powers still operates to some degree, but the seeming ignorance of the Constitution, the almost dictatorial attitude of Congress, especially its leaders, and their ability to get away with more and more criminal activities are all due to the changes made by the courts and the laws passed by Congress in the way in which the seperation of powers is perceived. The fact that the Constitution does not contain an expressed injuction to preserve the boundaries of the three branches is impetus for those bent on consolidating power to themselves.

The result of this curruption of the seperation of powers is what we see happening in our government, especially in Congress, today. Vaguely written, ill defined legislation leaves the details to the bureaucracy created by the bill. Bills redefining the powers of the judiciary and executive more often than not, are commonly passed. The result is Congress has become the de-facto regulator of all things executive, and the judiciary has become the law makers. This is most obvious in the consideration of abortion, pornography, school prayer, the death penalty, and immigration law and their enforcement.

This maldistribution of power received its biggest boost with the election of Woodrow Wilson as president in 1912. Since then, a faction loosely called the "Administrationists", has pushed further and further the Constitution’s seperation of power doctrine toward the brink of destruction. In essence, they have been unopposed in their work.

Wilson, an academic in all that that infers, believed the seperation of powers was a deadlock to government efficiency. He and his followers were of the belief that the Constitution should be a living document as history had shown how much time had changed man’s ideologies about himself, and all other aspects of his world. They saw the Constitution as being a religious like set of commandments that society had outgrown with the advances in understanding and man’s ability to reason rather than simply observing. He and his followers often stated the following about the Constitution, "The more open-eyed we become as a nation to its defects the better." They believed that man received his rights to life, liberty, etc., not from God or nature’s laws, but from those in power. Yet he espoused the theory that government was not a written set of mandates, but was a living, breathing entity susceptible to outgrowing certain premises.

In Wilson’s view of government, only the consolidation of powers under one branch would provide the most efficient government. He believed that the only seperation should be between the politics and the administration of government. Therefore, he held that two branches should comprise government, the executive and the administrative. The executive would be the only elected position and would be the "people’s delegate" in government. It would be the President’s sole responsibility to sell the policies of the administration to the people, and to convey the wishes of the people to the administration. This executive would, seemingly, be perpetually in campaign mode, selling the policies to the people, forming interest groups that could convince others of the benefits of the policies. A cheerleader, the executive would have no real administrative duties, but would be essential if civil disruption were to be avoided.

The administration’s major responsibility was to foretell the future and set in motion policies that would be effective in bringing the nation into that future. There would be no laws except those conferring the power to legislate upon the administration, and as few as necessary to regulate society. The everyday administration of the activities of the people would be per diem, or on an as needed basis and would be revisable, also as needed, or, as they saw fit.

To Wilson and the Administrationists, the future of the nation was to be decided according to what they saw as historically becoming the future, and not having anything to do with the rational, Constitutional standards addressing the nature of human beings. The duty of government, in their eyes, was to be attuned to the time and spirit of the future and to guide the nation where those events showed it to be headed. No thought was given, in fact it was specifically ommitted, that the duties should ever provide for common security or to secure the inalienable rights of men. Such idealistic thought was, to their way of thinking, responsible for selfishness in man, poverty, war, and all injustices so prolific in the world. Only a trained class of elitists, scientifically determined as non-partisan could bring about the perfection the Constitution had failed to achieve.

We, when analyizing the properties of one form of government as opposed to some other, are more apt to choose that form which elevates the common person, defining and insuring the retention of human rights as are the nature of all persons ever born, than a form which is impersonal, abstract, and, in anyway authoritarian. Indeed, those very qualities of humane governence, drafted by and for the People of the nation, are the reasons why the people of these United States have, for so many years, seen the Constitution as their own insurance policy against tyranny and the loss of their freedom. Only by the corruption and ignorance of the principles inherent in the Constitution have evil men, bent on tyranny and a greedy consolidation of power, made the few inroads they have to their purposes. The Constitution, as written, is still very much appropriate and timely for the purpose for which it was created.

The fact that the Constitution embraces the idea that there is a higher power than man is what makes it so personally acceptible to men of decent character. The robotic, un-godly processes of Administrationism, Socialism, Communism, Fascism, etc., and the policies resultant therein, are the very reasons they are soundly rejected and despised by those same decent humans.