NationStates Jolt Archive

A Constitution is a law determining the fundamental political principles of a government. Well, ok, 25 or so governments. The US constitution has 12 pages, 11 if you exclude the list of men who signed it. There are another nine pages of amendments added over that last 230 years. You can read it in about 30 minutes, and have a pretty clear idea about how the US Government is going to work.

The EU Constitution weighs in at well over 500 pages, and a kilo in weight, and contains bits and pieces that'll be argued over forever.

It supports positive discrimination, outlaws the death penalty in all circumstances, commits itself to high public spending, compulsory consultation with trade unions about changes at work, "the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen," and has all sorts of other bits, like: abortion in Malta, "Hot Rolling Mills Nos 1 and 2" for a steel company in the Czech Republic, some stuff about the nuclear power plant in Slovakia and "the right to provide services by natural persons who do not enjoy hembygdsrätt/kotiseutuoikeus (regional citizenship) in Åland".

Oh, and it imposes all this on 25, or so, governments.

This is not a constitution, certainly not a constitution intended to be understood by those it affects. It is a vast mish-mash of decisions made by governments to take power over citizens of vastly differing countries.

outlaws the death penalty in all circumstances,

That would merely be inscribing into a Constitution something which is already EU law. You cannot enter the EU unless you have an adequate human rights' record, and any nation which still has the death penalty is deemed to be too low on human rights to be granted membership. None of the 25 present members has the death penalty.


commits itself to high public spending,


Actually, it's a lot more complex and ambiguous that that. I wish it did, though.


and has all sorts of other bits, like: abortion in Malta, "Hot Rolling Mills Nos 1 and 2" for a steel company in the Czech Republic, some stuff about the nuclear power plant in Slovakia and "the right to provide services by natural persons who do not enjoy hembygdsrätt/kotiseutuoikeus (regional citizenship) in Åland".


I hadn't heard about those bits, but I'm certain they were added by the governments of those countries themselves, not imposed by the others.


It is a vast mish-mash of decisions made by governments to take power over citizens of vastly differing countries.

May I remind you that it is being submitted to the vote of citizens in several countries (including here in France)?

May I remind you that it is being submitted to the vote of citizens in several countries (including here in France)?

Good luck!! I dont know if its good or bad, but I have no desire to read a document/contract that weighs a kilo.

Do you think the people who vote on it will actually read it?

We in Germany would happily vote on it, but we aren't allowed to, because the majority here would reject it. The EU constitution is a joke and a neo-liberal marketing tool. It'll open up all European markets for the neo-liberal predator economy that is already dominant in the US. It's a dictatorship of big money, not a constitution.

I think -that- is too big. A constitution should be limited to a declaration of intent, a definition of the structure of the government, and enumerations of the essential rights, prohibitions (if any) and responsibilities common to each (but not necessarily all) of the following blocs: the government, corporations (taken as a whole and apart from the other blocs), all citizens (again taken independently, though maybe some overlap with other persons), and all other persons on the nation's soil (see citizens).

From the sound of it, 90 percent of the EU constitution belongs in a European Union Code of laws, and a lot of -that- is too directed to be part of European law in the first place.

A Constitution is a law determining the fundamental political principles of a government. Well, ok, 25 or so governments. The US constitution has 12 pages, 11 if you exclude the list of men who signed it. There are another nine pages of amendments added over that last 230 years. You can read it in about 30 minutes, and have a pretty clear idea about how the US Government is going to work.

The EU Constitution weighs in at well over 500 pages, and a kilo in weight, and contains bits and pieces that'll be argued over forever.

It supports positive discrimination, outlaws the death penalty in all circumstances, commits itself to high public spending, compulsory consultation with trade unions about changes at work, "the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen," and has all sorts of other bits, like: abortion in Malta, "Hot Rolling Mills Nos 1 and 2" for a steel company in the Czech Republic, some stuff about the nuclear power plant in Slovakia and "the right to provide services by natural persons who do not enjoy hembygdsrätt/kotiseutuoikeus (regional citizenship) in Åland".

Oh, and it imposes all this on 25, or so, governments.

This is not a constitution, certainly not a constitution intended to be understood by those it affects. It is a vast mish-mash of decisions made by governments to take power over citizens of vastly differing countries.

The US Constitution is a Constitution... The EU Constitution isn't... It's more of a mis-labled legal code book and the like. It serves more special-purpose issues than anything else...

A Proper constitution should only contain "The fundamental political principles of a government"... The US Constitution is a good example... It basically outlines the form and operation of the government; then lays down fundamental principles by which that government will operate...

The EU Constitution is not a proper Constitution... It delves too much into outlying issues which have no business being drafted into such... Most of the stuff it covers should be in Legal Code, and not drafted into Constitutional format...

But, that's to be expected from Statists... They are more concerned with the "Big Issue of the Day" than with practical form and function... The EU is nothing short of a codified special-interest group, with political power...

The EU constitution is big (about 240 pages I think) and it isn't as nice a piece of prose to read as the US constitution but on the other hand it replaces 80,000 to 90,000 pages of European laws and treaties which the EU has built up over its last 50 years of existence, and it is also a compromise between 25 different sovereign states all with different interests, histories and cultures. So while the EU constitution isnt perfect it is much better than what came before it and it also was a harder thing to write up than a document written between 13 originally British colonies in the creation of the USA.

The EU constitution is big (about 240 pages I think) and it isn't as nice a piece of prose to read as the US constitution but on the other hand it replaces 80,000 to 90,000 pages of European laws and treaties which the EU has built up over its last 50 years of existence, and it is also a compromise between 25 different sovereign states all with different interests, histories and cultures. So while the EU constitution isnt perfect it is much better than what came before it and it also was a harder thing to write up than a document written between 13 originally British colonies in the creation of the USA.

No, the number of members has little to do with it... It's content... Constitutions should just contain fundamental purposes of the government... Actually the entire Constitution is about 855 pages long... Really, about 764 of those 855 have no business being in a constitution... The thing could perform the same function, more efficiently, if everything after Part II were cut out...

Ein Deutscher']We in Germany would happily vote on it, but we aren't allowed to, because the majority here would reject it. The EU constitution is a joke and a neo-liberal marketing tool. It'll open up all European markets for the neo-liberal predator economy that is already dominant in the US. It's a dictatorship of big money, not a constitution.

Repeat after me.. crack is bad.. crack is bad. crack is bad. The first step to curing your insanity is to admit that you are in fact crazy. The 12 step program, use it..it works.

No, the number of members has little to do with it... It's content... Constitutions should just contain fundamental purposes of the government... Actually the entire Constitution is about 855 pages long... Really, about 764 of those 855 have no business being in a constitution... The thing could perform the same function, more efficiently, if everything after Part II were cut out...

This is a constitutional treaty, there is no country called Europe going to exist because of this document, its is just a replacement for a whole lot of existing treaties and an effort to increase the efficiency of the EU itself. This is not the constitution of some European superstate.


You are arguing this is big government/over-legisation yes? You are probably a conservative or a libertarian but just take note that the EU isnt a national body, its a supranational entity, by its nature it is big, it is trying to coordinate nations all with their own governments. Maybe in the future there can be more ammendments and the treaty be made smaller but for now this is the best that can be made. As I said this isn't an ideal, because there are different visions of Europe and a compromise needed to be made between them.

Repeat after me.. crack is bad.. crack is bad. crack is bad. The first step to curing your insanity is to admit that you are in fact crazy. The 12 step program, use it..it works.
Thats nice. Instead of debating the issue you stoop to personal attacks. Nice way to build credibility.

This is a constitutional treaty, there is no country called Europe going to exist because of this document, its is just a replacement for a whole lot of existing treaties and an effort to increase the efficiency of the EU itself. This is not the constitution of some European superstate.


You are arguing this is big government/over-legisation yes? You are probably a conservative or a libertarian but just take note that the EU isnt a national body, its a supranational entity, by its nature it is big, it is trying to coordinate nations all with their own governments. Maybe in the future there can be more ammendments and the treaty be made smaller but for now this is the best that can be made. As I said this isn't an ideal, because there are different visions of Europe and a compromise needed to be made between them.

If its a treaty its a treaty... not a constitution... (More Amendments? Smaller? Those two are in opposition to one another...)... And if you were going to be coordinating nations, each which are independent, it would be SMALLER not larger.

There is little difference between this and the initial US Constitution in form or concept... You have several independent entities, each with their own government and constitution, unifying while remaining mostly independent...

Simple fact is, steel mills in one particular nation, have no business being in a document intended to unify core purposes... If anything, the thing should not be nation specific period... And little can be done about altering a constitution AFTER ratification, short of re-holding a new convention and re-drafting the entire thing for re-ratification... So it's really all moot....

As MellowMuddle as putted it so nicely.. its A CONSTITUTIONAL TREATY FOR CHRIST SAKE!

It is a treaty between nations that setups their common functioning in the EU, and the way that its nations act with each other.

Most of it is a copy-paste of old treaties, this "Constitution" is basically making all those treaties into a single text.

Thats nice. Instead of debating the issue you stoop to personal attacks. Nice way to build credibility.


Spare me the condescension(sp).. Look at his posts in this thread and others. to paraphrase this persons arguments... Nazis killing 6 million jews was bad but Germany made up for it by saying sorry later, but America is evil because some guys in prison got beat on/humiliated.

If its a treaty its a treaty... not a constitution... (More Amendments? Smaller? Those two are in opposition to one another...)... And if you were going to be coordinating nations, each which are independent, it would be SMALLER not larger.

There is little difference between this and the initial US Constitution in form or concept... You have several independent entities, each with their own government and constitution, unifying while remaining mostly independent...

Simple fact is, steel mills in one particular nation, have no business being in a document intended to unify core purposes... If anything, the thing should not be nation specific period... And little can be done about altering a constitution AFTER ratification, short of re-holding a new convention and re-drafting the entire thing for re-ratification... So it's really all moot....

Not quite..

Article I-1 Establishment of the Union

1. Reflecting the will of the citizens and States of Europe to build a common future, this Constitution establishes the European Union, on which the Member States confer competences to attain objectives they have in common. The Union shall coordinate the policies by which the Member States aim to achieve these objectives, and shall exercise on a Community basis the competences they confer on it.

From here (http://europa.eu.int/constitution/en/ptoc2_en.htm#a2)


This is an agreement between member states, not between a state and its citizens, like a constitution.

Good luck!! I dont know if its good or bad, but I have no desire to read a document/contract that weighs a kilo.

Do you think the people who vote on it will actually read it?

Few people will read it fully. I try to stay as informed as I can; I've read several summaries of it, several specific parts, commentaries on specifics and general intents in newspapers, watched debates, etc... But I wouldn't have the time to read such a massive text, especially one drafted as a technical legal document.

If its a treaty its a treaty... not a constitution...

The EU is a fairly unique entity, it is both a treaty and a constitution. It is a legal document agreed between nations so it is a treaty and it is also the fundamental laws of the EU so it is a constitution.



(More Amendments? Smaller? Those two are in opposition to one another...)...

Ammendment means a change, it can make something bigger or smaller. It could subtract clauses, add them or merge them, make more compact...


And if you were going to be coordinating nations, each which are independent, it would be SMALLER not larger.

The EU requires its member states to give some of its sovereignty up voluntarily to the EU therefore this constitution is a document that needs to take precedence over national laws in a number of areas so there is by its nature a lot of complexity to it.



There is little difference between this and the initial US Constitution in form or concept... You have several independent entities, each with their own government and constitution, unifying while remaining mostly independent...


The differences between the original US 13 was much less culturally and politically than between the EU 25 at the onset, also these US states were never really sovereign nations. The US also is much more federalised than the EU so the EU states are actually much more independent.


Simple fact is, steel mills in one particular nation, have no business being in a document intended to unify core purposes... If anything, the thing should not be nation specific period... And little can be done about altering a constitution AFTER ratification, short of re-holding a new convention and re-drafting the entire thing for re-ratification... So it's really all moot....

Steel mills in the constitution? Please quote me the paragraph so I can see for myself in what context this is mentioned.

Steel mills in the constitution? Please quote me the paragraph so I can see for myself in what context this is mentioned.


Found it here (http://europa.eu.int/constitution/en/ptoc130_en.htm#a601)


And its presence its obvious.. the European Coal and Steel Community is the GrandMother of the EU, still, most of its provisions must be accounted for and considered, ence the protocol.

In other words: They had to find room in the Constitutional Treaty for an outdated treaty of Europe.

They put it in because they wanted no legal ambiguity. That Coal and Steel union indeed was the beginning of the EU but that 50 year old treaty had to be mentioned as the Constitution would be replacing it. As I said this is a complex document but it replaces a confusing web of older treaties which was much harder to deal with.

also these US states were never really sovereign nations.


The US states were never nations period... They were sovereign states however from 1776 (Signing of the Declaration of Independence) untill 1789 (Ratification of the US Constitution), including under the Articles of Confederation (from 1777-1789)... Prior to the Constitution, they were seperate sovereign entities allied into a loose "Confederation", with no strong central power or government... It wasn't untill the states ratified the Constitution, that any sovereignty was surrendered to a central government... Prior to that, the govenors, state legislators and the individual state constitutions were the authority.

They put it in because they wanted no legal ambiguity. That Coal and Steel union indeed was the beginning of the EU but that 50 year old treaty had to be mentioned as the Constitution would be replacing it. As I said this is a complex document but it replaces a confusing web of older treaties which was much harder to deal with.

I hope they put the beer regulations in there. Wouldn't want the quality of European beer (well, Belgian and German anyway) to go downhill.

The EU Constitution is more than likely a way

a) for countries to internationalise their domestic policies
b) for Brussels to take more domestic matters out of our hands
c) to install the neoliberal agenda as fundamental to the Union

You can probably guess from my language that I do not view this positively.

The EU Constitution is more than likely a way

a) for countries to internationalise their domestic policies
b) for Brussels to take more domestic matters out of our hands
c) to install the neoliberal agenda as fundamental to the Union

You can probably guess from my language that I do not view this positively.

but... they're doing it to you for your own good! Inclusion of specific references to things like coal, or steel-mills, marks this as a short-term solution at-best. A Constitution is what it is, because no matter how technology changes, it remains, for the bulk of it, relevant to the ongoing business of government.
Since 1789, the U.S. constitution has had seventeen changes (the first ten amendments were voted in as a block.), that's a span of some 216 years.
The lifespan of a rolling mill as about fifty-and getting shorter as technology advances. The EU could get away with defining the broad powers of the Euroopean Union Government, its structure, and its basic limits. Special references to specific and transitory issues like Czech Steel mills should've waited for laws written under the Constitution. This actually looks a bit like an attempt at micromanagement, rather than a definitive document on how the European Union Parlaiment will function and what its powers are.

The EU Constitution is more than likely a way

a) for countries to internationalise their domestic policies
b) for Brussels to take more domestic matters out of our hands
c) to install the neoliberal agenda as fundamental to the Union

You can probably guess from my language that I do not view this positively.

Yep I agree we have already enough problem with neoliberalism affecting nationalpolicies. Like for example that we in sweden have decided to have hightaxes on alchohol both becuase lower demand of alchohol and the problem with alchohol but also as a way for alchoholsells to pay for the problem they cause. But because that you can know in reallity take as mutch alchohol with you from other nations close to sweden with mucth lower alchololprices, that national decision is underminded. Another example is a harmful chemical that have some use in farming but no real use in homegardens. So the swedish goverment tried to stop it from use in gardens but alow it but with restriction in farming, but that was against eu:s free trade the eu court deiceded.

Experience shows that a constitution should be as vauge and non-specific as possible. It is much easier to reinterpret a 12 page document than it is to reinterperate a 500 page document, as is evidenced by the fact that France is on its fifth Constitution.

It really has more to do with legal history than anything else. The US was used to the flexible British system of common law when its constitution was written. The framers of the constitution knew that the vaguries of the text could be work out by judges on a case-by-case basis.

The rest of Europe was, and still is, stuck on the Roman notion of codified law, the idea that every little rule and regulation should be written down and judges should follow all of them.