Oaths of office too often forgotten
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
City and county officials, before taking office, must first pledge a sworn commitment to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution and the Montana State Constitution. This sworn commitment is known as the “Oath of Office.” This is a very serious matter, and at this time, one that deserves further attention and examination.
The constitutions are intended to be “limitations” put upon the power of elected officials and are not intended to be a grant of power. Therefore it is essential that sworn officials understand the content of the documents they swear to uphold.
The question is, do they? And if they don’t, just who is it that is holding them accountable for their actions?
To be sure, it is not necessarily easy work understanding these documents. Much study is needed. Our courts have made the process even more difficult by teaching us that these documents are “living” open for manipulation. None the less, it is important that the official be knowledgeable in them so that his decision making process is informed by the limitations imposed upon him by these constitutions.
Many newly sworn officials and even many presiding council members have never had any formal training, nor have they done any independent research and study into of the meanings contained in these same “limiting” constitutions. The oath is pulled off the shelf, dusted off, administered with very little fanfare and is then quickly put back on the shelf so that the decision making can proceed, many times uninformed by constitutional limitations.
It is not surprising that we see so many decisions being made by these local city and county councils that are not informed by things constitutional but rather informed by the sectarian influences placed upon them by either local organizations, or local organizations who work closely with national and international conglomerates and foundations who provide funding.
Statutorily there are several ways to violate the oath of office. One of those ways is to allow oneself to “succumb to the pressure of those who would engraft the sectarian tenets and personal values of some onto the laws which govern all.”
I would like to give credit where credit is deserved, and that is to say that public service is not always rewarded in the ways we might think it would be and should be. That being said, the reward for violating the oath of office seems to have the equal lack of attention and fanfare.
Where is the public? Why has the public decided to sit on the sidelines, not even watching the game as it is played out? These are our constitutions, our sacred documents that are intended to put limitations on the ever-expanding nature of the thing we know as government.
(Editor’s note: John Swenson is a Ronan resident.)
