lecture 2: confederation or union?. the constitutional convention hcolonists’ ideas about...
TRANSCRIPT
Lecture 2:Confederation or Union?
The Constitutional Convention
Colonists’ ideas about government: Independence
“benign neglect”Religious freedom
Equality Democracy Union The Bill of Rights Opposition to monarchy
The Constitutional Convention
Growth of the nation: 1607 (Jamestown): 210 1630 (Plymouth): 2,500 1650: 28,000 1690: 214,000 1750: 1.2 mil 1780: 2.8 mil
The Constitutional Convention
Who were these men? Well educated, well read –
The Age of Reason Madison, “Father of the
Constitution” Washington Witherspoon’s influence They were men
The Constitutional Convention
Compromises reached: Bicameral legislature Division of powers: 3 branches of govt. Electing the President Senators 3/5 Compromise
The Constitutional Convention
Hamilton’s proposal President for life “The people begin to be
tired of an excess of democracy…”
The Constitution
“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 the Constitution of the United States of America.”
The Great Debate
The Federalist PapersFoundations of the argument:
Classical Republicanism (the Roman model)Aristocratic
Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws (1748)DemocraticSmall, manageable statesHomogeneous
The Great DebateAnti-Federalists:
Govt. secure rights and liberties Government = necessary evil Constitution threatens rights
The Great Debate: National defenseThe Federalists:
U.S. must observe international law Foreign powers less likely to attack Government unlimited power to tax Current govt. is inadequate ALL confederacies end in death
Anti-Federalist response: Isolated position State militias Fear of peacetime standing army Federalists are power-hungry
The Great Debate: National defenseThe Federalist rebuttal:
Anti-Feds. underestimate importance Local militias inadequate Anti-Feds. plan will lead to destruction
Anti-Federalist response: Too much emphasis on national security at
the expense of individual liberty
The Great Debate: Checks & BalancesThe Anti-Federalist argument:
The states must have enough power to check the national government
The Federalist response (Fed. 9 & 10): Attack classical republican model
Not small, local democraciesMassive national republic
Factions The “tyranny of the majority”
The Great Debate: Representation
The Anti-Federalist argument: As much direct participation as possible
The Federalist response: Government by a capable, virtuous few
Anti-Feds: Distrustful and suspicious of elected officials
Feds: Distrustful and suspicious of the masses
The Great Debate: Legislative BranchThe Anti-Federalist argument:
The House of Reps., elected by the people, should be sufficient
Elected annually More representatives, fewer constituents
The Federalist response: House needs counter-balance (Senate) Biannual elections sufficient More reps = mob It is the House that needs to be checked
The Great Debate: Separation of PowersThe Anti-Federalist argument:
Too much overlap
The Federalist response: Overlap is necessary for the branches to control (check)
each other
Madison on the Senate: Limited in number Distinguished and experienced
The Anti-Federalist response: Senate = too aristocratic
The Great Debate: Separation of PowersThe Anti-Federalists on the presidency:
Too much like a monarch Propose a small executive council
The Federalist response: Need to have power in one person
The Anti-Federalists on the judiciary: Weakens other courts Undemocratic
The Federalist response: Not too powerful Must be uniquely qualified
The Bill of RightsVictory for the Anti-Federalists?What did the Anti-Federalists want?
Distrust of government
Federalists: why no Bill of Rights? Not necessary Risky
The Anti-Federalist response: Anchor for the citizenry Foundation for judicial consideration Include a cautionary statement
Were the Anti-Federalists right?