Surprisingly, the Cato Institute dislikes the EU Constitution

American think-tanks are sometimes desperately predictable. I mean, what if neo-con groups were suddenly embracing a stronger Europe? Wouldn't they be happy to see Europeans finally act as adults, and build a proper army to defend themselves? After all, neo-cons have been criticizing Europe for its over-reliance on the US.
Well, the Cato Institute ("The Cato Institute seeks to broaden the parameters of public policy debate   to allow consideration of the traditional American principles of limited government,   individual liberty, free markets and peace.") has decided to review the EU Constitution. Guess what? The EU Constitution is bad, the US Constitution is good:

The American Constitution is a product of the 18th century Enlightenment. (...) In contrast, the recently drafted EU constitution is a product of 20th century welfare-state socialism.

Don't tell the Cato Institute that most Enlightenment thinkers were French, they would have a heart attack.  Welfare-state is such a bad word, but this is not surprising. It is not my point of view, but it is consistent with their beliefs.

The EU's operations are expanded, not streamlined, and its bureaucracy is made more complex, not simpler. There are no cuts to the EU's 97,000 pages of accumulated laws and regulations

I heard this argument before, while in class in the US.  Well, I wonder how many regulations exist on the Federal level in the US? If a new state was joining the USA, let's imagine British Columbia, can you imagine how much text should be written in order to adapt British Colombian laws to those of the US?

If the EU is ever to approximate the stature of the United States in international affairs and global economics, the Brussels-led reasoning goes, centralized decision-making must increase.

Now, that's interesting. The article goes on saying that no limits to the federal state are given in the Constitution, and that this is the real democratic deficit. I guess this is when the subsidiarity principle is supposed to kick in.
Also interesting is that to the Cato Institute, the real goal behind the EU Constitution is to build a rival to the US.
It is true that one can read in the Constitution the influence of the welfare state and a compromise with the Euro Socialists (e.g. right to a job). I agree with the Cato Institute that this reflects a gap between the US and Europe. But I actually believe that it is the result of democracy: the elected people who crafted the text were from both the right and the left. So, it is normal to find references to socialist views. Now, whether it is a good thing or not, I will let the reader decide.

Comments

[roger]

The people who drafted the constitution weren't elected, not all of them anyway and they were from various different institutions and i know many british tories had no influence whatsoever. So the constituion doesn't reflect the will of the people. Besides constitutions shouldn't be about defining policies but policy areas and powers of different constitutions.

[thebizofknowledge.com]

I'm honestly not sure what they mean by their statement that centralized decision-making must increase. But then, many of their arguments, to me, seem a bit questionable and ethereal!

[Robert Lightfoot]

you said: "the elected people who crafted the text were from both the right and the left."

How bureaucrats in Brussels are elected by "the people" is still a mystery to me within so-called EU democracy. I like your site and agree with many talking points but when it comes to electing politicians in Europe I see no true democracy at work as I see no true democracy in the United States. Only the illusions of one.