We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. Preamble to the United States Constitution

Reflecting on these introductory words to the Constitution, I have decided I am an originalist.  However, when originalists harp on the few designated powers of the federal government in the Constitution, they seldom mention the visionary Preamble. In the Preamble I read the goals that can not be spelled out as laws.

The Federal Government has always excelled at two of these goals:

1.  provide for the common defence
2.  secure the Blessings of Liberty

What the government has accomplished imperfectly are:

1. establish Justice
2. insure domestic tranquility
3. promote general Welfare

These are the intentions needed for “a more perfect union.”   A funny expression, “more perfect union.”  “Perfect” is a description of an absolute condition, yet the Constitution calls for a “more perfect union.” I like this abuse of the absolute by making it a comparative: “more perfect.” It means we have done well, yet still may do better.

It is uncomfortable to view 2020 through the lens of Justice, domestic tranquility, and general welfare. We are twisting the concept of “Justice” by politicizing the Supreme Court, connecting the Justices with political parties. We are politicizing the notion of “domestic tranquility” by treating law enforcement as if you have to choose to support either the police or Black Lives–a false dichotomy.  We are debating what constitutes “general welfare” by stripping down health insurance so only the very poor and the very rich are covered. We have failed to integrate both the races and quality education into all schools.

If we read the Preamble as a record of the Founders’ intentions we are visionary originalists.  We see the tensions between the intentions: between Justice and domestic tranquility, between general welfare and blessings of liberty. We realize these goals are “both and,” rather than “either or.” The Constitution is not about absolutes; it is about the inevitable tensions between its core values.

“Justice” with a capital “J” can only mean “Justice for all.”  That includes minorities, such as African Americans, and the enforcers of justice, the local police and the National Guard. That enforcers deserve justice may be overlooked, because enforcers are always perceived as the perpetrators, rather than the victims of injustice.  In every street encounter justice for both parties ought to be considered. It is amazing how decisions of justice are not always clear, even with video evidence. We have to learn to judge only when all the facts are presented. The badge or the race are not the determiners of who is just.

For some time the debate about health care has focused on whether health is a human right. Given the resources of this country, we should finally agree that health is a human right, even the treatment of addiction and mental health, which lead to crime. The prisons can only contain so many drug offenders, and their condition is usually curable.

What about education? Is it a human right? Or to frame it precisely, how much education is a human right? How much will promote “general welfare,” as the Preamble states? Based on voting and military requirements, it seems that education should be a right through the age of 18. This means a quality education, as defined by each state. The federal government’s role has been spelled out by the entitlements: Title I, II and IX especially.

So the goals for the next Presidential administration are clear, according to the Preamble: establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility,  . . .  promote the general Welfare” as well as provide for the common defence . . . and secure the Blessings of Liberty.” But we understand these latter goals have been best served in the past, because the rich and the powerful have insured them.

We originalists need to remember how the Preamble provides for the weak and the under-served. They, too, were considered by the Founders and the U.S. Constitution.