Titles of Office Are / Should Be Temporary

For John, BLUF:  They are not our betters.  They are our equals, elected to serve us.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

America has a nobility problem, and it means our leaders don't pay for their failures

Here is the sub-headline:

Politicians and bureaucrats are America's ruling class and they should start paying a price for failure. Accountability isn't just for little guys.

From USA Today, by Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, 16 July 2018.

Here is the lede plus †hree:

Our Constitution forbids the creation of “titles of nobility.”  The Framers thought it was important enough that the prohibition appears twice, once forbidding the federal government from doing it, and elsewhere extending the ban to the states.

And Americans, to the extent that they give the question any thought at all, probably think that the ban works:  After all, nobody’s squiring about the United States, sporting titles like Duke of Pennsylvania or Earl of Internal Revenue.

But now I’m wondering if we don’t have a problem.  First, Charles C.W. Cooke, a Brit who just recently became an American citizen, noted the practice of calling former government officials by their former titles and called it "grotesque.”  It’s something he discussed in a recent book.

"By custom, we allow our politicians to retain their titles for life. Throughout the 2012 election, Mitt Romney was referred to as 'Governor Romney,' though he had not been in public office for six years," Cooke wrote.  "One can only ask, 'Why?'  America being a nation of laws and not men, political power is not held in perpetuity, and there is supposed to be no permanent political class.

I think the Law Professor has a point.  We need to respect our elected officials, but we need to remember that they are citizens, just like us.

But, undue respect will be a hard habit to break.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit, who resurrected this item for Sunday.

Regards  —  Cliff