Nearly a year after President Obama took office, I’m still more positive than negative on his decisions, and of the times I’ve been negative, the subjects of concern have often amounted to little more than a passing annoyance.
Take the Nobel Peace Prize, for instance. Though it’s old news, the Prize will not be formally awarded to the President until next week.
When this old news first broke, I remember thinking what many people at the time thought, “Really? Isn’t that a bit premature?” Regardless, a few days later, I and others had moved on, because the Prize was just not that important in the scheme of things, against the backdrop of a limping economy, multi-front wars, etc.
I still feel that way, but in a commentary published today in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Tad Armstrong forced me to think twice.
In his capacity as an ardent promoter of citizenry knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, Armstrong reminds us that Article I of our nation’s founding document includes the following clause …
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State.
Next, Armstrong clearly and persuasively demonstrates how that clause applies to a sitting President, the Nobel Peace Prize, and its associated cash award.
There is obviously an out embedded in this clause; namely, “the Consent of the Congress” — and I’m guessing the current Congress would provide such consent, although I’m wondering why they have not. Maybe Congressional leaders assumed it was so obvious what the vote outcome would be that actually holding the vote would be nothing more than a formality and they could thus skip it, staying focused on greater concerns.
The problem with skipping formalities is that, after skipping one, you’re tempted to skip two or more — and perhaps a few non-formalities while you’re at it. Call me a t-crosser and i-dotter, but I think Mr. Armstrong has a point. Surely, this required exercise of consent would not take much of Congress’ time and I see no good argument why they shouldn’t just do it.
Granted, if they don’t, I suspect I’ll continue to sleep just fine. Of course, the problem with sleeping through skipped formalities is that, after sleeping through one, you’re tempted to sleep through more of them … and so on.