The EU Constitution

The European Union’s impending Constitution showdown is very interesting indeed. Most agree that the document is bulky, hyper-political, and so complex that it’s meaning will be difficult to precisely interpret. However, most logical reviews of this situation also indicate that ratification of the EU Constitution is necessary for the Union’s continued development and economic improvement. There are two main issues that come to the forefront:

First, as George Will indicates in his recent article, the document itself has serious issues…

The proposed constitution has 448 articles -- 441 more than the U.S. Constitution. It is a jumble of pieties, giving canonical status to sentiments such as "the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen" should be protected. It establishes, among many other rights, a right to "social and housing assistance" sufficient for a "decent existence." Presumably, supranational courts and bureaucracies will define and enforce those rights, as well as the right of children to "express their views fully." And it stipulates that "preventive action should be taken" to protect the environment.

Do the European elites really believe that their rank-and-file public electorates understand this document? Or does it not really matter because the majority of EU citizens will not be afforded the opportunity of a referendum vote such is occurring in France today? The elites in Germany recently adopted the Constitution at the Bundestag level only. If given the opportunity would the social-minded Germans react any differently than the French Socialists? Will Continues:

The European Union, which has a flag no one salutes and an anthem no one knows, now seeks ratification of a constitution few have read. Surely only its authors have read its turgid earnestness without laughing, which is one reason why the European project is foundering. Today in France, and Wednesday in the Netherlands, Europe's elites -- political, commercial and media -- may learn the limits of their ability to impose their political fetishes on restive and rarely consulted publics.

Of course the other main issue is one of the European public’s inability to administer itself some much-needed medicine. Will correctly notes that the European process has come this far by largely bypassing democracy.

Many French voters will use today's referendum to vent grievances against Jacques Chirac, who has been in power for 10 years, which would be excessive even if he were not overbearing. Some French factions, their normal obstreperousness leavened by paranoia, think the constitution is a conspiracy to use "ultraliberalism" -- free markets -- to destroy their "social model." That is the suffocating web of labor laws and other statism that gives France double-digit unemployment -- a staggering 22 percent of those under age 25.

The far-reaching social entitlements system in Europe is stifling the collective economy, but the general public seems unwilling to make the necessary reductions to this system. Again, this is a difficult pill to swallow if you are accustomed to these full benefits. The Euro-Elites are also paying the price of their very existence right now. The governments of western Europe have not kept up with their ever-changing populations.

Furthermore, with a Muslim presence in France of 8 percent and rising, there is a backlash against Chirac's championing of E.U. membership for Turkey, which would be, by the time it joined, by far the most populous E.U. country. Admission of Turkey would further reduce -- more than did last year's admission of 10 nations, eight in Eastern Europe -- the European Union's output per person, which according to one study already ranks below that of 46 American states.

This is of course in part, the point… With a 8% Muslim population in France, I believe that there are approximately zero Muslim members of the National Assembly. With a 2% Turkish population in Germany, I believe there is approximately one Turkish member of the Bundestag.