America needs modern, toothless monarchy
Three co-equal branches of government was a fine idea when America was in its postrevolutionary fervor, having just rejected the vilified royal sovereign King George III of mighty England.
If the Broadway musical “Hamilton” did not make you laugh at the diminished and divorced-fromreality kingly figure, then any number of modernday royals will remind you of the insulated nature of a dying and dated institution hanging by a fragile golden thread. In most countries where a monarchy endures, however, the royals’ level of engagement, authority and power are threadbare.
That’s why in the age of Donald Trump, the United States needs to welcome back a king. An updated, modern-day American monarchy with all the royal trappings and none of the real juice. Someone like militarily-bedecked King Philippe of Belgium, for example. This respectable modern royal is a powerless pussycat compared to 19th century despotic King Leopold II of the Belgians.
Kings in other countries today can open parliaments and dub knights; be the patrons of regattas and oversee philanthropic causes; endorse products selected by the royal court and pimp out their titles for a share of commercial profits. In almost none of the modern constitutional monarchies are kings, queens, princes, princesses, dukes and duchesses anything more than ceremonial celebrities and a contemporary throwback to cultural traditions or non-democratic tyrannical pasts.
America could use a bit of the celebrated role but skip past the tyranny part while cutting back some of the runaway executive power.
New York’s Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently reacted to President Trump’s assertion that the federal government could decide by fiat on the fate and laws of an individual state. Trump said, “When somebody is the president of the United States, the authority is total.” Cuomo’s comeback was crisp: “We don’t have a king . . . the president doesn’t have total authority.”
In fact, the Constitution prevents that total level of executive overreach and power. That didn’t stop the president from his declaration or temper his attitude. It took a governmental reality check, states’ pushback and a whole lot of eaten crow for him to back down and recognize that, in fact, thanks to federalism the states are really in charge of decision-making.
If America, however, had a modern toothless monarchy in the reign of
King Trump — even continuing on through an endless Trump family dynasty — the so-called “sovereign” could say anything he or she wanted. Outbursts, tweets and proclamations wouldn’t ultimately matter except to the degree that the king or queen had true moral authority, credibility, governing alliances, trust and a common touch. Bluster and balderdash would lead to nothing but irrelevance and be seen as folly. Not so our modern presidency.
America’s president is today imbued with too much power. When this country parted with King George III, the limits on the executive were substantial. Running the country was not so complex. 18th century presidents did not sit on a nuclear football, sign bills to print $3 trillion dollars instantly or tell states much of anything, let alone how to manage stay-at-home orders during global pandemics.
The world has gotten a lot smaller, the government a lot bigger and the authority and power of the presidency has become near limitless. That power is awesome, in fact. It is also too much power for one person — especially one who discounts expertise, ignores institutions, degrades government departments and claims supremacy over the judiciary and legislature. Over the years, the executive branch has moved from respecting checks and balances to operating on cash-and-carry.
Other countries have figured out how to maintain titular heads of state while also formally limiting the authority and power of those leaders. In constitutional monarchies, royalty is always a vote away from being discarded. Greece ran a referendum against its monarchy. Britain, too, regularly threatens to dump its royal family by plebiscite — and that was before Meghan and Harry moved to Malibu.
Maintaining modern monarchs makes sense for some nations because royals represent continuity, bring in a few tourist dollars and sell some tabloids. They get trotted out to host state dinners and greet visiting heads of state. They then go back to their palaces and properties to live their quiet lives while the day-to-day business of governing is left to elected officials who grind away at balancing budgets, building bridges and banging out laws.
Many countries without monarchies also have figurehead leadership represented by weak and relatively powerless presidents who do much the same as weak modern monarchs. They even have palaces. America can figure out a happy medium — a “president king” who would be far different from an executive who seeks and claims total authority while shunning real responsibility.