The agitation around the issue of the European Constitution is limited in a significant way to the political class of the EU. The constitution was developed, sparing no expenses, and signed October 9, 2004 after numerous last minute modifications. Since then, the governments of the member states and the key figures in Brussels have suffered from panic attacks and gloomy visions of the disappearance of the European Union. The voters’ requests to allow them to express their own opinions have made no impact, as if life could continue without the constitution. They’re right, nobody needs it.
The new document hasn’t change great deal in relation to the Treaty of Nice. The European Union can continue working perfectly on the basis of that treaty if the political leadership of the member states wanted to. This constitution is also about the status quo in the socio-political plane. Will it be because the document doesn’t change anything that Austria can only approve it in parliament? With a popular referendum we would find ourselves in the terrain of constitutionality. It is also a question of honesty. A re-establishment of the Union will take place. The old foundations and membership contracts are no longer valid. They will not only be renovated but also replaced. In other words, the European Union and its community, that which unites us through the decision of the people, will cease to exist. Democratic decency demanded a referendum. The problem is knowing whether a not very necessary constitution-which at the same time is not truly harmful-will compensate for the evident increase in frustration on the part of citizens when it is instituted everywhere without people’s opinions having been taken into consideration.

Der Standard (Austria)

"Wider die apokalyptischen Reiter der United States-Verfassung,” by Manfred Rotter, Der Standard , May 10, 2005.