Schlafly on the EU

Phyllis Schlafly has been around for a very long time, venting her spleen over the decades on a variety of political issues. Now she takes on the European Union. I would be the first to admit that the EU institutions are insufficiently accountable to the citizens of Europe. Even Europeans themselves decry what they call a democratic deficit. But few would argue for scrapping the EU altogether, which is what Schlafly appears to be doing. Would it not make more sense to argue for further empowering the popularly-elected European Parliament and limiting the powers of the Court of Justice (which has never been called the "world court," as Schlafly erroneously labels it)? Would it not be better to argue for strengthening the concept of subsidiarity as already embodied in the EU treaties?

Schlafly expresses puzzlement that Americans could support the concept of a supranational European Union in which member states give up some of their sovereignty to a central government. She appears to have forgotten that Americans charted the path already back in 1787 by establishing a federal United States of America. While Schlafly undoubtedly raises issues worthy of concern, there is no reason in principle why these should be taken as arguments against federalism per se.