Download Federalists vs. Anti-federalists

Federalists vs. Anti-federalists
Madison (#10) v. Brutus
Is democracy best served in large or small
republics?
Who is likely to be elected?
What is the greatest danger to democracy?
Madison, Federalist #10
Faction: "A number of citizens, whether
amounting to a majority or a minority of the
whole, who are united and actuated by some
common impulse of passion, or of interest,
adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to
the permanent and aggregate interests of the
community."
Inherent characteristic of people.
Madison- Federalist 10
Latent causes of faction are thus sown in the
nature of man.
“the most common and durable source of faction
has been the various and unequal distribution of
property” p. 18
Pure democracy has no cure for the mischiefs of
faction
Incompatible with personal security or the rights
of property. P. 20
Madison’s Solution
Republican government to refine and enlarge the
public views
Liberty is safest in large (extended) republics
many opinions and interests in large republic
makes it harder for a tyrannical majority to form
coalition formed in large republic are more
moderate
Liberty is threatened more by public passions and
popular factions than by strong government
Brutus’s Reply
In a republic, the manners, sentiments, and interest
of the persons should be similar (or else) constant
clashing of opinions
In a large republic “the people would be
acquainted with very few of their rules, the people
at large would know little of their proceedings,
and it would be extremely difficult to change
them. The consequence will be, they will have no
confidence in their legislature, suspect them of
ambitious views, be jealous of every measure they
adopt, and will not support the laws they pass.”
Anti-federalists
small republic is best
People are animated by a concern for public
good
strong national government would be
distant from the people
Madison, Federal #51
Is a large republic enough to prevent
tyranny of the majority?
Federalist #51, Madison
Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. If
men were angels, no govt would be necessary. If
angels were to govern men, neither external nor
internal controls on govt would be necessary
In framing a govt which is to be administered by
men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you
must first enable the govt to control the governed;
and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
Separation of Powers
Madison- accumulation of all powers,
legislative, executive, and judiciary in the
same hands, may justly be pronounced the
very definition of tyranny.
Legislature makes laws, executive administers,
and judiciary interprets
BUT Separation is not enough.
Checks and Balances
#51, Ambition must be made to counteract
ambition. The interest of the man must be
connected with the constitutional rights of
the place.
giving to those who administer each
department the necessary constitutional
means and personal motives to resist
encroachments of the others
Different Bases of Support
House of Representatives= only directly
elected officials; every two years
Senate= every six years; are selected by State
legislatures until 1913
President= selected by electoral college; state
legislatures; no popular vote
Judiciary= appointed by President, confirmed
by Senate. Life-time appointment
Checks and Balances
Federalist #51
President
Congress- veto, propose, appeal to people,
enforce laws
Courts- appoint justices, enforce law
Checks and Balances
Congress – “necessarily predominates”
Raise taxes, pass legislation
Impeach president and judges
determine number and jurisdiction of courts,
Senate confirms judges
House and Senate
Courts- “least dangerous branch”
can declare executive actions and laws unconstitutional.
Comparison with UK
Prime minister chosen by majority party.
No judicial review
control and responsibility concentrated in
legislature
Same electoral base
No checks and balances
Consequences
GRIDLOCK?
difficult to act unless there is overwhelming
sustained consensus about course of action.
2008 Election- 53% Obama, Democratic
Majorities; no health care reform
2008 $1 Trillion TARP bailout
Losers-- Efficiency and accountability
President Obama’s American Jobs Act
Continuing Battle over CnB
the War Power
Article I. Congress can “declare war”
Article II. President- commander in chief
How many declared wars?
Role of Courts
Separation of Powers
Limit the power of government
Limit democratic majoritarianism (aka
Tyranny of the Majority)
Policy should not reflect majority public
opinion
New Republicanism
OLD- positive political engagement – civic
virtue and small republics that required
some degree of equality
NEW- negative limitations on government –
the balance of interest based on the
“invisible hand” of self-interest and on the
equality of opportunity
Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, 1913
Argument
Evidence
Analysis
Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, 1913
Argument the Constitution was
written by a "cohesive" economic / propertied
elite- landholders (7), plantation owners (14),
creditors, merchants (13), public bondholders
(11), and lawyers (35).
Seeking to protect their personal property
(especially bonds) and economic standing.
A Conservative Counter Revolution
Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, 1913
EvidenceEconomic elite 55 of 72
President of Convention- wealthiest landowner in
the country
Shared common perspective
"In their speeches in Philadelphia, their private
letters [ . . . ], and their newspaper essays, the
Framers made it abundantly clear that they expected
the Constitution to benefit creditors and Americans
who had speculated, whether in Indian land or war
bonds."
Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, 1913
Limited the power of popular majorities
Article VI - the new government was to
guarantee all debts
Article I - clause prohibiting states from
impairing contracts
Create a national army strong enough to
take the Indians' land
Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, 1913
Anti - Federalists
-largest creditors- George
Mason
-biggest bondholders, Elbridge
Gerry
Federalist
Alexander Hamilton
James Madison
Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the
Constitution of the United States, 1913
Article VI - the new government was to
guarantee all debts
Restore government’s credit rating
Article I - clause prohibiting states from
impairing contracts
Easier for creditors to borrow money
Create a national army strong enough to
take the Indians' land
Looking for cheap land
John Roche, “The Founding Fathers: A
Reform Caucus in Action”
Argument
His view of founders?
Evidence
Data
John Roche, “The Founding Fathers: A
Reform Caucus in Action”
View of Founders
“were first and foremost superb democratic
politicians.”
Hamilton and Madison were “inspired
propagandists.”
Shared perspective- “how to construct a
national government” that people would accept
John Roche, “The Founding Fathers: A
Reform Caucus in Action”
Evidence/Data
transcripts of convention – no C&B, Sep of P.
Constitutional Evidence
Federalism- no legislative supremacy
Electoral College-
Diamond
Argument?
Evidence?
Implications?
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
Two main issues:
1.
Navigation Acts: Bar British ships from US ports
Should Congress pass by:
i.
Simple Majority?
ii. 2/3 Majority?
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
Two main issues:
2.
Slave Trade: key to Southern States
Should slavery be prohibited:
Immediately
At some point in the future (e.g., 1800+)
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
Position on Prohibition of Slavery
Immediate
Position on
Navigation Acts
Delay
Simple Majority
Simple,
Immediate
Simple, Delay
2/3 Majority
2/3, Immediate
2/3, Delay
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
Most Desired
Least Desired
Eastern & Middle
States
Southern States
Virginia
Simple Majority;
Immediate
2/3 Majority;
Delayed
2/3 Majority;
Immediate
Simple Majority;
Delayed
Simple Majority;
Delayed
2/3 Majority;
Delayed
2/3 Majority;
Immediate
2/3 Majority;
Immediate
Simple Majority;
Immediate
2/3 Majority;
Delayed
Simple Majority;
Immediate
Simple Majority;
Delayed
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The 3/5 Dilemma
On what basis should House seats be apportioned?
South wanted to offset the North’s population advantage
Obvious connection to importation of slaves:
“Are they [slaves] men? Then make them citizens and let
them vote? Are they property? Why then is no other
property included?” (Gouverneur Morris)
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The 3/5 Dilemma
Morris sees moral and strategic problems:
“What is the proposed compensation to the Northern States
for a sacrifice of every principle of right, of every impulse
of humanity?”
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The 3/5 Dilemma
Morris sees moral and strategic problems:
“On the other side the Southern States are not to be
restrained for importing… nay they are to be encouraged
to it by an assurance of having their votes in the Natl.
Govt. increased in proportion…”
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
Report of Committee on Detail Article VII (Sec 4 – 6):
Section 4. Clause 1: No tax or duty by Congress on state
exports
Section 4. Clause 2: Nor on migration or importation of
persons
Section. 4. Clause 3: nor shall migration or importation be
prohibited
Section 6: No navigation act shall be passed without assent
of 2/3 of members present in each House
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The Southern Response
“The Southern States could not be members of
the Union if the clause [i.e., Art VII, Sec 4, cl. 23] should be rejected.” Williamson (NC)
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
Morris increases the pressure
delete “persons” in Sec. 4.2, and substitute
“slaves into North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia.”
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The Southern Response
“...if himself and all his colleagues were to sign the
Constitution and use their personal influence, it
would be of no avail toward obtaining the assent of
their Constituents.” Charles Pickney (SC)
What makes these threats credible?
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The Strategic Situation
Refuse
Insist on Immediate
Prohibition
S
Accept
NE
Accept Delayed
Prohibition
S
Refuse
Accept
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The Strategic Situation
Refuse
Insist on Immediate
Prohibition
S
Accept
NE
Accept Delayed
Prohibition
S
Refuse
Accept
Not a sensible outcome
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
The Strategic Situation
Refuse
Insist on Immediate
Prohibition
S
Accept
NE
Accept Delayed
Prohibition
S
Refuse
Accept
No Union: A disaster for all
(federalist) delegates
Trading Votes at the Constitutional Convention
A Vote Trade
With ratification on the line, Morris proposed:
“…the whole subject to be committed including
clauses relating to the tax on exports and to a
navigation act. These things may form a bargain
among the Northern and Southern States.”
Amar’s Argument
More Democratic
More Slavocratic
#1 National Security
Pluribus to Unum
Why is America Democratic?
Assessing the Framers
Beard-- Elite Conspiracy
Federalists all wealthy planters and merchants
trying to get rich
Roche-- Sound Politicians
political expediency is the driving principle
Electoral college
Riker
Politicians representing economic interests
Diamond -- Brilliant Political Theorists
We the People of the United States, in Order
to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice,
insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the
common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure
the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,
do ordain and establish this Constitution
for the United States of America.