Search

This study examines and evaluates the ratification of the EU Constitution. It compares and contrasts the 2004-2005 ratification process in Europe with that of its American counterpart in 1787-1788. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On July 18th of this year, after 16 months of debating more than 7000 amendments, 105 delegates finished the draft of the new constitution for the EU. The completion of this draft is not the end of the struggle over defining Europe’s future—in fact, it has just kicked it off. Over the next year, European governments will debate the language of and propose changes to the draft document. Each of the EU’s current member countries, and the 10 expected to join next year, can press for content changes. June 15, 2004 is the deadline for governments to sign off on the text (which, by the way, must have unanimous approval). Then, from mid-2004 through mid-2005, individual ratification votes will take place in all 25 member countries, either in parliaments, by referenda, or both. This paper will be a comparative study of the American founding period of 1787-1789 and the current process of formulating and ratifying the EU constitution. The parallels are inviting. America’s founders spent a year writing, speaking and debating in an attempt to persuade the 13 colonies to ratify the proposed constitution. Europe is now wrestling with centuries of national histories, long-standing regional differences and 21 different languages. Further, there are some heavily disputed subjects that faced the US Constitutional convention in 1787 that will provide some of the biggest challenges to the push to approve the EU constitution. Some of the most intriguing are: · How much power should a central government have? · What is the proper balance of power between big and small states in the union? · How much should individual states and citizens contribute to their common defense? · How much power and independence should the proposed “president” have? · What is the proper relationship (and/or separation) of church and state? · What happens if a government refuses to ratify the constitution? This paper will examine both the text of and relevant commentary surrounding the draft document, identify the key conflicts that emerge from it, and evaluate how these conflicts are addressed (or fail to be addressed -- there are strategic silences and omissions in key areas such as collective security and defense). I will employ the main forms of constitutional argument: textual, structural, historical and ethical, to compare and contrast the American founding experience with the provisions, procedures and rights found in the EU Constitution, and identify the most important challenges and compromises that will confront the EU member states in the years to come. **This study will precede a Sabbatical year (2004-2005) in Europe, where I will be attending a number of the ratification debates and researching the process of drafting, amending and approving the EU constitution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]