The men who drafted our Constitution were brilliant. They devised a system wherein the three branches of government balanced each other. The legislature was to write the laws of the land, the executive was to execute these laws, and the courts would ensure that those who violate these laws, including the Constitution, were checked and, depending on the gravity of the violation, delivered to the executive powers for punishment.

If we were to rewrite our constitution today there are only a few things I would wish to change. For one thing, I would place term limits on members of Congress. For another, I would give the President right to exercise a line-item veto. The latter provision could work wonders in helping us avoid wasteful spending.

Recently, a more serious and glaring Constitutional defect has become apparent. Though Congress and the Federal courts may exercise powers of oversight with regard to the activities of the executive branch, neither Congress nor the courts have the muscle to enforce their decisions. If Congress holds a member of the executive in contempt, the Department of Justice may or may not act on it. Likewise, if the courts issue decisions that the executive powers do not like, their usual response is to appoint more cooperative judges, suggest packing the Supreme Court, and fight the decision through our labyrinthian legal system.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder was held in contempt, and nothing happened. It will be the same if the House holds members of our current administration in contempt. It would be an exercise in futility. The Department of Justice and the FBI would rather exercise their powers by going after people who prayed in front of an abortion clinic sometime in the last decade.