Yesterday, we celebrated the 233rd anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, which must be the most successful document produced by committee.
One must grant that this particular committee — Benjamin Franklin, Robert R. Livingston, Roger Sherman, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson — boasted an abundance of intellectual horsepower. It was Jefferson who wrote the Declaration, with the rest of the committee proposing a few changes before it was submitted to the Continental Congress in Philadelphia, which made more changes.
One might wonder how the Declaration would fare if it fell into the hands of a modern committee:
“When in the Course of human Events …”
(Clearly specist, elevating “human” events above sylvan or cetacean events. Lose the “human.”)
“. . . it becomes necessary for one People . . .”
(To say “one People” deliberately obscures our diversity. This should refer to our glorious mosaic or perhaps a rich tapestry.)
“. . . to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth the separate & equal Station . . .”
(“Separate and equal” sounds too much like “separate but equal,” which has bad connotations. Let’s rephrase this.)
“. . . to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them . . .”
(Why “Nature’s God” instead of just “God?” This might appeal to tree-huggers and secular humanists, but it could alienate segments of the market we need to reach.)
“. . . a decent Respect to the aps of Mankind . . .”
(We’re the United States of America. We don’t pander to the “aps of Mankind.” Delete this fuzzy-thinking internationalism.)
“. . . requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation. We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness . . .”
(“Pursuit of Happiness” sounds libertine. We should stick with John Locke’s formulation of “life, health, liberty or possessions.”)
(Agreed on possessions, though we should change that to “property.” But proclaiming an unalienable right to health could lead to socialized medicine, so cut that.)
(If right to Liberty is unalienable, how can anyone be imprisoned, no matter how heinous the crime? We need to scratch this, too.)
(When does right to Life take effect? Fertilization, quickening, breathing, reaching of age of majority? We need precision here.)
“. . . That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, . . .”
(Too much about Rights. What of public duties and responsibilities?)
“. . . deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the governed; that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, & to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, & organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety & Happiness. . . .”
(This is sedition. We definitely need to dial back a few notches.)
Back in the day, Jefferson was perturbed by the revisions that came from his fellow committee members, as well as “these mutilations” made by Congress.
But for a committee, they did a good job. To put it another way, can you imagine a modern congressional committee with something so inspiring and enduring?
Ed Quillen (ekquillen@gmail.com) of Salida is a free-lance writer and history buff, and he is a frequent contributor to The Post.
