JULY 4TH MUSINGS ON THE AMERICAN EXPERIMENT

I was on the New York subway on July 4, 1976, but nobody seemed to care about the bicentennial. People were reading the paper or staring off into space, as usual. Then, out of the blue, one person started singing God Bless America. A second person joined in, then a third, and before I knew it, the entire subway car had broken out in song, myself included. Black, white, Asian, Puerto Rican, punk rockers, young girls, tough guys, old women and men—it didn’t matter. Everyone was singing together. Everyone was smiling. I was so happy that this could happen I cried tears of joy. This was happening in New York—the place I was born, an incredibly diverse city, a microcosm of the world—and I was overcome with joy and gratitude.

To remember this experience makes my cry again, only this time for a different reason. I cannot imagine this reoccurring. We have become too divided. In the 1980s, the Fairness Act was scuttled and people started listening to their own particular news source, often the polar opposite of the other side. With the advent of social media and AI, the fragmentation has only grown worse. It doesn’t help that the current administration made no effort to expand the tent and be more inclusive. The 250^th anniversary party is more of a private invitation than a national event.

I was sitting here pondering how to bring back the spirit of 1976 when I suddenly realized that New Yorkers are celebrating something they hadn’t celebrated since the 1970s—the Knicks! The basketball team just won a championship for the first time since 1973. Come to think of it, there are other similarities between now and the 1970s. We were in the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate chapter of our history back then; today we are again trying to end an unpopular war (or two). America’s post WWII high may have come crashing down in the 1970s, but there was more to the era than America’s comeuppance.

There was a resurgence of optimism back in 1976. Nixon had resigned and Jimmy Carter had defeated Gerald Ford. Roe v Wade had passed, and women were empowered to be increasingly independent, launching their own businesses in record numbers. Martha Stewart started her catering business and Anita Roddick opened The Body Shop. But it wasn’t just the women. Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded Microsoft, and the Steves (Jobs and Wozniak) co-founded Apple Computers. America was on the rebound. We even had a growing sense of humor about ourselves. Saturday Night Live first aired in October 1975 amid a comedy club boom.

Most importantly, there was a greater consensus around the critical issues of the day. The Clean Air and Clean Water Acts both became law in the 1970s and the EPA was also founded then. We were tackling the most important problems, unlike today, where the political will to take on important issues has evaporated. The current administration just fired the scientists responsible for predicting climate change and environmental disasters. Fortunately, the scientists knew how important their work was and have opened a privately funded website— www.climate.us — that continues to disseminate the information. How did climate, clean air, and clean water ever become contentious issues? I trace it to Citizens United becoming law in 2010. Corporations can now donate unlimited amounts to particular Political Action Committees (known as Super PACS), and ever since, every issue has become politicized.

In my circles, many people are ashamed to be an American right now. The core of our beliefs are under siege; people are questioning what makes them an American anymore. Just days ago, the Supreme Court upheld the right of birthright citizenship enshrined in the 14^th amendment, but instead of the unanimous decision it should have been, it passed by a whisker. Four justices concluded that the president’s executive order did not violate the Constitution. I found that hard to believe, as here are the words of the 14^th amendment pertinent to the decision:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

You do not have to be an attorney to understand this sentence. The meaning is plain to see. So how did we nearly permit a wannabe king to overturn a Constitutional amendment? It takes ¾ of the states to ratify any amendment that is previously passed by Congress. Amendments were the founders way of “making a more perfect union,” understanding that changes would have to be made. Overturning a Constitutional amendment overrides the voice of the people and Congress, previously understood as a co-equal branch of government. The situation is dire. Our republic is hanging on by a thread.

Incredibly, one third of the nation sees no problem. They blithely go on supporting the current administration, unaware that the system they have known is crumbling. I say this without judgment, as I make no assumptions about Trump supporters. I know several who are in many respects good people. They support important causes, exhibit kindness and compassion toward their neighbors, and take good care of their spouses and families. They just happen to believe in a different set of facts than I do. Their eyes are not open to what is occurring, unlike the majority of the nation.

The Reflecting Pool in DC has become tantamount to a national mood ring. The pool became shrouded in algae because pride in America has turned murky. About two thirds of the nation understands we have a problem. As we enter this semiquincentennial of July 4^th, the mood is introspective. In a representational republic, the elected officials are ultimately a reflection of the nation. Who have we become? Is there any way out of this? There is, but it is up to WE, THE PEOPLE, to pull us out of this quagmire. We must elect new Congressmen and women that understand this moment in history and are ready to meet it with substantive change.

The Path to Redemption

How did we get to this place and what is the way out? Allow me to address this as succinctly as possible. When I wrote Original Politics: Making America Sacred Again, released in June of 2020, my foundational premise was how much Native America had contributed to the principle core beliefs of the nation—values such as liberty, equality, and natural rights. It makes sense if you think about it. The colonists lived on the land amongst Native Americans for approximately 150 years before deciding to break away from their mother country and form a new nation. The Native nations, inherently egalitarian, became models to learn from. The Haudenosaunee (Iroquois) Confederacy, formed as long ago as 1132 AD by some estimates, were the most influential on our founders. The Haudenosaunee (People of the Long House) governed themselves by something known as The Great Law of Peace. This was the model used by Ben Franklin when drafting the original founding document of the United States known as The Articles of Confederation. The Articles were ratified in 1781 and were the law of the land for eight years until the US Constitution supplanted the Articles and became the law of the land in 1789.

Franklin became familiar with the Haudenosaunee because he was the Indian Ambassador to them during the French and Indian Wars. It was Franklin’s friendship with the Onondaga Chief Canassatego that brought about an auspicious meeting in which Canassatego recommended that the thirteen colonies unite under one government. Amazingly, this meeting took place on July 4, 1744, exactly thirty two years before the colonies signed the Declaration of Independence that we are now celebrating. Historians tend to dismiss the Articles of Confederation as a failed experiment, and it is true that the Articles were supplanted—but only because they were so closely modeled on Indian law that they did not work for non-Native people, who had different concepts of law, money, property, and public service.

There are many aspects of the Articles of Confederation that are worth reexamining. All politicians served for free and could not receive emoluments of any kind. All elected officials had term limits. There was a single legislature, which operated similarly to an Indian council. There were presidents (at least in name), but they were similar to an Indian chief, deriving all power from the council and only serving a one-year term.

Much of this changed during the Constitutional Convention, when presidents were accorded much greater powers, which is why historians rightly distinguish them from the previous presidents. But other checks and balances in the US Constitution, as well as the concept of federalism, were also partly appropriated from the Iroquois, and Congress acknowledged this during the 1980s in a signed proclamation.

My main point is this: We began as far away from monarchy as we possibly could, but we have been inching closer and closer to monarchy ever since. It is almost as if we haven’t truly broken away from our mother country and don’t fully trust ourselves to self-govern. Is it a coincidence that the MAGA color is red, just like the British redcoats?

When we adopted the US Constitution, the idea was to create three co-equal branches of government. The checks and balances of the US Constitution were well conceived, but many of the checks against the executive branch have proven ineffective over time. Consider impeachment. While several presidents have been impeached, none have ever been convicted by the Senate, including Trump, who was impeached twice in his first term, the second time for fomenting an insurrection against his own government. Only Congress is supposed to declare war, but the last time that happened was 1942. Since WWII, presidents have skirted the law, waging war in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran, while Congress has stood idly by.

Many Americans are shocked at what is currently transpiring. The executive branch is aggressively usurping power from both the legislative and judicial branches, and neither Congress nor the Supreme Court are taking the necessary steps to reassert the authority of their own branches. Americans are wondering: Why is this happening today?

We are currently witnessing the culmination of a half-century-long effort from the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation (founded in 1973) to implement a “unitary executive,” in which nearly all governmental power would be transferred to the executive branch. The “Mandate for Leadership” of Project 2025 first appeared in 1981 at the beginning of the Reagan administration. In the first few pages of the Project 2025 document, its current leaders openly acknowledge the lineage that connects them to the Reagan administration. It was under Reagan that the nation not only began a shift toward enhanced power of the presidency, but also a rapid turn toward income inequality, with top tier income tax rates being cut from 70% to 33%, together with further protections enacted to limit inheritance taxes, ensuring intergenerational wealth.

The Heritage Foundation went on to become the most influential arm of the Republican Party in Supreme Court nominations, which led to the 2010 Citizens United decision that opened the floodgates of unlimited corporate money in politics. The Heritage Foundation was also instrumental in bringing about the controversial decision granting legal immunity to the president for official acts. The sum total of all of these actions has been to set the stage for an authoritarian takeover of government. In short, we cannot simply blame Trump for the current predicament we are now in. If not him, someone else would have come along to take advantage of the situation.

A Second Constitutional Convention

As soon as the current administration ends, while the embers of the charred republic are still warm, we need a second Constitutional convention. A truth and reconciliation commission is not enough. There must be a Constitutional convention with the express purpose of protecting against the abuses of power that have occurred in the last 50 years that have dismantled the checks and balances intended by our founders.

There are many actions I envision, beginning with a complete revamping of the Supreme Court. Lifetime appointments must be abolished and 10-20 year term limits established. Basic rules of ethical conduct need to be put into place, overseen by a committee composed of emeritus and emerita members of the Congress and Supreme Court. The immunity decision must be reversed, and the tenet that nobody is above the law, not even the president, reaffirmed. Moreover, the current Department of Justice practice prohibiting indictment of a sitting president must also be rescinded; even a sitting president must be able to be prosecuted if they are egregiously violating the law. Congress must also no longer give presidents a blank check for war powers, reasserting its Constitutional authority as the only branch empowered to declare war. Moreover, if Congress has established a government department or agency, such as the Department of Education or the Environmental Protection Agency, there should be reasonable limits as to how much the executive branch can restructure the agency.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court decision must be overturned, for as soon as unlimited corporate contributions became possible, the imposition of an oligarchy became inevitable. All these changes and more must be made to ensure the reconstitution and continuation of a representational republic that, despite its faults, was once the envy of all democracies throughout the free world.

It is only with substantive changes such as these that we can recommit to what I consider the sacred purpose of the nation: unity in diversity. The phrase on the Great Seal of the United States says it well: E Pluribus Unum (Out of the Many, One). We the People can still accomplish this mission by being kind and compassionate to those who disagree with us while simultaneously being strong in asserting the right of all to speak and contribute. We must be vigilant, persistent, and persevering, but also sometimes patient. As Theodore Parker said, and Martin Luther King and Barack Obama liked to reiterate, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” In the long run, we shall overcome. What I witnessed on the New York subway on July 4, 1976 was an example of unity in diversity in action. This is our sacred purpose. I pray this purpose will be fulfilled, and that there will be liberty and justice for all.

Love and blessings,

Glenn

_{Note: Parts of this essay were reproduced by permission from ReVision Journal, Winter 2026, Volume 35 issue}