"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this constitution of the United States of America."

When it was written, "we the people" referred to white, land-owning males. Perhaps the framers intentionally left it vague, but either way this open-ended term has allowed for a change in its definition to include different groups of people through American History. I would like to believe the framers of the Constitution had a feeling that changes in civil liberties and social behavior were going to happen, so they left it vague to allow future, further inclusion, but unfortunately we'll never truly know the framers' true intents. Since it was written, the word "government" in America is synonymous and interchangeable with the phrase "the people/citizens." Throughout the years, the type of persons included in the group "the people" has increased to now allow all legal citizens of the country.
"In order to form a more perfect union," can most directly be related to the Articles of Confederation. The system of government failed under the Articles, so the framers created the Constitution to improve upon the lack of a central, unified government under the Articles. They wanted to create a more perfect union, but they obviously recognized that it still may not be completely perfect, if they even believed that perfection was achievable. Overall, they needed to unify the very independent thirteen states and establish a system that would preserve the union.
The "people" would need to "establish justice" throughout the country by creating just laws and enforcing those laws using just means. Something that is just is something that is within the boundaries of the Constitution and its laws. In order to "insure domestic tranquility," laws and those who enforced them would have to stop all immediate threats against peace and tranquility, using only just methods, within their jurisdiction of the United States of America. To "provide for the common defense," the government would, through taxation, fund, supply, and train a national army and militia's only for the purposes of upholding democracy, protecting the land from threats and invaders, and maintaining national security using as little force as possible and without imposing or forcing our views upon any other independent nations. In order to "promote the general welfare," the government must do everything in its power and resources to not only prevent social, economic, and military recession, but it must also enhance the standard and quality of life for the general public. One of the most important parts of the preamble is "secur[ing] the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." This means that the government needs to uphold common and general liberties, granted by the constitution and social contract, for all people within its jurisdiction while removing immediate and preventing potential threats to civil liberties not only for the people of the present, but also for future generations. To close, the founding fathers acknowledged that "We the people...do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of America."

The founding fathers had a great idea, one that was revolutionary for its time. Imagine observing the drafting of this document where the greatest and most intelligent minds of the time all gathered in one room at one time to discuss and debate the creation of a new nation. What a rare and wonderful interaction that would have been. What if the people in that room were to come to our time and observe the state of The Union as it now stands. Would they be pleased? Or disappointed?

In my opinion, I do not believe that the founding fathers of our nation would be pleased with the way the government currently operates. First and foremost, I believe they intended the Congress to be in session full time, especially with the amount of backed-up legislation. Even though they were given the right from the Constitution to only meet 4 days a week, I don't think the founding fathers took into account the exponentially increasing laziness of modern America. Congressman should have to work like any regular citizen should: a 40-hour average work week, but with the load they have now, it should be well over that until they have at least caught up a little bit. This laziness fails to establish justice and secure the blessings of liberty in the most efficient manner possible. This, being just an example of the many flaws of modern government-efficiency, is an overall failure on the government's part, and, essentially, the people's part as well, to form a more perfect union. Yes, perhaps perfection is impossible, but we are not currently doing our best to, at least, strive for it.
_______________________________________________________________________

Mailbag: Remember the Preamble