Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess Constitutional
Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Naturalization Test
Quiz Prep
Opening Exercise
Naturalization Test
Quiz Prep
Opening Exercise
Interview, Opening Exercise, Naturalization Test
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
SEE:
Citizenship Interview
Opening Exercise
Nationalization Test
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.info.gov www.census.gov
www.uscis.gov/graphics/index
www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
www.firstgov usa.gov
www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/govpolus
Chap 1 Vocabulary QUIZ Next Class
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.wadsworth.com (Crossword, flashcard, glossary, etc)
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess
Constitutional Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Review Naturalization Test
Introductory Transparencies (Political Spectrum Notes)
Review Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
Ch. 2 Assignment
-Introduction/Instructions
Introductory Transparencies (Political Spectrum Notes)
Review Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
Ch. 2 Assignment
-Introduction/Instructions
Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
-Mastery
-Skim (responsibilities)
SEE: Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
Chapter 2 Assignment
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.prenhall.com/burns
www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/index.html
www.usconstitution.net
memory.loc.gov www.BillofRightsInstitute.org
www.ConSource.org
www.prenhall.com/burns Study Guide Link Ch. 1&2
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess
Constitutional Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Websites, Updates
Political Spectrum Notes
Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
-Mastery
-Skim (responsibilities)
Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
-Mastery
-Skim (responsibilities)
Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
-Mastery
-Skim (responsibilities)
SEE: Chapter 1 Vocabulary Assignment
-Mastery
-Skim (responsibilities)
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.prenhall.com/burns
www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/index.html
www.usconstitution.net
memory.loc.gov www.BillofRightsInstitute.org
www.ConSource.org
www.wadsworth.com
Social Sciences, Political Science,
American Government Comprehensive, companion site
pages.cms.k12.nc.us/patrickoneil
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess Constitutional
Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Review Ch. 1 Vocabulary
Introductory Transparencies
Ch. 2 Assignment
-Introduction/Instructions
Ch. 2 Assignment
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
See Ch. 2 Assignment
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
SEE:
Ch. 2 Assignment
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.info.gov www.census.gov www.pbs.org
www.uscis.gov/graphics/index www.procon.org
wwwww.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
www.firstgov usa.gov
www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/govpolus
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.wadsworth.com (Crossword, flashcard, glossary, etc)
Ch. 2 Assignment
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess Constitutional
Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Review Ch. 1 Vocabulary
Ch. 2 Assignment
-Introduction/Instructions
Study Guide
Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
See Ch. 2 Assignment
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
SEE:
Ch. 2 Assignment
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.info.gov www.census.gov www.pbs.org
www.uscis.gov/graphics/index www.procon.org
wwwww.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
www.firstgov usa.gov
www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/govpolus
TEST Prep ****
Study Guide
Pages.cms.k12.nc.us/Patrickoneil
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess Constitutional
Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Constitution PowerPoint
Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
Chapter 2 Vocab
Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
Chapter 2 Vocab
See Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
SEE:
Ch. 2 Assignment
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.info.gov www.census.gov www.pbs.org
www.uscis.gov/graphics/index www.procon.org
wwwww.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
www.firstgov usa.gov
www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/govpolus
TEST 9/13-14???
Chapter 2 Vocab
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: Students will be able to analyze and assess Constitutional
Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Constitution PowerPoint Presentation
Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
PowerPoint Presentation
Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
See Ch. 2 Assignment
Study Guide
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
SEE:
Ch. 2 Assignment
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.info.gov www.census.gov www.pbs.org
www.uscis.gov/graphics/index www.procon.org
wwwww.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
www.firstgov usa.gov
www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/govpolus
TEST Friday/Monday
Embedded in
Lesson
Mallard Creek High School
Lesson Plan for: P. O’Neil
Date:
Subject: US Government AP
Student Stated Objective: SWBAT demonstrate mastery of Constitutional
Underpinnings
Rationale: To gain an understanding of various aspects of the U.S. government in
preparation for the AP exam.
Type of Instruction
*Instructional Focus
Introductory Activity
Teacher Directed
Direct Teacher Input
Modeling
Guided Practice
*Instructional Activities
Variety
Change of Pace every 15 – 20
minutes
Specific Strategy(ies) for
Active Student Involvement
Instructional Activities
Brief Description of Instructional Activity
Time Frame
Prep: Citizenship Interview, Naturalization Test, Chapter 1
Vocab, Chapter 2 Vocab, Chapter 2 Assignment, and Study
Guide
Prep
Q&A/Review
ASSESSMENT
Federalism Assignment
Prep
Q&A/Review
ASSESSMENT
Federalism Assignment
See Assessment
Assignment
(active mental engagement)
Planned Questions
Higher Level
Increase Challenge
Ongoing Assessment
Strategies
*Final Assessment of Daily
Instructional Objective
*Remediation/Enrichment
Strategies
*Homework
(Top three tiers of Blooms)
SEE:
Assessment
Assignment
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
Monitoring
Random Student Selection
Q&A/Discussion
www.politicalscience.wadsworth.com/amgov
www.info.gov www.census.gov www.pbs.org
www.uscis.gov/graphics/index www.procon.org
wwwww.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/govweb.html
www.firstgov usa.gov
www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/govpolus
Federalism Assignment
Ch. 3 Vocabulary
Embedded in
Lesson
THE FORMAL AMENDMENT PROCESS
PROPOSAL
Two-thirds Congress
Two-thirds of a
National Convention
RATIFICATION
Three-fourths of State
Legislatures
Three- Fourths of State
Conventions
METHOD I
Proposal by 2/3rds of
Congress Ratification
3/4ths State Legislatures
METHOD II
Proposal by 2/3rds of
Congress Ratification by
3/4ths of State Conventions
METHOD III
Proposal 2/3rds National
Convention Ratification
3/4ths of State
Legislatures
METHOD IV
Proposal by 2/3rds of
National Convention
Ratification by 3/4ths of
State Conventions
1. Only Method I and Method II have ever been used
2. Method II was used on only one occasion- the repeal of prohibition
21st amendment ratified in 1933.
3. The President has no formal role to play in the amendment process.
4. The Constitution cannot be amended to deprive a state of its territory
or to deprive any state of its equal representation in the Senate.
5. We have never had a National Convention-- it could be called by
congress on petition of 2/3rds of the state legislatures.
Constitutional Underpinnings Chapters 1-2
Chapter 1 The Democratic Republic
Politics and Government
-Politics –The struggle over power or influence within organizations or informal groups
that can grant or withhold benefits or privileges.
(families, churches, schools, social groups, any other organized collection of people)
-institution- An ongoing organization that performs certain functions for a society.
-government – The institution in which decisions are made that resolve conflicts or
allocate benefits and privileges. It is unique because it had the ultimate authority within
society. The preeminent institution within a society—making decisions and establishing
political values.
Why is Government Necessary?
Chaos, order, and Stabilty
The Need for security
-order-the state for peace and security. one of the original purposes of government is the
maintenance of security. Protects the people from violence at the hands of private armies
(e.g. warlords in Somalia or Saddam Hussein’s Iraq)
Citizens need to be protected from the abuses of government (Saddam Hussein’s Iraq)
-liberty –the greatest freedom of the individual consistent with the freedom of other
individuals in the society.
-Authority – the right and power of a government or other entity to enforce its decisions
and compel obedience. (i.e. armed forces and police)
-legitimacy- popular acceptance of the right and power of a government or other entity to
exercise authority
Democracy and Other Forms of Government
-totalitarian regime- a form of government that controls all aspects of the political and
social life of a nation
-authoritarianism- a type of regime in which only the government itself is fully
controlled by the ruler. Social and economic institutions exist that are not under the
government’s control.
-aristocracy- Rule by the “best”; in reality, rule by an upper class
-democracy- a system of government in which political authority is vested in the people.
Derived from the Greek words demos (“the people”) and kratos (“authority”)
-Direct Democracy- a system of government in which political decisions are made by the
people directly, rather than by their elected representative; probably attained most easily
in small political communities (Greek city-state Athens—purest model)
-legislature- in Athens this was composed of all of the citizens (women, foreigners, and
slaves were excluded/non-citizens) by definition, it is the governmental body primarily
responsible for the making of laws
(other examples of Direct Democracy—Switzerland, New England town meetings,
-Modern adaptation of Direct Democracy—initiative - a procedure by which voters can
propose a law or a constitutional amendment referendum - an electoral device
whereby legislative or constitutional measures are referred by the legislature to the voters
for approval or disapproval recall- a procedure allowing the people to vote to dismiss
an elected official from state office before his or her term has expired
Teledemocracy internet (2000 Colorado offered online voting
Consent of the People - the idea that governments and laws derive their legitimacy from
the consent of the governed (American Revolution, French Revolution, = aspiration)
Some people, like James Madison, distrusted the concept of Direct Democracy and
believed would lead to mob rule. Then what about the idea of the majority of the people
abusing the rights of minority groups?
republic- a form of government in which sovereignty rests with the people, as opposed
to a king or monarch
popular sovereignty - the concept that ultimate political authority is based on the will of
the people
democratic republic - a republic in which representatives elected by the people make
and enforce laws and policies (there is no king)
representative democracy - a form of government in which representatives elected by
the people make and enforce law and policies; may retain the monarchy in a ceremonial
role (e.g. Great Britain)
Initially, only free white males (in some cases property owners—women, African
Americans, Native Americans
Universal suffrage - the right of all adults to vote for their representatives
Majority – more than 50 percent
Majority rule – a basic principle democracy asserting that the greatest number of
citizens in any political unit should select official and determine policies
Limited Government - the principle that the powers of government should be limited,
usually by institutional checks (written document-namely U.S. Constitution or through
widely shared beliefs
What Kind of Democracy Do We Have?
Theories:
Majoritarianism – a political theory holding that in a democracy, the government ought
to do what the majority of the people want.
Elite Theory – A perspective holding that society is ruled by a small number of people
who exercise power to further their self-interest (a privileged minority/a small cohesive,
elite class)
Pluralism – a theory that views politics as conflict among interest groups. Political
decision-making is characterized by bargain and compromise. (The reality is there are a
multitude of interests, no one group can dominate the political process). Well-organized
and wealthy groups tend to have greater influence than the poor citizens.
*Some scholars argue that no single theory defines American politics but rather a
combination of the three.
Fundamental Values
Political culture- The collection of beliefs and attitudes toward government and the
political process held by a community or nation
Political socialization – the process through which individuals learn a set of political
attitudes and form opinions about social issues. The family and the educational system
are two of the most important forces in the political socialization process.
Dominant Culture – the values, customs, and language established by the group or
groups that traditionally have controlled politics and government in a society.
(in the U.S. that would be Western European civilization which includes a bias towards
individualism, private property, and Judeo-Christian ethics.
Equality - as a political value, the idea that all people are of equal worth
(of course, ethnic groups, women, disabled persons, gay and lesbian have sought equality
in the US)
Property - Anything that is or may be subject to ownership. As conceived by the
political philosopher John Locke, the right to property is a natural right superior to human
laws (laws made by government)
Capitalism - an economic system characterized by the private ownership of wealthcreating assets, free markets, and freedom of contract. Funds are invested with the hope
earning profits.
Eminent Domain- A power set forth in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
that allows government to take private property for public use under the condition that
just compensation is offered to the landowner.
Ideology a comprehensive set of beliefs about the nature of people and about the role of
an institution or government
See pages 14-17
Conservatism - a set of beliefs that includes a limited role for the national government
in helping individuals, support for traditional values and lifestyles, and a cautious
response to change.
Liberalism - a set of that includes the advocacy of positive government action to
improve the welfare of individuals, support for civil rights, and tolerance for political and
social change.
Socialism - A political ideology based on strong support for economic and social
equality. Socialists traditionally envisioned a society in which major businesses were
taken over by employee cooperatives.
Libertarianism - a political ideology based on skepticism or opposition toward almost
all government activities.
Communism a revolutionary variant of socialism that favors a partisan (and often
totalitarian) dictatorship, government control of all enterprises, and the replacement of
free markets by central planning. Stalin’s Russia/Soviet Union
Facism a twentieth-century ideology often totalitarian- that exalts the national collective
united behind an absolute ruler. Fascism rejects liberal individualism, values action over
rational deliberation, and glorifies war (Mussolini’s Italy, Hitler’s Germany)
Hispanics Someone who can claim a heritage from a Spanish-speaking country (other
than Spain). The term is used only in the US or other countries that receives
immigrants—Spanish-speaking persons living in Spanish speaking countries do not
normally apply the term to themselves.
Chapter 1 The Democratic Republic
Vocabulary Assignment
1. institution- An ongoing organization that performs certain functions for a society.
2. Politics –The struggle over power or influence within organizations or informal
groups that can grant or withhold benefits or privileges (families, churches, schools,
social groups, any other organized collection of people).
3. order-the state for peace and security. one of the original purposes of government is
the maintenance of security. Protects the people from violence at the hands of private
armies (e.g. warlords in Somalia or Saddam Hussein’s Iraq)
4. Teledemocracy internet and political participation (e.g. In 2000, Colorado offered
online voting)
5. liberty –the greatest freedom of the individual consistent with the freedom of other
individuals in the society.
6. legitimacy- popular acceptance of the right and power of a government or other
entity to exercise authority
7. totalitarian regime- a form of government that controls all aspects of the political and
social life of a nation
8. government – The institution in which decisions are made that resolve conflicts or
allocate benefits and privileges. It is unique because it had the ultimate authority within
society. The preeminent institution within a society—making decisions and establishing
political values.
9. recall- a procedure allowing the people to vote to dismiss an elected official from
state office before his or her term has expired
10. Facism a twentieth-century ideology often totalitarian- that exalts the national
collective united behind an absolute ruler. Fascism rejects liberal individualism, values
action over rational deliberation, and glorifies war (Mussolini’s Italy, Hitler’s Germany)
11. Authority – the right and power of a government or other entity to enforce its
decisions and compel obedience. (i.e. armed forces and police)
12. “In God We Trust” National motto on July 30, 1956, but had appeared on U.S.
coins as early as 1864.
13. aristocracy- Rule by the “best”; in reality, rule by an upper class
14. Direct Democracy- a system of government in which political decisions are made
by the people directly, rather than by their elected representative; probably attained most
easily in small political communities (Greek city-state Athens—purest model)
15. legislature- in Athens this was composed of all of the citizens (women, foreigners,
and slaves were excluded/non-citizens). By definition, it is the governmental body
primarily responsible for the making of laws.
16. authoritarianism- a type of regime in which only the government itself is fully
controlled by the ruler. Social and economic institutions exist that are not under the
government’s control.
17. popular sovereignty - the concept that ultimate political authority is based on the
will of the people
18. referendum - an electoral device whereby legislative or constitutional measures are
referred by the legislature to the voters for approval or disapproval
19. Majority rule – a basic principle democracy asserting that the greatest number of
citizens in any political unit should select official and determine policies
20. Eminent Domain- A power set forth in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution that allows government to take private property for public use under the
condition that just compensation is offered to the landowner.
21. Consent of the People - the idea that governments and laws derive their legitimacy
from the consent of the governed (American Revolution, French Revolution, =
aspiration)
22. republic- a form of government in which sovereignty rests with the people, as
opposed to a king or monarch
23. Pluralism – a theory that views politics as conflict among interest groups. Political
decision-making is characterized by bargain and compromise. (The reality is there are a
multitude of interests, no one group can dominate the political process). Well-organized
and wealthy groups tend to have greater influence than the poor citizens.
24. -initiative - a procedure by which voters can propose a law or a constitutional
amendment
25. -democracy- a system of government in which political authority is vested in the
people. Derived from the Greek words demos (“the people”) and kratos (“authority”)
26. representative democracy - a form of government in which representatives elected
by the people make and enforce law and policies; may retain the monarchy in a
ceremonial role (e.g. Great Britain)
27. Universal suffrage - the right of all adults to vote for their representatives
28. Majority – more than 50 percent
29. Limited Government - the principle that the powers of government should be
limited, usually by institutional checks (written document-namely U.S. Constitution or
through widely shared beliefs
30. Libertarianism - a political ideology based on skepticism or opposition toward
almost all government activities.
31. democratic republic - a republic in which representatives elected by the people
make and enforce laws and policies (there is no king)
32. Majoritarianism – a political theory holding that in a democracy, the government
ought to do what the majority of the people want.
33. Elite Theory – A perspective holding that society is ruled by a small number of
people who exercise power to further their self-interest (a privileged minority/a small
cohesive, elite class)
34. Socialism - A political ideology based on strong support for economic and social
equality. Socialists traditionally envisioned a society in which major businesses were
taken over by employee cooperatives.
35. Political socialization – the process through which individuals learn a set of political
attitudes and form opinions about social issues. The family and the educational system
are two of the most important forces in the political socialization process.
36. Conservatism - a set of beliefs that includes a limited role for the national
government in helping individuals, support for traditional values and lifestyles, and a
cautious response to change.
37. Dominant Culture – the values, customs, and language established by the group or
groups that traditionally have controlled politics and government in a society.
(in the U.S. that would be Western European civilization which includes a bias towards
individualism, private property, and Judeo-Christian ethics.
38. Equality - as a political value, the idea that all people are of equal worth
(of course, ethnic groups, women, disabled persons, gay and lesbian have sought equality
in the US)
39. Property - Anything that is or may be subject to ownership. As conceived by the
political philosopher John Locke, the right to property is a natural right superior to human
laws (laws made by government)
40. Hispanics Someone who can claim a heritage from a Spanish-speaking country
(other than Spain). The term is used only in the US or other countries that receives
immigrants—Spanish-speaking persons living in Spanish speaking countries do not
normally apply the term to themselves.
41. Capitalism - an economic system characterized by the private ownership of wealthcreating assets, free markets, and freedom of contract. Funds are invested with the hope
earning profits.
42. Ideology a comprehensive set of beliefs about the nature of people and about the
role of an institution or government
43. Liberalism - a set of ideas that includes the advocacy of positive government action
to improve the welfare of individuals, support for civil rights, and tolerance for political
and social change.
44. Communism a revolutionary variant of socialism that favors a partisan (and often
totalitarian) dictatorship, government control of all enterprises, and the replacement of
free markets by central planning. Stalin’s Russia/Soviet Union
45. Political culture- The collection of beliefs and attitudes toward government and the
political process held by a community or nation
Delegates to the Constitutional Convention
(http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/marryff.html)
On February 21, 1787, the Continental Congress resolved that:
... it is expedient that on the second Monday in May next a Convention of delegates who
shall have been appointed by the several States be held at Philladelphia for the sole and
express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation...
Assembly Room in Independence Hall, Philadelphia,
site of the signing of the Constitution in 1787.
Photo courtesy of Independence National Historical Park.
The original states, except Rhode Island, collectively appointed 70 individuals to the
Constitutional Convention, but a number did not accept or could not attend. Those who
did not attend included Richard Henry Lee, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, John
Adams, Samuel Adams and, John Hancock.
In all, 55 delegates attended the Constitutional Convention sessions, but only 39 actually
signed the Constitution. The delegates ranged in age from Jonathan Dayton, aged 26, to
Benjamin Franklin, aged 81, who was so infirm that he had to be carried to sessions in a
sedan chair.
BIOGRAPHICAL INDEX OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS
For a short biographies of each of the Founding Fathers who were delegates to the
Constitutional Convention, select the states below. ( * indicates delegates who did not
sign the Constitution)
Connecticut
Ellsworth (Elsworth), Oliver*
Johnson, William S.
Sherman, Roger
Delaware
Bassett (Basset), Richard
Bedford, Gunning, Jr.
Broom, Jacob
Dickinson, John
Read, George
Georgia
Baldwin, Abraham
Few, William
Houstoun, William*
Pierce, William L.*
Maryland
Carroll, Daniel
Jenifer, Daniel of St. Thomas
Martin, Luther*
McHenry, James
Mercer, John F.*
Massachusetts
Gerry, Elbridge*
Gorham, Nathaniel
King, Rufus
Strong, Caleb*
New Hampshire
Gilman, Nicholas
Langdon, John
New Jersey
Brearly (Brearley), David
Dayton, Jonathan
Houston, William C.*
Livingston, William
Paterson (Patterson), William
New York
Hamilton, Alexander
Lansing, John, Jr.*
Yates, Robert *
North Carolina
Blount, William
Davie, William R.*
Martin, Alexander *
Spaight, Richard D.
Williamson, Hugh
Pennsylvania
Clymer, George
Fitzsimons, Thomas
Franklin, Benjamin
Ingersoll, Jared
Mifflin, Thomas
Morris, Gouverneur
Morris, Robert
Wilson, James
South Carolina
Butler, Pierce
Pinckney, Charles
Pinckney, Charles Cotesworth
Rutledge, John
Rhode Island
Rhode Island did not send any delegates to the Constitutional Convention.
Virginia
Blair, John
Madison, James
Mason, George *
McClurg, James*
Randolph, Edmund J.*
Washington, George
Wythe, George*
Chapter 1 The Democratic Republic
Vocabulary Assignment
1. An ongoing organization that performs certain functions for a society.
2. The struggle over power or influence within organizations or informal groups that can
grant or withhold benefits or privileges (families, churches, schools, social groups, any other
organized collection of people).
3. The state for peace and security. one of the original purposes of government is the
maintenance of security. Protects the people from violence at the hands of private armies
(e.g. warlords in Somalia or Saddam Hussein’s Iraq).
4. The internet and political participation (e.g. In 2000, Colorado offered online voting).
5. The greatest freedom of the individual consistent with the freedom of other individuals
in the society.
6. Popular acceptance of the right and power of a government or other entity to exercise
authority.
7. A form of government that controls all aspects of the political and social life of a nation.
8. The institution in which decisions are made that resolve conflicts or allocate benefits and
privileges. It is unique because it had the ultimate authority within society. The preeminent
institution within a society—making decisions and establishing political values.
9. A procedure allowing the people to vote to dismiss an elected official from state office
before his or her term has expired.
10. A twentieth-century ideology often totalitarian- that exalts the national collective united
behind an absolute ruler. Fascism rejects liberal individualism, values action over rational
deliberation, and glorifies war (Mussolini’s Italy, Hitler’s Germany).
11. The right and power of a government or other entity to enforce its decisions and compel
obedience. (i.e. armed forces and police).
12. Became the national motto on July 30, 1956, but had appeared on U.S. coins as early as
1864.
13. Rule by the “best”; in reality, ruled by an upper class.
14. A system of government in which political decisions are made by the people directly,
rather than by their elected representative; probably attained most easily in small political
communities (Greek city-state Athens—purest model).
15. In Athens this was composed of all of the citizens (women, foreigners, and slaves were
excluded/non-citizens). By definition, it is the governmental body primarily responsible for
the making of laws.
16. A type of regime in which only the government itself is fully controlled by the ruler.
Social and economic institutions exist that are not under the government’s control.
17. The concept that ultimate political authority is based on the will of the people.
18. An electoral device whereby legislative or constitutional measures are referred by the
legislature to the voters for approval or disapproval.
19. A basic principle democracy asserting that the greatest number of citizens in any
political unit should select official and determine policies.
20. A power set forth in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that allows
government to take private property for public use under the condition that just
compensation is offered to the landowner.
21. The idea that governments and laws derive their legitimacy from the consent of the
governed (American Revolution, French Revolution, = aspiration).
22. A form of government in which sovereignty rests with the people, as opposed to a king
or monarch.
23. A theory that views politics as conflict among interest groups. Political decision-making
is characterized by bargain and compromise. (The reality is there are a multitude of
interests, no one group can dominate the political process). Well-organized and wealthy
groups tend to have greater influence than the poor citizens.
24. A procedure by which voters can propose a law or a constitutional amendment.
25. A system of government in which political authority is vested in the people. Derived
from the Greek words demos (“the people”) and kratos (“authority”).
26. A form of government in which representatives elected by the people make and enforce
law and policies; may retain the monarchy in a ceremonial role (e.g. Great Britain).
27. The right of all adults to vote for their representatives.
28. More than 50 percent.
29. The principle that the powers of government should be limited, usually by institutional
checks (written document-namely U.S. Constitution or through widely shared beliefs).
30. A political ideology based on skepticism or opposition toward almost all government
activities.
31. A republic in which representatives elected by the people make and enforce laws and
policies (there is no king).
32. A political theory holding that in a democracy, the government ought to do what the
majority of the people want.
33. A perspective holding that society is ruled by a small number of people who exercise
power to further their self-interest (a privileged minority/a small cohesive, elite class).
34. A political ideology based on strong support for economic and social equality. Socialists
traditionally envisioned a society in which major businesses were taken over by employee
cooperatives.
35. The process through which individuals learn a set of political attitudes and form
opinions about social issues. The family and the educational system are two of the most
important forces in the political socialization process.
36. A set of beliefs that includes a limited role for the national government in helping
individuals, support for traditional values and lifestyles, and a cautious response to change.
37. The values, customs, and language established by the group or groups that traditionally
have controlled politics and government in a society.
38. As a political value, the idea that all people are of equal worth.
39. Anything that is or may be subject to ownership.
40. Someone who can claim a heritage from a Spanish-speaking country (other than Spain).
The term is used only in the US or other countries that receives immigrants—Spanishspeaking persons living in Spanish speaking countries do not normally apply the term to
themselves.
41. An economic system characterized by the private ownership of wealth-creating assets,
free markets, and freedom of contract. Funds are invested with the hope earning profits.
42. A comprehensive set of beliefs about the nature of people and about the role of an
institution or government.
43. A set of that includes the advocacy of positive government action to improve the welfare
of individuals, support for civil rights, and tolerance for political and social change.
44. A revolutionary variant of socialism that favors a partisan (and often totalitarian)
dictatorship, government control of all enterprises, and the replacement of free markets by
central planning.
45. The collection of beliefs and attitudes toward government and the political process held
by a community or nation.
Chapter 2 The Constitution
Critical Thinking Questions
1. Explain what would happen if the Supreme Court overturned its decision in Roe v.
Wade.
2. Explore the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and how they gave rise to
the necessity to come up with a new system of government in the Constitution.
3. Examine the major conflicts at the Constitutional Convention and how they were
ultimately resolved.
4. Should the Framers have attempted to abolish slavery in the new Constitution?
5. Explain how each branch checks, and is checked by, the other branches of
government.
6. Explore the issues raised in the battle over ratification of the Constitution.
7. Explain the process for the amendment of the Constitution.
8. Analyze the changes that have been achieved in our nation through the amending of
the Constitution.
9. Explain how the Constitution has been changed on an informal basis.
10. How did the Bill of Rights reflect the Framers' concern with the natural rights
presented in the Declaration of Independence?
1. Create a T-Chart and compare Jamestown and Plymouth.
T-Chart: Jamestown and Plymouth
Jamestown
1607
Virginia Company of London
1st permanent settlement
Representative Assembly- a legislature
composed of individuals who represent the
population
Plymouth
1620 Separatists (Church of England)
Massachusetts
Mayflower Compact –contract in which the
signers agreed to create and submit to the
authority of a government
-Consent of the affected individuals
-Served as a prototype for other compacts
2. Design a graphic organizer that displays your understanding of colonial selfgovernment
-13 colonies
-London governed the colonies in theory but the distance allowed the colonies to
exercise a large measure of self-government.
-The colonists were able to make their own laws
Fundamental Orders of Connecticut 1639
Massachusetts Body of Liberties 1641
Pennsylvania Frame of Government 1682
Pennsylvania Charter of Privileges 1701
*All of this gave the colonist valuable political experience
3. Create an annotated timeline of the road to the American Revolution.
1756-1763 French and Indian War
1760 King George III ascended to the throne and required the American colonists to
pay the cost of the war
1764 British Parliament passed the Sugar Act
1765 The Stamp Act is passed
The Stamp Act Congress assembled and protest “taxation without
representation”
1766 The Stamp Act is repealed
1767 Parliament passed Townsend Act (duties on lead, glass, paint, and other
items
1773 Boston Tea Party (boycott and protest of British taxes)
1774 Intolerable Acts (Coercive Acts) closed the Boston Harbor and placed the
government of Massachusetts under British control
1774 September First Continental Congress met in Philadelphia 12 of 13 colonies
were represented (GA exception)—the delegates decided to send King George III a
petition listing their grievances (independence wasn’t an issue). It was also decided
that colonies would raise their own troops and boycott British trade.
1775 May Second Continental Congress George Washington was named
commander-in-chief after the frequency of military encounters
Delegates voted for free trade with all countries except Britain, encouraged
each state to establish state governments unconnected to Britain, and
declared independence from Britain
Thomas Paine’s Common Sense published (up to 11 million copies sold 1st
1776 July The Declaration of Independence was written by Thomas Jefferson (33)
established American Independence.
-177?-1783 The American Revolution
Cornwallis surrendered 1781
1783 Treaty of Paris officially recognized the independence of the United States
4. Discuss in detail the main ideas of the Declaration of Independence (Universal
Truths, Natural Rights, Social Contract, etc)
-Universal Truths - All men are created equal, Consent of the Governed,
-Natural Rights- rights held to be inherent in natural law, not dependent on
governments. John Locke stated that natural law, being superior to human law,
specifies certain rights of “life, liberty, and property” in his Two Treatises on Government
1690. Locke suggested that the primary purpose of government was to protect these
rights. These rights, altered to become “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” are
asserted in the Declaration of Independence
-Social Contract- a voluntary agreement among individuals to secure their rights and
welfare by creating a government and abiding by its rules
5. -Articles of Confederation (Graphic Organizer)
Weaknesses/Strengths-Accomplishments – Pros/Cons, Confederation, 1781-1789,
etc.
 States retained most of the power and the central government had a
very limited role in the governing process. The loyalty most citizens
had was to their state first and foremost.
 Created by the 2nd Continental Congress in 1777, but not approved by
the states until 1781.
 Congress was the dominant force (no executive or federal courts)











1. All bills required 2/3 vote for passage
2. Any amendment to the Articles required a unanimous vote
3. Each state had 1 vote.
4. No power to regulate commerce
5. No tax enforcement power (states paid taxes voluntarily).
Loose Confederation of States
No executive or federal courts
Foreign Policy—very little respect and recognition
No Power to tax/Regulate trade
Unanimous vote needed to amend Articles
No power to compel military service.
 The U.S. had difficulty commanding respect from allies or enemies
(loans, recognition, trade)
 Domestic disputes arose over economic and political weaknesses
 1. Some states refused to pay any taxes, the public debt grew and the
nation's credit dwindled.
2. States began levying duties on each other's products and
quarreling over boundaries.
3. Internal Conflicts -maintaining order
-Confederation—a voluntary association of independent states/loose organization with
limitations such as those pertaining to executive authority
6. Drafting the Constitution: News Article (describing the drafting of the
Constitution)
-VA legislature called for meeting to discuss commercial problems at Annapolis, MD
-Some delegates wanted to discuss the weaknesses of the national government
(relationship between the states and central government, powers of the national
legislature, need for executive leadership, and economic policies).
-The decision was made to have a Convention in Philadelphia, My 1787 “for the sole and
express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation”
7. Profile the Delegates
74 were chosen but only 55 attended (of which 40 played active roles)
33 members of the legal profession
3 physicians
almost 50% college graduates
7 form chief executives of their respective states
6 were owners of large plantations
8 important businessmen
Ben Franklin 81 Jonathan Dayton of New Jersey was 26 average age 42
115 days beginning in MAY
maintained total secrecy
Factions
-James Madison kept a detailed, daily personal journal
-strong nationalists, those favoring limited national authority with a separation of powers,
some distrusted the common people in self-government, some favored a monarchy-Hamilton, some were concerned with republican principles, others western lands, some
were totally against a national authority and quit the convention.
-The VA delegation led the convention and presented 15 resolutions which set the agenda
for the convention
8. Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey Plans
9. Discuss the Great Compromise and Three-Fifths Compromise
•-Virginia Plan - favored the large states (representation based
on a state’s population
three branches:
-bicameral two-chamber
-national executive, elected by the legislature
-national judiciary, appointed by the legislature
•-New Jersey Plan- countered which favored the small states
-William Paterson proposed:
-one state, one vote
-Congress would regulate trade and imposed taxes
-All acts of Congress would be the supreme law of the land
-Several people would be elected by Congress to form an executive office
-the executive office would appoint a Supreme Court
Supremacy doctrine- a doctrine that asserts the priority of national law over state laws.
This principle is rooted in Article VI of the Constitution, which provides that the
Constitution, the laws passed by the national government under its constitutional powers,
and all treaties constitute the supreme law of the land
Great Compromise
Roger Sherman of CT proposed: the Connecticut Compromise
-bicameral legislature (House of Representatives (based on population according to the
number of free inhabitants plus 3/5ths of the slaves)
Senate - two members from each state elected by the state legislature
-the compromise resolved the large-state/small-state controversy and the Senate served as
a checks-and-balances system against the House, which many feared would be dominated
by and responsive to the masses.
Three-Fifths Compromise
How did they deal with the issue of slaves and representation?
Slavery was legal in all 13 colonies/states but it was dominate in the southern states.
Southern opposed any ban on slavery, and wanted slaves to be counted in determining
representation in Congress
Slaves are referred to as “all other persons” in the Constitution but essentially the house
of Representatives and the electoral college would be apportioned in part based on
property—slave property. This illustrates the power of the southern states at the
convention as the compromise enhanced the power of the South in the Congress.
Slavery related issues:
Congress would not interfere in the importation of slaves until after 1808
Fugitive Slave Clause
Other issues:
The South was concerned about the imposition of export taxes. As a result, the United
States is among few countries that do not tax their exports.
10. Explain: The Madisonian Model- Separation of Powers
The Madisonian Model- Checks and Balances
The Madisonian Model- Separation of Powers
-the executive, legislative, and judicial powers of government were to be separated so
that no one branch had enough power to dominate the others
(Congress –passing the law, Executive enforcing and administering the law, courts –
interpreting the law
Each branch would be independent of the others, but they would have to cooperate to
govern see Federalist Paper No. 51
The Federalist No. 51
The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between
the Different Departments
Independent Journal
Wednesday, February 6, 1788
[James Madison]
To the People of the State of New York:
TO WHAT expedient, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary
partition of power among the several departments, as laid down in the Constitution? The
only answer that can be given is, that as all these exterior provisions are found to be
inadequate, the defect must be supplied, by so contriving the interior structure of the
government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the
means of keeping each other in their proper places. Without presuming to undertake a full
development of this important idea, I will hazard a few general observations, which may
perhaps place it in a clearer light, and enable us to form a more correct judgment of the
principles and structure of the government planned by the convention.
In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different
powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential
to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its
own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as
little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others. Were this
principle rigorously adhered to, it would require that all the appointments for the supreme
executive, legislative, and judiciary magistracies should be drawn from the same fountain
of authority, the people, through channels having no communication whatever with one
another. Perhaps such a plan of constructing the several departments would be less
difficult in practice than it may in contemplation appear. Some difficulties, however, and
some additional expense would attend the execution of it. Some deviations, therefore,
from the principle must be admitted. In the constitution of the judiciary department in
particular, it might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principle: first, because
peculiar qualifications being essential in the members, the primary consideration ought to
be to select that mode of choice which best secures these qualifications; secondly,
because the permanent tenure by which the appointments are held in that department,
must soon destroy all sense of dependence on the authority conferring them.
It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as
possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the
executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular,
their independence in every other would be merely nominal.
But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same
department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary
constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The
provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the
danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man
must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on
human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.
But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men
were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither
external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a
government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this:
you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place
oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on
the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary
precautions.
This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives,
might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We
see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the
constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each
may be a check on the other -- that the private interest of every individual may be a
sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in
the distribution of the supreme powers of the State.
But it is not possible to give to each department an equal power of self-defense. In
republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy
for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render
them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected
with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence
on the society will admit. It may even be necessary to guard against dangerous
encroachments by still further precautions. As the weight of the legislative authority
requires that it should be thus divided, the weakness of the executive may require, on the
other hand, that it should be fortified. An absolute negative on the legislature appears, at
first view, to be the natural defense with which the executive magistrate should be armed.
But perhaps it would be neither altogether safe nor alone sufficient. On ordinary
occasions it might not be exerted with the requisite firmness, and on extraordinary
occasions it might be perfidiously abused. May not this defect of an absolute negative be
supplied by some qualified connection between this weaker department and the weaker
branch of the stronger department, by which the latter may be led to support the
constitutional rights of the former, without being too much detached from the rights of its
own department?
If the principles on which these observations are founded be just, as I persuade myself
they are, and they be applied as a criterion to the several State constitutions, and to the
federal Constitution it will be found that if the latter does not perfectly correspond with
them, the former are infinitely less able to bear such a test.
There are, moreover, two considerations particularly applicable to the federal system of
America, which place that system in a very interesting point of view.
First. In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the
administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a
division of the government into distinct and separate departments. In the compound
republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two
distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and
separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The
different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be
controlled by itself.
Second. It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the
oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the
other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a
majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.
There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the
community independent of the majority -- that is, of the society itself; the other, by
comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens as will render an
unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable, if not impracticable. The
first method prevails in all governments possessing an hereditary or self-appointed
authority. This, at best, is but a precarious security; because a power independent of the
society may as well espouse the unjust views of the major, as the rightful interests of the
minor party, and may possibly be turned against both parties. The second method will be
exemplified in the federal republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it will be
derived from and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many
parts, interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority,
will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority. In a free government
the security for civil rights must be the same as that for religious rights. It consists in the
one case in the multiplicity of interests, and in the other in the multiplicity of sects. The
degree of security in both cases will depend on the number of interests and sects; and this
may be presumed to depend on the extent of country and number of people
comprehended under the same government. This view of the subject must particularly
recommend a proper federal system to all the sincere and considerate friends of
republican government, since it shows that in exact proportion as the territory of the
Union may be formed into more circumscribed Confederacies, or States oppressive
combinations of a majority will be facilitated: the best security, under the republican
forms, for the rights of every class of citizens, will be diminished: and consequently the
stability and independence of some member of the government, the only other security,
must be proportionately increased. Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil
society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be
lost in the pursuit. In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily
unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature,
where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in
the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their
condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves;
so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradnally induced, by
a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well
as the more powerful. It can be little doubted that if the State of Rhode Island was
separated from the Confederacy and left to itself, the insecurity of rights under the
popular form of government within such narrow limits would be displayed by such
reiterated oppressions of factious majorities that some power altogether independent of
the people would soon be called for by the voice of the very factions whose misrule had
proved the necessity of it. In the extended republic of the United States, and among the
great variety of interests, parties, and sects which it embraces, a coalition of a majority of
the whole society could seldom take place on any other principles than those of justice
and the general good; whilst there being thus less danger to a minor from the will of a
major party, there must be less pretext, also, to provide for the security of the former, by
introducing into the government a will not dependent on the latter, or, in other words, a
will independent of the society itself. It is no less certain than it is important,
notwithstanding the contrary opinions which have been entertained, that the larger the
society, provided it lie within a practical sphere, the more duly capable it will be of selfgovernment. And happily for the republican cause, the practicable sphere may be carried
to a very great extent, by a judicious modification and mixture of the federal principle.
PUBLIUS
Summary and Analysis of Essay 51
Summary:
James Madison begins his famous federalist paper by explaining that the purpose of
this essay is to help the readers understand how the structure of the proposed
government makes liberty possible. Each branch should be, for the most part, in
Madison's opinion, independent. To assure such independence, no one branch should
have too much power in selecting members of the other two branches. If this
principle were strictly followed, it would mean that the citizens should select the
president, the legislators, and the judges. But, the framers recognized certain
practical difficulties in making every office elective. In particular, the judicial branch
would suffer because the average person is not aware of the qualifications judges
should possess. Judges should have great ability, but also be free of political
pressures. Since federal judges are appointed for life, their thinking will not be
influenced by the president who appoints them, or the senators whose consent the
president will seek.
Madison furthers, the members of each branch should not be too dependent on the
members of the other two branches in the determination of their salaries. The best
security against a gradual concentration of power in any one branch is to provide
constitutional safeguards that would make such concentration difficult. The
constitutional rights of all must check one man's personal interests and ambitions.
We may not like to admit that men abuse power, but the very need for government
itself proves they do, "if men were angels, no government would be necessary."
Unfortunately, all men are imperfect, the rulers and the ruled. Consequently, the
great problem in framing a government is that the government must be able to
control the people, but equally important, must be forced to control itself. The
dependence of the government on the will of the people is undoubtedly the best
control, but experience teaches that other controls are necessary.
Dividing power helps to check its growth in any one direction, but power cannot be
divided absolutely equally. In the republican form of government, the legislative
branch tends to be the most powerful. That is why the framers divided the Congress
into two branches, the House of Representatives and the Senate, and provided for a
different method of election in each branch. Further safeguards against legislative
tyranny may be necessary.
In a representative democracy it is not only important to guard against the
oppression of rulers, it is equally important to guard against the injustice which may
be inflicted by certain citizens or groups. Majorities often threaten the rights of
minorities. There are only two methods of avoiding evil. The first is to construct a
powerful government, a "community will." Such a "will' is larger than, and
independent of, the simply majority. This "solution" is dangerous because such a
government might throw its power behind a group in society working against the
public good. In our country, the authority to govern comes from the entire society
the people. In addition, under the Constitution society is divided into many groups of
people who hold different views and have different interests. This makes it very
difficult for one group to dominate or threaten the minority groups.
Justice is the purpose of government and civil society. If government allows or
encourages strong groups to combine together against the weak, liberty will be lost
and anarchy will result. And the condition of anarchy tempts even strong individuals
and groups to submit to any form of government, no matter how bad, which they
hope will protect them as well as the weak.
Madison concludes that self-government flourishes in a large country containing
many different groups. Some countries are too large for self-government, but the
proposed plan modifies the federal principle enough to make self-government both
possible and practical in the Untied States.
Analysis
In this essay, Madison's thoughts on factionalism are delineated clearly. As we
observed earlier, he assumed that conflicts of interests are inherent in human
nature, and he recognized that, as a consequence, people fall into various groups.
He wanted to avoid a situation in which any one group controlled the decisions of a
society. Free elections and the majority principle protected the country from
dictatorship, that is, the tyranny of a minority. However, he was equally concerned
about the danger that he thought was more likely in a democracy, that is, the
tyranny of the majority. A central institutional issue for him was how to minimize this
risk.
Madison's solution characteristically relied not only on formal institutions, which
could be designed, but also on the particular sociological structure of American
society, which he took as a fortunate starting point for the framers of the new
constitution. The institutional component in his solution was checks and balances, so
that there were multiple entry points into the government and multiple ways to
offset the power that any one branch of the government might otherwise acquire
over another. In this system, "the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several
offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on each other."
These institutional arrangements were reinforced by the sociological fact that the
Republic contained a multiplicity of interests that could, and did, offset one another:
"While all authority in it will be derived from and dependent on the society, the
society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests and classes of citizens that
the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger form interested
combinations of the majority." It is good that there are many group interests; that
they be numerous is less important than that they be impermanent and shifting
alliances whose components vary with the specific policy issue.
Madison commenced the statement of his theory in Federalist 51 with an
acknowledgement that the "have nots" in any society are extremely likely to attack
the "haves," for like Hamilton the Virginian believed class struggle to be inseparable
from politics. "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard against the
oppression of its rulers," Madison writes, "but to guard one part of the society
against the injustice of the other. Different interests necessarily exist in different
classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest the rights of the
minority will be insecure."
Madison, it is clear, had emancipated himself from the sterile dualistic view of society
that was so common in the eighteenth century and that so obsessed Hamilton.
Madison was one of the pioneers of "pluralism" in political thought. Where Hamilton
saw the corporate spirit of the several states as poisonous to the union, Madison was
aware that the preservation of the state governments could serve the cause of both
liberty and union. Finally, the vastness of the United States, a fact that Hamilton
considered the prime excuse for autocracy was recognized by Madison as the surest
preservative of liberty. To assert after reading this passage that Alexander Hamilton
wrote Federalist 51 is to imply first, that he was a magician in mimicking Madison's
very words and tone of vote, and in the second place that he was the most
disingenuous hypocrite that ever wrote on politics. No unprejudiced or informed
historian would accept this latter charge against Hamilton.
It is interesting to note that the Federalist papers are unique, as shown in this paper,
because of the extreme amount of thought that was put into the design of the
constitution, as shown in Madison's original thought process that were penned in 51.
Many, if not most, changes in institutional design, they usually occur as the reactions
of shortsighted people to what they perceive as more-or-less short-range needs. This
is one reason the Constitutional Convention was a remarkable event. The Founding
Fathers set out deliberately to design the form of government that would be most
likely to bring about the long-range goals that they envisaged for the Republic. What
is most unusual about Madison, in contrast to the other delegates, is the degree to
which he thought about the principles behind the institutions he preferred. Not only
did he practice the art of what nowadays is deemed institutional design, but he
developed, as well, the outlines of a theory of institutional design that culminated in
this essay.
The Madisonian Model- Checks and Balances—each branch of government can check
the actions of the others
Examples:
-Congress can enact laws, but the president has veto power over congressional acts
-The Supreme Court has the power to declare acts of Congress and of the executive
unconstitutional, but the president appoints the justices of the Supreme Court, with the
advice and consent of the Senate.
French Philosopher-- Montesquieu 1689-1755 in his The Spirit of the Laws 1748
explored the concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances.
Getting around the Checks and Balance system
-Congress can override a presidential veto by a two-thirds vote (67%)
-Congress hold the “power of the purse” and can refuse to appropriate funds to
programs
-The president can make “recess appointments” if the Senate refuses to confirm a
presidential appointment
11. Convey your understanding of the Electoral College.
A group of persons called electors selected by the voters in each state and the District of
Columbia; the group officially elects the president and vice president of the United
States. The number of electors in each state is equal to the number of each state’s
representatives in both chambers of Congress.
12. The final Document (Summarize/Simplify)
The final Document was approved by 39 delegates September 17, 1787. with two
fundamental principles:
1. Popular sovereignty or control by the people
2. A republican government in which the people choose representatives to make
decisions for them.
3. Limited government with written laws, in contrast to the powerful British government
against which the colonists had rebelled
4. Separation of powers, which checks and balances among branches to prevent any
one branch from gaining too much power
5. A federal system that allows for states’ rights, because the states feared too much
centralized control - power is divided between central government and regional, or
subdivisional government. A brilliant concept that attempted to address the idea of the
states or the central government having ultimate sovereignty
Ratification –formal approval
13. T-Chart: Federalists and Anti-Federalists
T-Chart
Federalists
Anti-Federalists
In favor of a strong central government
Republicans
Knowledgeable regarding the document
Opposed a strong central government
(attendees/delegates)
Wanted to prevent the Constitution from
Advantages: time, money, and power
being drafted
Highly organized
At a serious disadvantage when it came to
Effectively communication/Urban networks the document (many weren’t there)
Advantage: Represented the solid/strong
status quo (change is difficult to accept)
Hamilton, Jay, Madison
Oppose aristocratic, tyrannical,
Found the Articles highly ineffective
overbearing, overburdening governments
hostile to personal liberties
Favored a bill of rights
Patrick Henry and Samuel Adams
14. Read Federalist Papers #10, 51, & 78 and Explain.
Federalist Papers
Hamilton, Jay, Madison Publius 85 essays that defended the document and the
republican form of government. Appeared in a New York newspaper from 1787-1788.
Hamilton was likely responsible for 2/3rd of the essays. Madison’s No. 10 is considered a
classic in political theory; it deals with the nature of groups or factions
The Federalist, No. 10.
factions and the ideas of federalism
The Federalist, No. 51.
checks and balances
The Federalist, No. 78
life tenure judicial system
The Federalist No. 10
The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection
(continued)
Daily Advertiser
Thursday, November 22, 1787
[James Madison]
To the People of the State of New York:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves
to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of
faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their
character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He
will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the
principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it. The instability, injustice,
and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases
under which popular governments have everywhere perished; as they continue to be the
favorite and fruitful topics from which the adversaries to liberty derive their most
specious declamations. The valuable improvements made by the American constitutions
on the popular models, both ancient and modern, cannot certainly be too much admired;
but it would be an unwarrantable partiality, to contend that they have as effectually
obviated the danger on this side, as was wished and expected. Complaints are everywhere
heard from our most considerate and virtuous citizens, equally the friends of public and
private faith, and of public and personal liberty, that our governments are too unstable,
that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are
too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party,
but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. However anxiously
we may wish that these complaints had no foundation, the evidence, of known facts will
not permit us to deny that they are in some degree true. It will be found, indeed, on a
candid review of our situation, that some of the distresses under which we labor have
been erroneously charged on the operation of our governments; but it will be found, at the
same time, that other causes will not alone account for many of our heaviest misfortunes;
and, particularly, for that prevailing and increasing distrust of public engagements, and
alarm for private rights, which are echoed from one end of the continent to the other.
These must be chiefly, if not wholly, effects of the unsteadiness and injustice with which
a factious spirit has tainted our public administrations.
By a faction, I understand 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, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate
interests of the community.
There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its
causes; the other, by controlling its effects.
There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying
the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the
same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.
It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the
disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly
expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life,
because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is
essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.
The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the
reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will
be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his
opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former
will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the faculties of
men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a
uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government.
From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the
possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the
influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a
division of the society into different interests and parties.
The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them
everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different
circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion,
concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an
attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to
persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions,
have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and
rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for
their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual
animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and
fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite
their most violent conflicts. But the most common and durable source of factions has
been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are
without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors,
and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a
manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser
interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes,
actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and
interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit
of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.
No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly
bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater
reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time; yet what
are many of the most important acts of legislation, but so many judicial determinations,
not indeed concerning the rights of single persons, but concerning the rights of large
bodies of citizens? And what are the different classes of legislators but advocates and
parties to the causes which they determine? Is a law proposed concerning private debts?
It is a question to which the creditors are parties on one side and the debtors on the other.
Justice ought to hold the balance between them. Yet the parties are, and must be,
themselves the judges; and the most numerous party, or, in other words, the most
powerful faction must be expected to prevail. Shall domestic manufactures be
encouraged, and in what degree, by restrictions on foreign manufactures? are questions
which would be differently decided by the landed and the manufacturing classes, and
probably by neither with a sole regard to justice and the public good. The apportionment
of taxes on the various descriptions of property is an act which seems to require the most
exact impartiality; yet there is, perhaps, no legislative act in which greater opportunity
and temptation are given to a predominant party to trample on the rules of justice. Every
shilling with which they overburden the inferior number, is a shilling saved to their own
pockets.
It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing
interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will
not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all
without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail
over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of
another or the good of the whole.
The inference to which we are brought is, that the causes of faction cannot be removed,
and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects.
If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle,
which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the
administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its
violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction,
the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling
passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens. To secure the
public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction, and at the same time
to preserve the spirit and the form of popular government, is then the great object to
which our inquiries are directed. Let me add that it is the great desideratum by which this
form of government can be rescued from the opprobrium under which it has so long
labored, and be recommended to the esteem and adoption of mankind.
By what means is this object attainable? Evidently by one of two only. Either the
existence of the same passion or interest in a majority at the same time must be
prevented, or the majority, having such coexistent passion or interest, must be rendered,
by their number and local situation, unable to concert and carry into effect schemes of
oppression. If the impulse and the opportunity be suffered to coincide, we well know that
neither moral nor religious motives can be relied on as an adequate control. They are not
found to be such on the injustice and violence of individuals, and lose their efficacy in
proportion to the number combined together, that is, in proportion as their efficacy
becomes needful.
From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I
mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the
government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common
passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a
communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is
nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious
individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and
contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of
property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their
deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have
erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political
rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their
possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes
place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us
examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend
both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the
delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the
rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which
the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public
views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom
may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of
justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under
such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the
representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if
pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the
effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister
designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and
then betray the interests, of the people. The question resulting is, whether small or
extensive republics are more favorable to the election of proper guardians of the public
weal; and it is clearly decided in favor of the latter by two obvious considerations:
In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the
representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of
a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in
order to guard against the confusion of a multitude. Hence, the number of representatives
in the two cases not being in proportion to that of the two constituents, and being
proportionally greater in the small republic, it follows that, if the proportion of fit
characters be not less in the large than in the small republic, the former will present a
greater option, and consequently a greater probability of a fit choice.
In the next place, as each representative will be chosen by a greater number of citizens in
the large than in the small republic, it will be more difficult for unworthy candidates to
practice with success the vicious arts by which elections are too often carried; and the
suffrages of the people being more free, will be more likely to centre in men who possess
the most attractive merit and the most diffusive and established characters.
It must be confessed that in this, as in most other cases, there is a mean, on both sides of
which inconveniences will be found to lie. By enlarging too much the number of electors,
you render the representatives too little acquainted with all their local circumstances and
lesser interests; as by reducing it too much, you render him unduly attached to these, and
too little fit to comprehend and pursue great and national objects. The federal
Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests
being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.
The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory
which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government;
and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be
dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will
be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and
interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller
the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within
which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of
oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests;
you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to
invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more
difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each
other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a
consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by
distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary.
Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a
democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small
republic, -- is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it. Does the advantage
consist in the substitution of representatives whose enlightened views and virtuous
sentiments render them superior to local prejudices and schemes of injustice? It will not
be denied that the representation of the Union will be most likely to possess these
requisite endowments. Does it consist in the greater security afforded by a greater variety
of parties, against the event of any one party being able to outnumber and oppress the
rest? In an equal degree does the increased variety of parties comprised within the Union,
increase this security. Does it, in fine, consist in the greater obstacles opposed to the
concert and accomplishment of the secret wishes of an unjust and interested majority?
Here, again, the extent of the Union gives it the most palpable advantage.
The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but
will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect
may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of
sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any
danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal
division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to
pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same
proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an
entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy
for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of
pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the
spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.
PUBLIUS
Summary and Analysis of Essay 51
Summary:
James Madison begins his famous federalist paper by explaining that the purpose of
this essay is to help the readers understand how the structure of the proposed
government makes liberty possible. Each branch should be, for the most part, in
Madison's opinion, independent. To assure such independence, no one branch should
have too much power in selecting members of the other two branches. If this
principle were strictly followed, it would mean that the citizens should select the
president, the legislators, and the judges. But, the framers recognized certain
practical difficulties in making every office elective. In particular, the judicial branch
would suffer because the average person is not aware of the qualifications judges
should possess. Judges should have great ability, but also be free of political
pressures. Since federal judges are appointed for life, their thinking will not be
influenced by the president who appoints them, or the senators whose consent the
president will seek.
Madison furthers, the members of each branch should not be too dependent on the
members of the other two branches in the determination of their salaries. The best
security against a gradual concentration of power in any one branch is to provide
constitutional safeguards that would make such concentration difficult. The
constitutional rights of all must check one man's personal interests and ambitions.
We may not like to admit that men abuse power, but the very need for government
itself proves they do, "if men were angels, no government would be necessary."
Unfortunately, all men are imperfect, the rulers and the ruled. Consequently, the
great problem in framing a government is that the government must be able to
control the people, but equally important, must be forced to control itself. The
dependence of the government on the will of the people is undoubtedly the best
control, but experience teaches that other controls are necessary.
Dividing power helps to check its growth in any one direction, but power cannot be
divided absolutely equally. In the republican form of government, the legislative
branch tends to be the most powerful. That is why the framers divided the Congress
into two branches, the House of Representatives and the Senate, and provided for a
different method of election in each branch. Further safeguards against legislative
tyranny may be necessary.
In a representative democracy it is not only important to guard against the
oppression of rulers, it is equally important to guard against the injustice which may
be inflicted by certain citizens or groups. Majorities often threaten the rights of
minorities. There are only two methods of avoiding evil. The first is to construct a
powerful government, a "community will." Such a "will' is larger than, and
independent of, the simply majority. This "solution" is dangerous because such a
government might throw its power behind a group in society working against the
public good. In our country, the authority to govern comes from the entire society
the people. In addition, under the Constitution society is divided into many groups of
people who hold different views and have different interests. This makes it very
difficult for one group to dominate or threaten the minority groups.
Justice is the purpose of government and civil society. If government allows or
encourages strong groups to combine together against the weak, liberty will be lost
and anarchy will result. And the condition of anarchy tempts even strong individuals
and groups to submit to any form of government, no matter how bad, which they
hope will protect them as well as the weak.
Madison concludes that self-government flourishes in a large country containing
many different groups. Some countries are too large for self-government, but the
proposed plan modifies the federal principle enough to make self-government both
possible and practical in the Untied States.
Analysis
In this essay, Madison's thoughts on factionalism are delineated clearly. As we
observed earlier, he assumed that conflicts of interests are inherent in human
nature, and he recognized that, as a consequence, people fall into various groups.
He wanted to avoid a situation in which any one group controlled the decisions of a
society. Free elections and the majority principle protected the country from
dictatorship, that is, the tyranny of a minority. However, he was equally concerned
about the danger that he thought was more likely in a democracy, that is, the
tyranny of the majority. A central institutional issue for him was how to minimize this
risk.
Madison's solution characteristically relied not only on formal institutions, which
could be designed, but also on the particular sociological structure of American
society, which he took as a fortunate starting point for the framers of the new
constitution. The institutional component in his solution was checks and balances, so
that there were multiple entry points into the government and multiple ways to
offset the power that any one branch of the government might otherwise acquire
over another. In this system, "the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several
offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on each other."
These institutional arrangements were reinforced by the sociological fact that the
Republic contained a multiplicity of interests that could, and did, offset one another:
"While all authority in it will be derived from and dependent on the society, the
society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests and classes of citizens that
the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger form interested
combinations of the majority." It is good that there are many group interests; that
they be numerous is less important than that they be impermanent and shifting
alliances whose components vary with the specific policy issue.
Madison commenced the statement of his theory in Federalist 51 with an
acknowledgement that the "have nots" in any society are extremely likely to attack
the "haves," for like Hamilton the Virginian believed class struggle to be inseparable
from politics. "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard against the
oppression of its rulers," Madison writes, "but to guard one part of the society
against the injustice of the other. Different interests necessarily exist in different
classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest the rights of the
minority will be insecure."
Madison, it is clear, had emancipated himself from the sterile dualistic view of society
that was so common in the eighteenth century and that so obsessed Hamilton.
Madison was one of the pioneers of "pluralism" in political thought. Where Hamilton
saw the corporate spirit of the several states as poisonous to the union, Madison was
aware that the preservation of the state governments could serve the cause of both
liberty and union. Finally, the vastness of the United States, a fact that Hamilton
considered the prime excuse for autocracy was recognized by Madison as the surest
preservative of liberty. To assert after reading this passage that Alexander Hamilton
wrote Federalist 51 is to imply first, that he was a magician in mimicking Madison's
very words and tone of vote, and in the second place that he was the most
disingenuous hypocrite that ever wrote on politics. No unprejudiced or informed
historian would accept this latter charge against Hamilton.
It is interesting to note that the Federalist papers are unique, as shown in this paper,
because of the extreme amount of thought that was put into the design of the
constitution, as shown in Madison's original thought process that were penned in 51.
Many, if not most, changes in institutional design, they usually occur as the reactions
of shortsighted people to what they perceive as more-or-less short-range needs. This
is one reason the Constitutional Convention was a remarkable event. The Founding
Fathers set out deliberately to design the form of government that would be most
likely to bring about the long-range goals that they envisaged for the Republic. What
is most unusual about Madison, in contrast to the other delegates, is the degree to
which he thought about the principles behind the institutions he preferred. Not only
did he practice the art of what nowadays is deemed institutional design, but he
developed, as well, the outlines of a theory of institutional design that culminated in
this essay.
14. Analyze and assess Beard’s thesis.
Beard’s thesis;-1913 historian Charles Beard’s An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of
the United States (Debate: Was the Constitution supported by a majority of
Americans
Beard argued that the Constitution was produced by wealthy property owners who
desired a strong central government to protect their property rights
15. Why did the Founding Fathers add a Bill of Rights?
Bill of Rights James Madison came up with 17, Congress reduced that number to
12 of which only 2 were not ratified (one dealt with the apportionment of
representatives and the compensation of the members of Congress/Supreme Court
decisions led to reform of the apportionment process and the compensation issue
was ratified 203 years later 1992)
15. Create a Chart that displays your mastery of Amending the Constitution.
Amending the Constitution
Proposing Amendments
Formal Methods
1. a two-thirds vote in each chamber of Congress
2. a national convention that is called by Congress at the request of twothirds of the state legislatures (never used)
Ratifying Amendments
1. by a positive vote in three-fourths of the legislatures of the various states
2. by special conventions called in the states and a positive vote of three-fourths
(75%) of them (used once, to repeal prohibition)
Informal
PEO: The brevity and ambiguity of the original document have permitted great
alterations in the Constitutions by way of varying interpretations over time. As the
US grew, new social and political realities emerged. Congress, presidents, and the
courts found it necessary to interpret the Constitution’s provisions in light of these
new realities. So the Constitution has proved to be a remarkably flexible document,
adapting itself to new events and concerns.
•Congressional Legislation
-broad powers to carry out its duties (e.g. the power to regulate foreign and
interstate commerce- Congress has cited the commerce clause for passing
thousands of laws that have defined the meaning of foreign and interstate
commerce
-Congress has delegated to federal agencies the legislative power to write
regulations. These regulations become law unless challenged in the court
system.
16. Create a Chart that displays your mastery of presidential action, executive
agreements, judicial review, interpretation, custom, and usage.
•Presidential Action
-presidents have proposed bills and budgets since the times of Woodrow
Wilson (1913-1921) although the Constitution doesn’t authorize such action.
-As commander-in-chief, the president can send troops abroad into combat
while only Congress can declare war
-Executive agreements an international agreement between chiefs of state
that does not require legislative approval
•Judicial Review
- Judicial Review
-The power of the Supreme Court and other courts to declare unconstitutional
federal or state laws and other acts of government
•Interpretation, Custom, and Usage
-Political parties aren’t mentioned in the Constitution but parties have played
a major role in electing the president.
-initially small, rural republic now an industrial giant with vast geographic,
natural, and human resources.
The Federalist No. 78
The Judiciary Department
Independent Journal
Saturday, June 14, 1788
[Alexander Hamilton]
To the People of the State of New York:
WE PROCEED now to an examination of the judiciary department of the proposed
government.
In unfolding the defects of the existing Confederation, the utility and necessity of a
federal judicature have been clearly pointed out. It is the less necessary to recapitulate the
considerations there urged, as the propriety of the institution in the abstract is not
disputed; the only questions which have been raised being relative to the manner of
constituting it, and to its extent. To these points, therefore, our observations shall be
confined.
The manner of constituting it seems to embrace these several objects: 1st. The mode of
appointing the judges. 2d. The tenure by which they are to hold their places. 3d. The
partition of the judiciary authority between different courts, and their relations to each
other.
First. As to the mode of appointing the judges; this is the same with that of appointing the
officers of the Union in general, and has been so fully discussed in the two last numbers,
that nothing can be said here which would not be useless repetition.
Second. As to the tenure by which the judges are to hold their places; this chiefly
concerns their duration in office; the provisions for their support; the precautions for their
responsibility.
According to the plan of the convention, all judges who may be appointed by the United
States are to hold their offices during good behavior; which is conformable to the most
approved of the State constitutions and among the rest, to that of this State. Its propriety
having been drawn into question by the adversaries of that plan, is no light symptom of
the rage for objection, which disorders their imaginations and judgments. The standard of
good behavior for the continuance in office of the judicial magistracy, is certainly one of
the most valuable of the modern improvements in the practice of government. In a
monarchy it is an excellent barrier to the despotism of the prince; in a republic it is a no
less excellent barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of the representative body.
And it is the best expedient which can be devised in any government, to secure a steady,
upright, and impartial administration of the laws.
Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive, that, in
a government in which they are separated from each other, the judiciary, from the nature
of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the
Constitution; because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. The Executive
not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community. The legislature not
only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every
citizen are to be regulated. The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the
sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and
can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL,
but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even
for the efficacy of its judgments.
This simple view of the matter suggests several important consequences. It proves
incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three
departments of power1; that it can never attack with success either of the other two; and
that all possible care is requisite to enable it to defend itself against their attacks. It
equally proves, that though individual oppression may now and then proceed from the
courts of justice, the general liberty of the people can never be endangered from that
quarter; I mean so long as the judiciary remains truly distinct from both the legislature
and the Executive. For I agree, that "there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not
separated from the legislative and executive powers."2 And it proves, in the last place,
that as liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have every
thing to fear from its union with either of the other departments; that as all the effects of
such a union must ensue from a dependence of the former on the latter, notwithstanding a
nominal and apparent separation; that as, from the natural feebleness of the judiciary, it is
in continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced by its co-ordinate
branches; and that as nothing can contribute so much to its firmness and independence as
permanency in office, this quality may therefore be justly regarded as an indispensable
ingredient in its constitution, and, in a great measure, as the citadel of the public justice
and the public security.
The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited
Constitution. By a limited Constitution, I understand one which contains certain specified
exceptions to the legislative authority; such, for instance, as that it shall pass no bills of
attainder, no ex post facto laws, and the like. Limitations of this kind can be preserved in
practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be
to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all
the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing.
Some perplexity respecting the rights of the courts to pronounce legislative acts void,
because contrary to the Constitution, has arisen from an imagination that the doctrine
would imply a superiority of the judiciary to the legislative power. It is urged that the
authority which can declare the acts of another void, must necessarily be superior to the
one whose acts may be declared void. As this doctrine is of great importance in all the
American constitutions, a brief discussion of the ground on which it rests cannot be
unacceptable.
There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a
delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised,
is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny
this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is
above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people
themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do
not authorize, but what they forbid.
If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own
powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other
departments, it may be answered, that this cannot be the natural presumption, where it is
not to be collected from any particular provisions in the Constitution. It is not otherwise
to be supposed, that the Constitution could intend to enable the representatives of the
people to substitute their will to that of their constituents. It is far more rational to
suppose, that the courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and
the legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned
to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the
courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental
law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any
particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an
irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and
validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be
preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.
Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the
legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and
that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that
of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter
rather than the former. They ought to regulate their decisions by the fundamental laws,
rather than by those which are not fundamental.
This exercise of judicial discretion, in determining between two contradictory laws, is
exemplified in a familiar instance. It not uncommonly happens, that there are two statutes
existing at one time, clashing in whole or in part with each other, and neither of them
containing any repealing clause or expression. In such a case, it is the province of the
courts to liquidate and fix their meaning and operation. So far as they can, by any fair
construction, be reconciled to each other, reason and law conspire to dictate that this
should be done; where this is impracticable, it becomes a matter of necessity to give
effect to one, in exclusion of the other. The rule which has obtained in the courts for
determining their relative validity is, that the last in order of time shall be preferred to the
first. But this is a mere rule of construction, not derived from any positive law, but from
the nature and reason of the thing. It is a rule not enjoined upon the courts by legislative
provision, but adopted by themselves, as consonant to truth and propriety, for the
direction of their conduct as interpreters of the law. They thought it reasonable, that
between the interfering acts of an EQUAL authority, that which was the last indication of
its will should have the preference.
But in regard to the interfering acts of a superior and subordinate authority, of an original
and derivative power, the nature and reason of the thing indicate the converse of that rule
as proper to be followed. They teach us that the prior act of a superior ought to be
preferred to the subsequent act of an inferior and subordinate authority; and that
accordingly, whenever a particular statute contravenes the Constitution, it will be the duty
of the judicial tribunals to adhere to the latter and disregard the former.
It can be of no weight to say that the courts, on the pretense of a repugnancy, may
substitute their own pleasure to the constitutional intentions of the legislature. This might
as well happen in the case of two contradictory statutes; or it might as well happen in
every adjudication upon any single statute. The courts must declare the sense of the law;
and if they should be disposed to exercise WILL instead of JUDGMENT, the consequence
would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislative body. The
observation, if it prove any thing, would prove that there ought to be no judges distinct
from that body.
If, then, the courts of justice are to be considered as the bulwarks of a limited
Constitution against legislative encroachments, this consideration will afford a strong
argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices, since nothing will contribute so
much as this to that independent spirit in the judges which must be essential to the
faithful performance of so arduous a duty.
This independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the
rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors, which the arts of designing men,
or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people
themselves, and which, though they speedily give place to better information, and more
deliberate reflection, have a tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous
innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the
community. Though I trust the friends of the proposed Constitution will never concur
with its enemies,3 in questioning that fundamental principle of republican government,
which admits the right of the people to alter or abolish the established Constitution,
whenever they find it inconsistent with their happiness, yet it is not to be inferred from
this principle, that the representatives of the people, whenever a momentary inclination
happens to lay hold of a majority of their constituents, incompatible with the provisions
in the existing Constitution, would, on that account, be justifiable in a violation of those
provisions; or that the courts would be under a greater obligation to connive at infractions
in this shape, than when they had proceeded wholly from the cabals of the representative
body. Until the people have, by some solemn and authoritative act, annulled or changed
the established form, it is binding upon themselves collectively, as well as individually;
and no presumption, or even knowledge, of their sentiments, can warrant their
representatives in a departure from it, prior to such an act. But it is easy to see, that it
would require an uncommon portion of fortitude in the judges to do their duty as faithful
guardians of the Constitution, where legislative invasions of it had been instigated by the
major voice of the community.
But it is not with a view to infractions of the Constitution only, that the independence of
the judges may be an essential safeguard against the effects of occasional ill humors in
the society. These sometimes extend no farther than to the injury of the private rights of
particular classes of citizens, by unjust and partial laws. Here also the firmness of the
judicial magistracy is of vast importance in mitigating the severity and confining the
operation of such laws. It not only serves to moderate the immediate mischiefs of those
which may have been passed, but it operates as a check upon the legislative body in
passing them; who, perceiving that obstacles to the success of iniquitous intention are to
be expected from the scruples of the courts, are in a manner compelled, by the very
motives of the injustice they meditate, to qualify their attempts. This is a circumstance
calculated to have more influence upon the character of our governments, than but few
may be aware of. The benefits of the integrity and moderation of the judiciary have
already been felt in more States than one; and though they may have displeased those
whose sinister expectations they may have disappointed, they must have commanded the
esteem and applause of all the virtuous and disinterested. Considerate men, of every
description, ought to prize whatever will tend to beget or fortify that temper in the courts:
as no man can be sure that he may not be to-morrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by
which he may be a gainer to-day. And every man must now feel, that the inevitable
tendency of such a spirit is to sap the foundations of public and private confidence, and to
introduce in its stead universal distrust and distress.
That inflexible and uniform adherence to the rights of the Constitution, and of
individuals, which we perceive to be indispensable in the courts of justice, can certainly
not be expected from judges who hold their offices by a temporary commission.
Periodical appointments, however regulated, or by whomsoever made, would, in some
way or other, be fatal to their necessary independence. If the power of making them was
committed either to the Executive or legislature, there would be danger of an improper
complaisance to the branch which possessed it; if to both, there would be an
unwillingness to hazard the displeasure of either; if to the people, or to persons chosen by
them for the special purpose, there would be too great a disposition to consult popularity,
to justify a reliance that nothing would be consulted but the Constitution and the laws.
There is yet a further and a weightier reason for the permanency of the judicial offices,
which is deducible from the nature of the qualifications they require. It has been
frequently remarked, with great propriety, that a voluminous code of laws is one of the
inconveniences necessarily connected with the advantages of a free government. To
avoid an arbitrary discretion in the courts, it is indispensable that they should be bound
down by strict rules and precedents, which serve to define and point out their duty in
every particular case that comes before them; and it will readily be conceived from the
variety of controversies which grow out of the folly and wickedness of mankind, that the
records of those precedents must unavoidably swell to a very considerable bulk, and must
demand long and laborious study to acquire a competent knowledge of them. Hence it is,
that there can be but few men in the society who will have sufficient skill in the laws to
qualify them for the stations of judges. And making the proper deductions for the
ordinary depravity of human nature, the number must be still smaller of those who unite
the requisite integrity with the requisite knowledge. These considerations apprise us, that
the government can have no great option between fit character; and that a temporary
duration in office, which would naturally discourage such characters from quitting a
lucrative line of practice to accept a seat on the bench, would have a tendency to throw
the administration of justice into hands less able, and less well qualified, to conduct it
with utility and dignity. In the present circumstances of this country, and in those in
which it is likely to be for a long time to come, the disadvantages on this score would be
greater than they may at first sight appear; but it must be confessed, that they are far
inferior to those which present themselves under the other aspects of the subject.
Upon the whole, there can be no room to doubt that the convention acted wisely in
copying from the models of those constitutions which have established good behavior as
the tenure of their judicial offices, in point of duration; and that so far from being
blamable on this account, their plan would have been inexcusably defective, if it had
wanted this important feature of good government. The experience of Great Britain
affords an illustrious comment on the excellence of the institution.
PUBLIUS
Summary and Analysis of Essay 78
Summary:
Hamilton begins by telling the readers that this paper will discuss the importance of
an independent judicial branch and the meaning of judicial review. The Constitution
proposes the federal judges hold their office for life, subject to good behavior.
Hamilton laughs at anyone who questions that life tenure is the most valuable
advances in the theory of representative government. Permanency in office frees
judges from political pressures and prevents invasions on judicial power by the
president and Congress.
The judicial branch of government is by far the weakest branch. The judicial branch
posses only the power to judge, not to act, and even its judgments or decisions
depend upon the executive branch to carry them out. Political rights are least
threatened by the judicial branch. On occasion, the courts may unfairly treat an
individual, but they, in general, can never threaten liberty.
The Constitution imposes certain restrictions on the Congress designed to protect
individual liberties, but unless the courts are independent and have the power to
declare laws in violation of the Constitution null and void, those protections amount
to nothing. The power of the Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional leads
some people to assume that the judicial branch will be superior to the legislative
branch. Hamilton examines this argument, starting with the fact that only the
Constitution is fundamental law. To argue that the Constitution is not superior to the
laws suggest that the representatives of the people are superior to the people and
that the Constitution is inferior to the government it gave birth to. The courts are the
arbiters between the legislative branch and the people; the courts are to interpret
the laws and prevent the legislative branch from exceeding the powers granted to it.
The courts must not only place the Constitution higher than the laws passed by
Congress, they must also place the intentions of the people ahead of the intentions
of their representatives. This is not a matter of which branch is superior: it is simply
to acknowledge that the people are superior to both. It is futile to argue that the
court's decisions, in some instances, might interfere with the will of the legislature.
People argue that it is the function of Congress, not the courts, to pass laws and
formulate policy. This is true, but to interpret the laws and judge their constitution
are the two special functions of the court. The fact that the courts are charged with
determining what the law means does not suggest that they will be justified in
substituting their will for that of the Congress.
The independence of the courts is also necessary to protect the rights of individuals
against the destructive actions of factions. Certain designing men may influence the
legislature to formulate policies and pass laws that violate the Constitution or
individual rights. The fact that the people have the right to change or abolish their
government if it becomes inconsistent with their happiness is not sufficient
protection; in the first place, stability requires that such changes be orderly and
constitutional. A government at the mercy of groups continually plotting its downfall
would be a deplorable situation. The only way citizens can feel their rights are secure
is to know that the judicial branch protects them against the people, both in and
outside government, who work against their interests.
Hamilton cites one other important reason for judges to have life tenure. In a free
government there are bound to be many laws, some of them complex and
contradictory. It takes many years to fully understand the meaning of these laws and
a short term of office would discourage able and honest men from seeking an
appointment to the courts; they would be reluctant to give up lucrative law practices
to accept a temporary judicial appointment. Life tenure, modified by good behavior,
is a superb device for assuring judicial independence and protection of individual
rights.
Analysis
With a view toward creating a judiciary that would constitute a balance against
Congress, the Convention provided for the independence of the courts from
Congress. Hamilton opposes vesting supreme judicial power in a branch of the
legislative body because this would verge upon a violation of that "excellent rule,"
the separation of powers. Besides, due to the propensity of legislative bodies to party
division, there is "reason to fear that the pestilent breath of faction may poison the
fountains of justice." Hamilton, therefore, praises the Constitution for establishing
courts that are separated from Congress. He is pleased to note that to this
organizational independence there is added a financial one.
Another factor contributing to the independence of the judiciary is the judges' right
to hold office during good behavior. It is in connection with his advocacy of that
"excellent barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of that reprehensive body,"
that "citadel of the public justice," that Hamilton pronounces judicial review as being
part of the Constitution. Judicial review is another barrier against too much
democracy. Exercised by state courts before the Federal Convention met, and taken
for granted by the majority of the members of the Convention, as well as by the
ratifying conventions in the states, judicial review is expounded by Hamilton as a
doctrine reaching a climax and a conclusion in this Federalist paper.
Starting out from the premise that "a constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded
by the judged, as a fundamental law," Hamilton considers judicial review as a means
of preserving that constitution and, thereby, free government. To be more concrete,
when Hamilton considers the judiciary both as a barrier to the encroachments and
oppressions of the representative body and as the citadel of public justice, i.e., the
citadel for the protection of the individual's life, liberty, and property, he states that
judicial review means a curb on the legislature's encroachments upon individual
rights. Parallel to every denial of legislative power in essay seventy-eight goes an
assertion of vested rights.
Although he considers a power-concentration in the legislature as despotism,
Hamilton does not perceive a strong judiciary as a threat to free government. He
admits that individual oppression may now and then proceed from the courts, but he
is emphatic in adding that the general liberty of the people can never be endangered
from that quarter. When the judge unites integrity with knowledge, power is in good
hands. As the "bulwarks of a limited Constitution against legislative encroachments,"
they will use that power for the protection of the individual's rights rather than for
infringements upon those rights.
Through judicial review vested rights are protected not only from the legislature,
they are also protected from the executive. An executive act that is sanctioned by
the courts and since it is the duty of the judges to declare void legislative acts
contrary to the Constitution that is thus in conformity with the will of the people as
laid down in the Constitution, cannot be an act of oppression.
ADDITIONAL NOTES:
ESSAYS: ANSWERS
1. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “The Constitution belongs to the living and not the dead.”
Explain how the Constitution has endured for 200 years by:
a. Identifying examples of the Constitution’s flexibility and adaptability to changing
times.
b. Describing the amending and ratifying processes.
--necessary and proper or elastic clause gives the federal government the opportunity to
take action in areas not specifically delegated to it by the Constitution.
Constitution is subject to interpretation, Blacks and women (advancing the political
rights), Prohibition, Bootlegging and US treasury office “The Untouchables”
Oldest and one of the shortest constitutions, solid yet flexibility to changing times. The
ability to adapt to social, political, and economic changes
Amendments:
Ways of Amending the Constitution
Propose:
--By a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress
--By a specially called convention of 2/3 of state legislatures
Ratify
--By a 3/4ths vote of the state legislature
--By a specially called convention of 3/4th of the states
*The proposal can be matched with either one of the ratification processes
2. The United States has a representative form of government. Yet in many states,
people vote directly on legislative proposals.
a. Discuss the ways in which the people can vote directly on legislative provisions
b. Explain each process in detail
Initiative - Procedure whereby a certain number of voters may by petition propose a law
or constitutional amendment and have it submitted to the voters
Referendum Procedure for submitting to popular vote measures passed by the
legislature or proposed amendments to a state constitution
Recall Procedure for submitting to popular vote to removal of officials from office before
the end of their term.
3. In a federal system of government, the national (central) government shares power
with the state (and sub-divisional) governments.
a. Discuss and give examples of the specific and shared powers of the national and
state governments.
b. Describe, using historical evidence, what happens in the event of conflict
between the national and state governments
McCulloch v MD. The Supreme Court ruled that states cannot interfere with or tax the
activities of the federal government. National supremacy during times of conflict
Division of Powers in the Federal System
Federal Government
-Regulate interstate and foreign commerce
-establish armed forces
-declare war
-coin money
-regulate patents and copyright
-establish federal courts
-establish post offices
-establish standards of weights and measures
-admit new states
-pass laws necessary and proper for carrying out its other powers
Shared by Federal and State Government
-Lay and collect taxes
-Enforce the laws
-Borrow money
-Establish courts
-Provide for the general welfare
Powers Reserved for the States
-Regulate intrastate commerce
-Conduct elections
-Incorporate businesses
-Determine qualifications of voters
-Establish local governments
-Provide for the public safety and morals
Chapter 2 Assignment
1. Create a T-Chart and compare Jamestown and Plymouth.
2. Design a graphic organizer that displays your understanding of
colonial self-government
3. Create an annotated timeline of the road to the American Revolution.
4. Discuss in detail the main ideas of the Declaration of Independence
(Universal Truths, Natural Rights, Social Contract, etc)
5. Articles of Confederation (Graphic Organizer)
Weaknesses/Strengths-Accomplishments – Pros/Cons, Confederation,
1781-1789, etc.
6. Drafting the Constitution: News Article (describing the drafting of the
Constitution)
7. Profile the Delegates
8. Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey Plans
9. Discuss the Great Compromise and Three-Fifths Compromise
10. Explain: The Madisonian Model- Separation of Powers
The Madisonian Model- Checks and Balances
11. Convey your understanding of the Electoral College.
12. The final Document (Summarize/Simplify)
13. T-Chart: Federalists and Anti-Federalists
14. Read Federalist Papers #10, 51, & 78 and Explain.
15. Analyze and assess Beard’s thesis.
16. Why did the Founding Fathers add a Bill of Rights?
17. Create a Chart that displays your mastery of Amending the
Constitution.
18. Create a Chart that displays your mastery of presidential action,
executive agreements, judicial review, interpretation, custom, and usage.
US Government AP
Constitutional Underpinnings I
Test
1.
Disillusionment seems to stem from the
a. failure of the idea of democracy.
b. government does not seem to live up to expectations.
c. increasing levels of poverty.
d. continuation of racial and gender inequality.
2.
Registered voters directly elect which of the following?
I. The President and Vice President
II. Supreme Court Justices
III. Members of the Senate
IV. Members of the House of Representatives
a.
b.
c.
d.
I only.
III and IV only.
IV only.
II, III, and IV only.
3.
Political socialization is the process by which
a. political values are passed to the next generation.
b. the use of private property is regulated by the government.
c. children are trained for successful occupations.
d. governments communicate with each other.
4.
The system wherein citizens come together to discuss and pass laws and select their rulers is called
a. a republic.
c. direct democracy.
b. freedom.
d. representative democracy.
5.
The system wherein those who have governmental authority get and retain authority directly or
indirectly as a result of winning free elections in which all adult citizens are allowed to participate is
called
a. a republic.
c. direct democracy.
b. an authoritarian system.
d. representative democracy.
6.
According to public opinion research, which of the following individuals would be most likely to
hold liberal political views?
a. a middle aged black factory worker in a northeastern city.
b. a young white mid-western farmer.
c. a white female suburban teacher and mother of two.
d. a middle-aged Cuban business in Miami.
7.
The authors define the meaning of democracy as
a. a system of interacting values.
c. interdependent political structures.
b. interrelated political processes.
d. (all of the above)
8.
A government in which power is exercised by elected representatives of the people is a (an):
a. tyranny.
c. democracy.
b. republic.
d. federalist.
9.
All of the following are basic principles underlying the Constitution EXCEPT
a. federalism.
b. separation of powers and checks and balances.
c. Confederalism.
d. Checks and balances.
10.
Which of the following is an example of checks and balances, as established by the Constitution?
a. A requirement that states lower their legal drinking age to 18.
b. The requirement that presidential appointments to the Supreme Court be approved by the
Senate.
c. Media criticism of public officials during election campaigns.
d. The election of the President by the electoral college rather than by direct action.
11.
Conditions conducive to building and sustaining democracy include
a. high levels of education.
b. relative prosperity with a relatively equal distribution of income.
c. democratic consensus (general agreement).
d. (all of the above)
12.
Which of the following Federalist Papers argued for the separation of powers and federalism to
check the growth of factions, or special interest groups?
a. Federalist #78
c. Federalist #85
b. Federalist #51
d. Federalist #10
13.
The words "all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights; that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..." are from the
a. Mayflower Compact.
c. Declaration of Independence.
b. Virginia State Constitution.
d. the Constitution.
14.
Problems with the Articles of Confederation included
a. the lack of a national judiciary system.
b. lack of an executive branch.
c. inability to levy taxes to support the army and navy.
d. (all of the above)
15.
Special attention was focused on the problems inherent in the Articles of Confederation by
a. Shays' Rebellion.
b. the Boston Massacre.
c. the rebellion in Concord, Massachusetts.
d. (all of the above)
16.
The major theme of the Constitutional Convention was to
a. weaken an overly centralized government.
b. strengthen the central government to address the issues the Articles of Confederation did not.
c. maintain the Articles of Confederation correcting only its flaws.
d. ensure the passage of a Bill of Rights.
17.
Legislatures which have two houses, or chambers, are
a. unicameral.
c. replicate.
b. bicameral.
d. undemocratic.
18.
The plan that advocated a legislature with representation in both houses based on population or
wealth was called the
a. Virginia Plan.
c. New York Plan.
b. New Jersey Plan.
d. Great Compromise.
19.
The plan which advocated a single-house legislature where each state would have the same vote was
called the
a. Virginia Plan.
c. Connecticut Plan.
b. New Jersey Plan.
d. New Compromise.
20.
The plan, ultimately accepted as the Great Compromise, which called for one house in which each
state would have an equal vote and a second house in which representation would be based on population
was called the
a. Virginia Plan.
c. Connecticut Plan.
b. New Jersey Plan.
d. three-fifths compromise.
21.
The arrangement whereby slaves would be counted as a percentage of free persons was called the
a. Virginia Plan.
c. Connecticut Plan.
b. New Jersey Plan.
d. three-fifths compromise.
22.
The Constitutional Convention decided that the chief executive would be chosen by
a. the Senate.
c. popular vote.
b. the House.
d. the electoral college.
23.
Supporters of the new government who wrote in support of ratification called themselves
a. federalists.
c. compromisers.
b. anti-federalists.
d. nationalists.
24.
The Federalist Papers were written by all of the following EXCEPT
a. Thomas Jefferson.
c. James Madison.
b. Alexander Hamilton.
d. John Jay.
25.
The first system of government in the United States was based on a loose arrangement between the
states under the
a. Bill of Rights.
c. Constitution.
b. Articles of the Confederation.
d. Declaration of Independence.
26.
The authors list a number of values shared by most Americans. These include all of the following
EXCEPT
a. liberty.
c. education.
b. equality.
d. individualism.
27.
The term which stresses the importance of shared values such as individual freedom, equality,
private property, limited government and popular consent is
a. democracy.
c. liberalism.
b. conservatism.
d. classical liberalism.
28.
Americans tend to
a. distrust both local and federal government.
b. distrust the federal more than local government.
c. distrust local government more than federal government.
d. trust both local and federal governments.
29.
The idea that the ultimate power resides in the people is called
a. democracy.
c. vox populi.
b. human rights.
d. popular sovereignty.
30.
Purported causes of the Great Depression include all of the following EXCEPT
a. unrestrained capitalism.
c. unregulated markets.
b. antitrust legislation.
d. disparities of income.
31.
Most Americans believe that
a. there is too much power concentrated in the hands of a few big companies.
b. business corporations should be allowed to make as much profit as they can.
c. trickle-down economics is a viable economic strategy.
d. affirmative action programs should be discontinued.
32.
Franklin D. Roosevelt's 'Second Bill of Rights' was committed to
a. free speech and a free press.
c. fighting communism and socialism.
b. economic security and independence.
d. an American form of socialism.
33.
The American Dream is
a. a complex set of ideas about the economy and its relation to individuals.
b. about deeply held hopes and goals.
c. is rooted in an endorsement of capitalism.
d. (all of the above)
34.
The structure of a person's ideas or beliefs about the political system and the role of government is
called
a. an individual value system. c. ideology.
b. political culture.
d. prejudice.
35.
In modern American usage, liberalism refers to a belief in
a. limited government.
b. the welfare state.
c. democratic socialism.
d. the positive uses of government to bring about justice and equality of opportunity.
36.
The most important reference group for children learning about American political culture is the
a. family.
c. peer group.
b. school.
d. mass media.
37.
Bill Clinton signed the "Oprah Bill," designed to stop
a. violence in entertainment.
c. sexual harassment.
b. child abuse.
d. (none of the options)
38.
In the 2000 election, Bush characterized Gore as a(n)
a. diehard conservative.
b. radical far removed from the political center.
c. advocate of big government.
d. compassionate conservative.
39.
The major criticism of liberals is that they
a. are naive.
b. are misinformed.
c. are better at diagnosing than providing substantial policies and programs.
d. will destroy individual initiative and thereby economic growth.
40.
In contrast to liberals, conservatives want to keep government limited except in the area of
a. welfare.
c. defense.
b. education.
d. law and order.
41.
Conservatives believe that government should
a. maintain a framework of order within which other private institutions can operate effectively.
b. be limited to regulation of the economy.
c. support business through appropriate regulation.
d. be highly centralized.
42.
Conservatives tend to be opposed to
a. antitrust legislation.
b. environmental regulations.
c. trade regulations.
d. (all of the above)
43.
The Christian Coalition was founded by
a. Jimmy Carter.
c. Ralph Reed.
b. Pat Robertson.
d. Jesse Jackson.
44.
Which value is stressed by the Green Party in the U.S.?
a. agriculture which replenishes the soil
b. the integrity of natural systems
c. an energy efficient economy
d. (all of the above)
45.
The Libertarian Party would do away with
a. the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
b. the Central Intelligence Agency.
c. the Food and Drug Administration.
d. (all of the above)
46.
Conservatives have been criticized for
a. inconsistency.
b. insensitivity.
c. too much faith in the market economy.
d. (all of the above)
47.
American socialists tend to favor
a. limited government.
b. government ownership of all property.
c. an expanded role for government.
d. government control of all aspects of social welfare.
48.
Socialism is associated with
a. government ownership of key industries.
b. centralized government planning of the economy.
c. was advocated by Karl Marx.
d. all of the above.
49.
Libertarianism is associated with
a. individual liberty.
b. government responsibility.
c. government regulation of the economy and limited regulation of social programs.
d. support for education programs.
50.
While World War I and World War II strengthened positive views about the role of government, the
Vietnam War had the effect of
a. alienating government from the people.
b. creating a sense of disillusionment.
c. creating a chasm between the military and civilian institutions.
d. (very little real effect on public evaluation of government)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
b
b
a
c
d
a
d
b
c
b
d
d
c
d
a
b
b
a
b
c
d
d
a
a
b
c
d
b
d
b
a
b
d
c
d
a
b
c
d
c
a
d
b
d
d
d
c
d
a
b
Essay Questions:
1. List and explain the ways in which the Constitution corrected the weaknesses of the
Articles of Confederation.
2. When the Constitution was proposed in 1787, the Anti-federalists opposed its
ratification by the states. In response, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay
led the Federalist defense of the Constitution in The Federalists Papers.
a. List and explain the objections that the Anti-federalists had to the provisions of
the Constitution.
b. Describe and explain the arguments offered by the Federalists that encouraged
ratification by the states.
Lecture Notes:
This chapter describes how the principles of self- and limited government are
embodied in the Constitution and explains the tension between them. The
chapter’s main points are:
America during the colonial period developed traditions of limited
government and self-government. These traditions were rooted in
governing practices, philosophy, and cultural values.
The Constitution provides for limited government mainly by defining
lawful powers and dividing those powers among competing
institutions. The Constitution, with its Bill of Rights, also prohibits
government from infringing on individual rights. Judicial review is an
additional safeguard of limited government.
The Constitution in its original form provided for self-government
mainly through indirect systems of popular election of
representatives. The Framers’ theory of self-government was
based on the notion that political power must be separated from
immediate popular influences if sound policies are to result.
The idea of popular government—in which the majority’s desires
have a more direct and immediate impact on governing officials—
has gained strength since the nation’s beginning. Originally, the
House of Representatives was the only institution subject to direct
vote of the people. This mechanism has been extended to other
institutions and, through primary elections, even to the nomination
of candidates for public office.
The Constitution of the United States reflects the colonial and revolutionary
experiences of early Americans. Freedom from abusive government was a
reason for the colonies’ revolt against British rule, but the English tradition also
provided ideas about government, power, and freedom that were expressed in
the Constitution and, earlier, in the Declaration of Independence.
After declaring independence from Britain, America formed a central government
under the Articles of Confederation. Wary of governmental power because of the
colonial experience, the authors of the Articles created a very weak central
government. However, economic problems, national security concerns, and
internal disturbances soon demonstrated the need for a stronger central
government and led Congress to call a convention in 1787 to revise the Articles.
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia ignored that
directive, however, choosing instead to create a new political system for America.
The Constitution forged at that convention was designed to provide for a
government in which political power would be limited yet adequate to govern.
The Framers wanted to ensure that the government they were creating would not
itself be a threat to freedom. Delegates to the convention struggled with many
issues, especially how to allocate seats in Congress and how to deal with the
issue of slavery. A series of compromises were struck.
Ratification of the new Constitution was far from certain. Opponents of
ratification, known as Antifederalists, argued that the new government would be
able to oppress the people and infringe upon the states. Supporters of
ratification, the Federalists, pointed to the need for a stronger government and
the limitations upon it built into the Constitution. The Federalist Papers were
written to persuade people to accept the new Constitution, which eventually was
ratified. (See the OLC simulation, "Ratifying the Constitution," at
www.mhhe.com/patterson5/)
The Framers confined the national government to expressly granted powers and
also denied it certain specific powers. Other prohibitions on government were
later added to the Constitution in the form of stated guarantees of individual
liberties—the Bill of Rights. The most significant constitutional provision for
limited government, however, was a distribution of powers among the three
branches. The powers given to each branch enable it to act as a check on the
exercise of power by the others.
The Constitution, however, made no mention of how the powers and limits of
government were to be judged in practice. In its historic ruling in Marbury v.
Madison, the Supreme Court assumed the authority to review the constitutionality
of legislative and executive actions and to declare them unconstitutional and thus
invalid. The Constitution has also contributed to limited government, particularly
though its provisions for the separation of powers and its stated guarantees of
individual rights.
Since 1787, a major issue of American politics has been the public’s role in
governing. The Framers of the Constitution respected the idea of selfgovernment but distrusted popular majorities. They designed a government that
they felt would temper popular opinion and slow its momentum, so that the
public’s "true interest" (which includes a regard for the right and interests of the
minority) would guide public policy. Different methods were established to select
members of the House of Representatives and the Senate, the president, and
federal judges as a means of separating political power from momentary and
unreflecting majorities. The philosophy of representative democracy was
suggested in the writings of Burke, Locke, and Montesquieu and still has strong
advocates today.
Since the adoption of the Constitution, however, the public has gradually
assumed more direct control of its representatives, particularly through measures
affecting the way officeholders are chosen. Political parties, presidential voting
(linked to the Electoral College), and primary elections are among the devices
aimed at strengthening the majority’s influence. These developments are rooted
in the idea, deeply held by ordinary Americans, that the people must have
substantial direct control of their government if it is to serve their real interests.
For advocates of majority rule, the alternative is government by privileged
interest.
Today, the United States has a political system that is a model of popular rule but
it is also less democratic than some other political systems. Separation of powers
sometimes paralyzes the government’s ability to made quick and decisive
decisions, but the system also protects against abuses of power and against
hasty, unwise policies.
US Government AP
Constitutional Underpinnings II
1.
The system wherein citizens come together to discuss and pass laws and select
their rulers is called
a. a republic.
c.direct democracy.
b. freedom.
d. representative democracy.
2.
The words "all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable rights; that among them are life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness..." are from the
a. Mayflower Compact.
c.Declaration of Independence.
b. Virginia State Constitution.
d.the Constitution.
3.
Special attention was focused on the problems inherent in the Articles of
Confederation by
a. Shays' Rebellion.
c. the rebellion in Concord, Massachusetts.
b. the Boston Massacre.
d. Slavery in the United States.
4.
The Constitutional Convention decided that the chief executive would be chosen
by
a. the Senate.
c. popular vote.
b. the House.
d. the electoral college.
5.
The Constitution reflects the Founders' respect for ____ law, which implies a
sense of right and wrong.
a. formal
c. federal
b. natural
d. corporal
6.
Which of the following is closely associated with the 5th and 14th Amendments,
and protects citizens from the arbitrary denial of life, liberty, and property?
a. separation of powers.
c. judicial review.
b. checks and balances.
d. Due process.
7.
In a system of checks and balances
a. each branch has some authority over the others.
b. each branch is politically dependent upon the other.
c. there must be life-long appointments in the judiciary.
d. all branches of government must be elected at the same time.
8.
Powers maintained by the executive branch over the legislative and judicial branch
include
a. veto power.
b. direct appeals to the public.
c. nomination of officers of government and the judiciary.
d. (all of the above)
9.
Powers maintained by the legislative branch over the executive branch include
a. the ability to declare laws unconstitutional.
b. the right to pardon people convicted of federal crimes.
c. enforcing legislation.
d. confirmation of senior federal appointment.
10.
A strong role for federal courts was generally supported by
a. the Federalists.
c. Democrats.
b. Jeffersonian Republicans.
d. Republicans.
11.
A court order directing an official to perform an official duty is called a(n)
a. writ of certiorari.
c. writ of mandamus.
b. executive order.
d. impoundment.
12.
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court at the time of Marbury v Madison was
a. Oliver Wendell Holmes.
c. Robert Howard Taft.
b. John Marshall.
d. William Rehnquist.
13.
Presidential impoundment of funds is given as an example of
a. divided government.
c. political party power.
b. checks and balances.
d. judicial review.
14.
The Supreme Court's power of judicial review was established in the case of
a. Roe v. Wade.
c. Marbury v. Madison.
b. McCullouch v. Maryland.
d. Gibbons v. Ogden.
15.
Examples of expansion of the role of the electorate (particularly at the state level)
include all of the following EXCEPT
a. initiative.
c. recall.
b. referendum.
d. judicial nominations.
16.
Who presides over a Senate impeachment trial?
a. Majority Leader
c. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
b. Minority Leader
d. Speaker of the House of Representatives
17.
The sole power of impeachment is given to the
a. House of Representatives.
c. Supreme Court.
b. Senate.
d. President and the cabinet.
18.
The sole power to try impeachment is given to the
a. House of Representatives.
c. Supreme Court.
b. Senate.
d. Federal justices.
19.
The only two presidents to be impeached are
a. Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson.
b. Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon.
c. Richard Nixon and Andrew Johnson.
d. (none of the above)
20.
Only ___ amendments to the Constitution have been ratified.
a. 23
b. 25
c. 27
d. 31
In the Constitution as originally ratified in 1788, the provisions regarding which of
the following most closely approximate majoritarian, popular, and direct
democracy?
a. Election of the President.
21.
b. Confirmation of presidential appointments.
c. Ratification of treaties.
d. Election of members of the House of Representatives.
22.
American political culture is characterized by strong popular support for all of the
following EXCEPT
a. economic equality.
c. individual liberty.
b. limit government.
d. equality of opportunity.
23.
The idea of a flexible Constitution does NOT include
a. change in basic and timeless personal liberties.
b. change in interpretation.
c. change through informal methods.
d. responsiveness to changing technologies and values of the citizenry.
24.
The only method used thus far to propose amendments to the Constitution is
a. a two-thirds vote of both houses of Congress.
b. state conventions.
c. state legislatures.
d. popular mandate.
25.
After an amendment has been proposed, it must be ratified by the
a. House.
c. states.
b. Senate.
d. popular referendum.
26.
The attempt to return many functions to the state level has been called
a. a return to state control.
c. devolution revolution.
b. anti-federalism.
d. separation of powers.
27.
The number of governmental units in the United States numbers approximately
a. 50.
b. 250.
c.1,000.
d.85,000.
28.
The nationalist perspective suggests that the central government and the
government of states derives power from
a. the central government.
c. the Constitution.
b. state governments.
d. the people.
29.
The Federalist paper most clearly associated with the problems of factions and the
ideas of federalism is
a. The Federalist, No. 10. c. The Federalist, No. 68.
b. The Federalist, No. 58. d. The Federalist, No. 73.
30.
Which of the following best defines the constitutional interpretation of federalism?
a. The federal government and the states each have separate and mutually
exclusive roles and responsibilities; neither controls or effects the other.
b. The states have some powers reserved to them which they may exercise if the
Supreme Court permits.
c. the federal government and the states have separate but overlapping powers;
where these powers conflict the federal government prevails.
d. The states may only exercise those powers delegated to them by Congress.
31.
A return of fiscal resources and management responsibilities to the states in the
form of large block grants and revenue sharing and the idea that we should sort
out functions between national and state government is called
a. competitive federalism.
c. new federalism.
b. dual federalism.
d. permissive federalism.
32.
The term used to refer to a system that delivers governmental goods and services
to the people and calls for cooperation among various levels of government in
getting the job done is called
a. cooperative federalism.
c. new federalism.
b. marble cake federalism.
d. permissive federalism.
33.
The term which refers to a type of federalism in which all levels of government are
involved in a variety of issues and programs, rather than a type in which uniform
divisions are found between levels of government, is called
a. cooperative federalism.
c. new federalism.
b. marble cake federalism.
d. permissive federalism.
34.
The amendments to the Constitution that were ratified during Reconstruction were
primarily designed to
a. protect the rights of women against infringements of the federal government.
b. facilitate the rebuilding of the southern economy.
c. limit the power the President gained during the Civil War.
d. protect the rights of black citizens against infringements of state governments.
35.
The most clearly and specifically delegated powers found in the Constitution are
termed
a. expressed powers.
c. inherent powers.
b. implied powers.
d. assumed powers.
36.
The Constitutional base for the implied powers of Congress is
a. the Supremacy clause.
b. the necessary and proper clause.
c. the due process clause.
d. Article II.
37.
Examples of concurrent powers include all of the following EXCEPT the power to
a. tax citizens and businesses.
c. conduct elections.
b. establish courts.
d. protect civil rights.
38.
The first state to grant same-sex couples the same rights and protections of
married couples was
a. Oregon.
c. Georgia.
b. Vermont.
d. Massachusetts.
39.
The provision which ensures that state courts enforce civil judgments of the courts
of other states and accept their public records as valid is found in the
a. commerce clause.
c. privileges and immunities clause.
b. full faith and credit clause.
d. due process clause.
40.
When individuals charged with crimes have fled from one state to another, the
state to which they have fled is to deliver them to the proper officials upon the
demand of the executive authority of the state from which they fled. This process is
called
a. detention.
c. extradition.
b. arrest.
d. mandamus .
41.
In McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the Supreme Court established which of the
following principles?
a. The judicial branch cannot interfere in disputes between the President and
Congress.
b. The federal Bill of Rights places no limitations on the states.
c. States cannot interfere with or tax the legitimate activities of the federal
government.
d. Any branch of the federal government has the power to interpret the
Constitution.
42.
When a federal law or regulation takes over and precludes (disqualifies, discounts,
or over-rules) enforcement of a state or local law or regulation it is termed
a. dominance.
c. preemption.
b. supremacy.
d. intrusion.
43.
The three types of federal grants presently being administered are all of the
following EXCEPT
a. categorical formula grants.
c. revenue sharing grants.
b. project grants.
d. block grants.
44.
Funds appropriate for specific purposes, such as school lunches or the building of
highways or airports, which are allocated by formula and subject to detailed federal
conditions are
a. action grants.
c. categorical grants.
b. project grants.
d. block grants.
45.
The type of grant which provides federal funds to states for prescribed activities
such as welfare, child care, education, social services, preventive health, and
health services are
a. categorical formula grants.
c. critical grants.
b. project grants.
d. block grants.
46.
Political socialization is the process by which
a. the use of private property is regulated by the government.
b. political values are passed to the next generation.
c. public attitudes toward government are measured and reported.
d. children are trained for successful occupations.
47.
The reserved powers of the state governments can be best described as those
powers
a. implied in the Fifth Amendment.
b. listed in the Tenth Amendment.
c. granted to the states as part of the implied powers doctrine.
d. exercised by both national and state governments.
48.
The growth of the responsibilities of national government grew in all of the
following time periods EXCEPT
a. the Depression of 1930.
b. World War II of the late 1940s.
c. the Great Society programs of the 1960s.
d.
Reaganomics (especially the trickle down theory) of the 1980s.
49.
Centralists favor
a. state or local action over action at the national level.
b. national action over action at the state or local levels.
c. the idea of the Constitution as an interstate compact.
d. (all of the above)
50.
In contrast to liberals, conservatives want to keep government limited except in the
area of
a. welfare.
c. defense.
b. education.
d. law and order.
ESSAYS:
1. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “The Constitution belongs to the living and not the dead.”
Explain how the Constitution has endured for 200 years by:
c. Identifying examples of the Constitution’s flexibility and adaptability to changing
times.
d. Describing the amending and ratifying processes.
2. The United States has a representative form of government. Yet in many states,
people vote directly on legislative proposals.
c. Discuss the ways in which the people can vote directly on legislative provisions
d. Explain each process in detail
3. In a federal system of government, the national (central) government shares power
with the state (and sub-divisional) governments.
c. Discuss and give examples of the specific and shared powers of the national and
state governments.
d. Describe, using historical evidence, what happens in the event of conflict
between the national and state governments
1.
c
2.
c
3.
a
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
d
b
d
a
d
d
a
c
b
a
c
d
c
a
b
a
c
d
a
a
a
c
c
d
d
a
c
c
a
b
d
a
b
c
b
b
c
c
c
c
c
d
b
c
d
b
c
Political Spectrum
Left
Radical
Center
Liberal Moderate
Right
Conservative Reactionary
Radical--Favors extreme change to create an entirely
new social system
Liberal--Believes that government must take action to
change economic, political, and ideological policies that
may be unfair
Moderate -- Opposed to extreme or radical views or
measures. Middle of the road
Conservative—Seeks to keep in place the economic,
political, and ideological structures of society
Reactionary – favors extreme change to restore society
to an earlier state
Political Spectrum
Left
Center
Radical
Liberal
Moderate
Right
Conservative
Reactionary
Radical--Favors extreme change to create an entirely
new social system
Liberal--Believes that government must take action to
change economic, political, and ideological policies that
may be unfair
Moderate -- Opposed to extreme or radical views or
measures. Middle of the road
Conservative—Seeks to keep in place the economic,
political, and ideological structures of society
Reactionary – favors extreme change to restore society
to an earlier state
Articles of Confederation vs. the Constitution
The following chart compares some of the provisions of the Articles of
Confederation with those in the Constitution. It's important to note that most
commentators see the Articles period (1781-1789) as a weak one in terms of
governmental power. Whether that is a positive or negative for the United States depends
on one's point of view regarding the size and influence of a national government.
Libertarians would view the Articles period as the pinnacle of American freedom, while
those favoring a strong central government would see it as a failure.
Levying taxes
Articles of Confederation
Constitution
Congress could request states Congress has right to levy taxes on
to pay taxes
individuals
Federal courts
No system of federal courts
Court system created to deal with issues
between citizens, states
Regulation of
trade
No provision to regulate
interstate trade
Congress has right to regulate trade
between states
Executive
No executive with power.
President of U.S. merely
presided over Congress
Executive branch headed by President
who chooses Cabinet and has checks on
power of judiciary and legislature
Amending
document
13/13 needed to amend
Articles
2/3 of both houses of Congress plus 3/4
of state legislatures or national
convention
Representation
of states
Each state received 1 vote
regardless of size
Upper house (Senate) with 2 votes;
lower house (House of Representatives)
based on population
Congress could not draft
Congress can raise an army to deal with
Raising an army troops, dependent on states to
military situations
contribute forces
Interstate
commerce
No control of trade between
states
Interstate commerce controlled by
Congress
Disputes
between states
Complicated system of
arbitration
Federal court system to handle disputes
Sovereignty
Sovereignty resides in states
Constitution the supreme law of the
land
Passing laws
9/13 needed to approve
legislation
50%+1 of both houses plus signature of
President
The Federalist Papers (1787-1789)
THE FOUNDING FATHERS
Important Terms, People and Events
Terms
Anti-Federalists - As opposed to Federalists, people that feared a strong central government, supported
states' rights, and opposed ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Anti-federalists insisted that a Bill of Rights
must be included in the Constitution to protect individual's rights against a powerful central government. Antifederalists typically were members of the poorer classes, but also included patriots Thomas Jefferson,
Patrick Henry, James Monroe, and Richard Henry Lee. Anti-federalists strongly opposed the ratification of
the U.S. Constitution in Virginia and New York.
Articles of Confederation - The document that served as the first official constitution of the United States
from 1781 through 1789. The Articles of Confederation dictated a loose organization of 13 independent
states, joined together with equal representation in a Congress, in order to provide for the common defense.
The Articles proved too weak to effectively govern the young nation, however, and delegates meeting at the
Annapolis Convention in 1786 recommended that a new convention be called to discuss revision of the
Articles. SparkNote on the Articles of Confederation.
Confederacy - A confederacy is a form of government in which independent states are loosely joined,
typically for common defense. Each independent state maintains power over the majority of its own affairs.
Federalists - As opposed to anti-Federalists, people that favored a strong central government, feared too
much power in the hands of the masses, and strongly supported the U.S. Constitution. Federalists were
typically members of the cultured and propertied classes, and included Alexander Hamilton, James
Madison, and John Jay. The Federalist perspective was codified in the form of 85 essays that appeared in
New York newspapers between 1787 and 1788, and later published as The Federalist.
Ratification - To approve or accept an official or legal document. Article VII of the U.S. Constitution states
that 9 states must ratify the document before it became the official law of the land.
U.S. Constitution - The official document that is the basis of the U.S. Government. The U.S. Constitution
was officially put into effect on March 4, 1789 and has been in effect, with some amendments, ever since.
SparkNote on the U.S. Constitution
People
Alexander Hamilton - Beginning his political career through a close military association with George
Washington in the Continental Army, Hamilton soon distinguished himself as a strong proponent of
federalism. He represented New York at the Annapolis Convention, and participated as a delegate to the
Constitutional Convention at which he proposed a tremendously strong centralized government with a
president who served for life. When the U.S. Constitution was delivered to the states for ratification,
Hamilton played an integral role to pass the document in New York State through his joint authorship of a
series of persuasive essays called the Federalist Papers. He served as Secretary of the Treasury during
Washington's presidency and distinguished himself through his strong financial policy and leadership. He
died as a result of a duel fought with Aaron Burr in 1804, thus depriving the Federalist Party of its strongest
leader.
John Jay - John Jay was the most moderate of the three authors of The Federalist, having resisted
independence from England until the Declaration of Independence. After the formal dedication of war, Jay
was a devoted statesman and foreign ambassador, serving in New York State as Chief Justice, as delegate
to the Confederation Congress, as one of the negotiators for the Treaty of Paris, and as ambassador to
Spain. Although Jay was struck with a bout of rheumatism that prevented him from writing a significant
portion of the federalist essays, he worked closely with Alexander Hamilton throughout the ratification
process in New York to spread the federalist ideas. He later served as Chief Justice of the United States.
James Madison - James Madison was a delegate from Virginia to both the Annapolis Convention and the
Constitutional Convention who strongly clamored for a vigorous and powerful central government. Prior to
attending the Constitutional Convention, Madison prepared two papers on government, A Study of Ancient
and Modern Confederacies and Vices of the Political System of the United States, from which he drew most
of the ideas for the plan of government that was proposed on May 29th, 1787. Because of his central role in
creating the U.S. Constitution, and because of the diligence with which he maintained records during the
Convention, he is known as "the father of the Constitution." He faced off against Patrick Henry in the Virginia
debate over ratification, and contributed his nationalist arguments, along with Hamilton and Jay, to the series
of federalist propaganda compiled in The Federalist. Later in his political career, he moved away from the
federalist political party and became a strong supporter of the Jeffersonian Republicans. Madison followed
Jefferson as the fourth president of the United States.
Publius - “Public man” The name used by all three authors of The Federalist to conceal their true identity.
Publius referred to the legendary Publius Valerius Puplicolo, the founder of republican government in
ancient Rome.
Events
Annapolis Convention - Held in September 1786 at the request of Virginia, this meeting of the states
aimed to improve the uniformity of commerce. Only 12 delegates participated, including Alexander Hamilton
and James Madison. Sensing a statewide agreement on the importance of revising the Articles of
Confederation, this convention resolved to call another statewide convention in May of 1787. This
convention would become known as the Constitutional Convention.
Constitutional Convention - Scheduled to begin on May 14, 1787 in Philadelphia PA, the Constitutional
Convention progressed through the summer to establish a new form of government as described by the U.S.
Constitution. Although the convention was called for the purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation,
delegates from 12 of the 13 states (Rhode Island was absent) expressed an overwhelming interest in a
totally new, and stronger, form of central government. Upon ratification of the U.S. Constitution in 1789, this
agreed upon form of government was put into effect and has operated as the government of the United
States ever since.
Ratification of the U.S. Constitution - Article VII of the U.S. Constitution indicates that the document
would officially go into effect upon the ratification of 9 of the 13 state ratifying conventions. When New
Hampshire, the 9th state to do so, formally ratified the Constitution, the Constitutional Convention appointed
a committee to begin planning the transition to the new government. Planning for the new government was
underway even before Virginia, New York, North Carolina and Rhode Island had formally approved of the
government plan.
Shays' Rebellion - Daniel Shays organized farmers throughout New England to protest legislation that
increased taxes and demanded immediate debt-repayment. When the state legislature refused to respond,
Shays and his armed followers closed the courts in Western Massachusetts in protest of foreclosed
properties. The rebellion came to a head when Shays was defeated while trying to seize a federal arsenal of
weapons in Springfield, MA on January 25, 1787. This rebellion demonstrated the weaknesses of the
Articles of Confederation, and convinced many states of the need for a stronger central government.
Federalist #10: More of the same.
In brief: You can't eliminate the causes of faction without eliminating freedoms.
Since factions will exist, we need to mitigate them. The constitution does so, both
by its (federal and representative) institutions and by the larger polity that
unification would create.
The Problem of Factions
Factions--a catch-all term for what we might call "special interests," "political
parties," and pressure groups like the Moral Majority--worried Madison. If a
faction grew large enough, it could impose its will on an entire nation, resulting
in a tyranny of the majority.
Eliminating Factions
Madison argues that we cannot eliminate factions. To do so would require either
denying civil liberties (worse than having factions) or enforcing conformity
(impracticable). Factions are natural and the most common cause (according to
Madison) is the unequal distribution of property.
However, even if we can't remove the causes of factionalism, we can mitigate the
effects. Madison identifies both institutional and societal means of doing so.
Institutional Solutions
A representative form of government mitigates the effects of factionalism better
than direct democracy would. Unlike the masses who reign under direct
democracy, elected representatives are unlikely to be tempted by temporary
passions because representatives must balance all the competing demands placed
on them by various constituencies.
Furthermore, the Constitution's two-tiered (i.e. federal) government also helps
mitigate this dilemma because state and local legislatures handle local issues,
leaving only certain policy issues to the national government.
Societal Solutions
Besides these institutional solutions, the Constitution would also increase the size
of the American republics by combining them into a single large polity. Larger
republics have a greater number of interests and parties than smaller ones,
diluting the effect of any one faction. Thus, a national union has advantages over
smaller (state) republics, in that a faction in one state is unlikely to spread to
other states. (See also Federalist #9 on these points.)
Importance Today
These arguments were reflected in the later debates about pluralism. See Truman
(1971) for context.
Federalist #51: "Men are not angels."
Madison continues the theme discussed in Federalist #47-50: The importance of
checks and balances.
If men were angels, he writes, no government would be necessary. Because men
are not angels, government is necessary--but this creates a paradox. We must
give our representatives sufficient power to govern us, yet prevent them from
using this power against us. After all, we cannot assume that our representatives
will be any more angelic than the rest of us. Some have dubbed this "Madison's
dilemma" (e.g. Kiewiet and McCubbins 1991).
Madison sees the answer to this paradox in the Constitution's separation of
powers. Each branch (judicial, legislative, and executive) has ways to limit (i.e.
"check") the power of the other branches--likewise, each branch has ways to
resist encroachments by the others. The self-interested ambitions held by
members of Congress lead them to counter the ambitions of the president and the
courts. "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition," Madison writes. Giving
each branch a check on the other is central to the Constitution's strength; these
balances and checks ensure that the constitutional structures will be selfenforcing.
Furthermore, this design divides those seeking power in two ways. First, it
separates authority between states and the center (federalism). Second, it
separates competencies within the national government (separate executive,
legislative, and judicial branches). Not only can one branch of the federal check
the others, but the states can check the central government.
Moreover, dividing up power into so many pieces helps mitigate the problem of
factionalism (see Federalist #10). Factions would have trouble taking control of
the entire government apparatus. This multiple division of authority "will render
an unjust combination of a majority on the whole very improbable, if not
impracticable." Seldom would the majority embrace "any other principles than
those of justice and the general good." For example, the president with his veto,
allied with the Senate, can prevent the House (seen at the time as the most
dangerous branch) from taking over.
Federalist #78: The judicial system.
Critics questioned the Constitution's stipulation that judges should have life
tenure (assuming good behavior). Hamilton argues that life tenure is not only
acceptable, but requisite.
First, judges must be able to combine knowledge of the laws with integrity.
Second, they must not be afraid to cross the other branches, particularly the
legislative. Indeed, one of the courts' most important responsibilties will be to
determine whether the legislative branch oversteps its Constitutionallyprescribed limits with a particular statute. Independence is absolutely essential
for this balancing to take place, and only life tenure ensures complete
independence.
The Constitution
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After students have read and studied this chapter, they should be able to:

Explain the impact of events in the early settlements, including Jamestown (representative
assembly) and Plymouth (social contract) on later political developments in the colonies.

Trace the events and circumstances that led to the Revolutionary War.

Explain the reasons for British attempts to raise revenue.

Describe the colonial response:

o
Boston Tea Party
o
First Continental Congress
o
Second Continental Congress
o
Common Sense
Explain the key ideas in the Declaration of Independence, including the concepts of natural
rights and consent of the governed

Explain the development of the Articles of Confederation.

Explain the structure of the government created under the Articles of Confederation,
including Congress.

Explain the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation (dependence upon the good will of
states, the inability to tax or support a militia, the need for unanimous approval of
amendments).

Explain the impact of Shays’ Rebellion.

Summarize the events leading to the calling of the Constitutional Convention.

Explain the problem of representation in Congress, including the Virginia and New Jersey
plans.

Describe the Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise.

Explain the attempts at the distribution of power (separation of powers, checks and balances,
and the Electoral College).

Describe the historical context surrounding the drafting and ratification of the Constitution,
including the motivations of the founders.

Describe the Bill of Rights.

Detail the ways in which Constitutional amendments are proposed and ratified.

Describe the informal ways in which Congress, the president, and the courts can change the
Constitution.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION
Why did the British place restrictions on the colonies?
Does it matter how the term “people,” as used in the Declaration of Independence, is defined?
Did the members of the Second Continental Congress mean all people? What of the rights of
women? What of the rights of Native Americans? What of the rights of slaves?
What was one of the major deletions of Jefferson’s first draft of the Declaration of Independence?
Why was this provision deleted? Does the deletion of the condemnation of slavery statement
reduce the impact of the concept of “inalienable rights?” Remember that inalienable means
incapable of being transferred to a new owner.
One of the most important powers of a government is to raise revenue. What actions can a
government take without money? How does a government make money?
What was the major reason for the Electoral College? (Hint: It makes the president independent
of Congress.) Would it make a major difference if Congress selected the president, as some of
the delegates advocated? How does the Electoral College demonstrate the founders’ suspicion
of mass democracy?
The Constitution was not made public until September 17, 1787. The public had no input as to
what the document would include. Furthermore, the Constitution violated the provisions in
the Articles of Confederation for alterations to the government. What would public reaction
be today if Congress passed a major legislative proposal where the public had no
forewarning? Would it be difficult for Congress to persuade the public such legislation was in
the public’s best interest? What would be the reaction of the media and political leaders at the
state level to decisions that violated the Constitution?
Explain the delicacy of the issue of slavery for the men at the Constitutional Convention, examine
the manner in which the Framers dealt with the matter and ask your students whether the
Framers should be viewed as gutless hypocrites or brilliant pragmatists.
What would have occurred if one or more of the states had rejected the Constitution? If a large
state like New York or Virginia had voted to reject the Constitution, would the United States
have taken economic and/or political sanctions against such a state? Could a single state have
managed to survive outside the union of states? (Rhode Island could be an example.)
How difficult is it to amend the Constitution? How difficult should it be to make alterations in the
Constitution? What are the problems if a constitution is easy to amend? What are the
problems if a constitution is difficult to amend? How can the Constitution take on new
meanings without formal amendments?
Have your students discuss this question: What should be the subject matter of the TwentyEighth Amendment? Should it address a social issue such as same-sex marriage or abortion?
Should it restructure the manner in which government operates, such as establishing term
limits or altering the power of the Supreme Court? Explain the reasons we have amended the
Constitution in the past and how possible amendments compare with the ones we have made
a part of the Constitution.
Have your students discuss this question: Is it time for us to hold a second constitutional
convention?
What would have happened without the case of Marbury v. Madison? Would the concept of
judicial review have come about? Why is judicial review important?
Which amendments have served to make the Constitution more “democratic?”
What would the founders say about the ability of the President to use a line-item veto on
legislation passed by Congress?
What would Madison think about interest groups in modern society?
Would Madison approve of the current two-party system that controls virtually all levels of
government in the United States?
BEYOND THE BOOK
This chapter describes the Constitution in historical context, rather than examining the particular
provisions of the document in detail. That is a choice that provides a body of insights, but not
the only possible choice. If you wish, you can spend some time on a detailed analysis. The
commentary imbedded in the text of the Constitution that we provide in an appendix to the
chapter may be helpful in doing this.
Why did England leave the colonies alone during the century after the first colonial foundations?
The answer is, in part, because England was distracted by its Civil War. Further, the winners
of the Civil War were English Puritans who were sympathetic to the religious beliefs of the
colonists, and for that reason alone, unlikely to revoke their practical autonomy. A final point
is that initially, at least, the colonies had little economic importance, especially compared to
the sugar-producing islands of the West Indies.
A confederation is a difficult concept for most modern Americans to grasp. We have come to
think of the United States as a large political unit that has secondary levels of smaller political
units (that is, state and local governments). What exists today is a vastly different form of
government than what existed under the Articles of Confederation. A modern confederation
might look something like the European Union (EU). If you wish, you could provide some
details about the EU as an example of a confederation.
The birth of the nation is linked to the date 1776. However, the government as provided by the
Constitution did not begin until 1789. Many events occurred between the Revolution and the
adoption of the Constitution over a thirteen-year time frame. One way to illustrate this point
is to subtract the following:
1789
2006 (or the current year)
- 13
- 13
1776
1992
There have been dramatic changes in the world in the last thirteen years, changes that no one
could have correctly predicted thirteen years ago. The same was true for the changes the
people in United States encountered in the thirteen years from 1776 to 1789.
One of the key questions asked by foreign observers is why the United States did not adopt a
parliamentary system. After all, they had an example of it in front of them in the form of the
British parliament, and other former British possessions such as Canada and Australia
adopted such a system. To raise this topic for discussion, it would be necessary to describe, at
least briefly, to your students what a parliamentary system is, because many of them may be
unclear on the definition (unified government, executive chosen by parliament). Given the
definition, and given the revolutionary-era distrust of powerful governors and preference for
the legislature, might it have been reasonable to establish a weak executive chosen by the
legislature? Such a system does not seem to have commanded much thought, however. In the
end, having the governor chosen by the people seemed a better way to control the aspirations
of holders of that office.
A division of powers clearly was not just Madison’s idea, but a concept with wide support. We
mention Montesquieu as a source of these ideas, and his idealized (and somewhat fallacious)
vision of the British constitution as representing the tripartite division doubtless had impact.
You could, however, consider making Bernard Bailyn’s point, from The Ideological Origins
of the American Revolution, that the true conduit of republican ideas to the colonists was a
host of minor pamphleteers in England, none of whom are famous today.
Did most Americans support ratification of the Constitution? Most of the delegates to the
Constitutional Convention were professionals (33 were lawyers) who were well educated and
represented various economic interests. (If we were to analyze the demographic backgrounds
of the members of the current Congress and the state legislatures, we would also find many of
the same characteristics as those of the founders.) Was the Constitution truly favored by the
majority? If we count all the people who participated in comparison to the adult population,
the answer would be no. However, if we ask which politician is favored by a majority of the
public today the answer would be none. Even a very popular senator who receives 70% of the
vote cast in an election cannot claim to be favored by a majority of the public because less
than half of the adult population participates in general elections.
CHAPTER OUTLINE
I. The Colonial Background.
Conditions in the early English settlements were unimaginable by today’s standards. Why
were so many people willing to relocate to America? How important was the concept of
limited self-government?
A. Separatists, the Mayflower, and the Compact. The first New England colony was
established in 1620. The people were dissatisfied with the Church of England and sought
a place where they could practice their religious beliefs. The compact they formed set
forth the idea of consent of the governed.
B. More Colonies, More Government. People in each of the colonies became accustomed to
making decisions that affected the internal order of the colony. While each colony had
only limited authority to make decisions, in practice most governmental actions that
affected the people were made within the colony. The colonies were not really united as
a political force before the First Continental Congress (1774). Each colony was separate
with its own decision-making government.
II. British Restrictions and Colonial Grievances
In 1763 the British Parliament began to pass laws that treated the colonies as a unit. The
major reason for these laws was to raise revenue to help pay off the war debt incurred during
the French and Indian Wars (1756-1763).
III. The Colonial Response: The Continental Congresses
A. The First Continental Congress. The colonists’ began to gradually realize they were
similar in many respects and that as a political unit they would have more influence with
Parliament. Still the focus of these political meetings was to restore the political
structure that was in existence before the passage of legislation affecting the internal
operations of each colony by Parliament. Had the Crown and Parliament relented on
many of their demands it is possible the Declaration of Independence would never have
been issued.
B. The Second Continental Congress. This is the Congress that made Washington the
general in chief and pursued the Revolutionary War.
IV. Declaring Independence
A. The Resolution of Independence. A brief precursor to the Declaration.
B. July 4, 1776—the Declaration of Independence
1. Universal truths: “We hold these Truths . . . “
2. Natural Rights and a Social Contract. People have natural rights including life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. An important component of the Declaration of
Independence was the concept of a social contract, which came from the experiences
of the formers of the Mayflower Compact. Like that compact more than 200 years
before, The Declaration of Independence was based on the idea of consent of the
governed, and that governments had the responsibility to protect the natural rights of
its citizens. If the government failed to do so, the people had the right to revolt.
C. The Rise of Republicanism
Republican as used here must be carefully distinguished from the current Republican Party.
While republicans were opposed to rule by the British, they were also opposed to rule by any
central authority. They were even skeptical of a permanent union of the states. Each state
was seen as the sovereign authority and the only legitimate ruling force.
V. The Articles of Confederation: Our First Form of Government
States retained most of the power and the central government had a very limited role in the
governing process. The loyalty most citizens had was to their state first and foremost.
A. Accomplishments under the Articles. The primary reason for the establishment of the
Articles was to organize the states so they could defeat the British forces and gain
independence from Britain. Once independence was granted, there was less pressure on
the states to organize for the collective good.
B. Weaknesses of the Articles. The lack of a strong central authority to resolve disputes
between the states, and to organize the states for the collective good, including the
organization of a militia, was crucial to the development of the Constitutional
Convention.
C. Shays’ Rebellion and the Need for Revision of the Articles. Events such as Shays’
Rebellion convinced many political leaders that the national government, under the
Articles of Confederation, and individual state governments were incapable of resolving
the most pressing problems. The solution appeared to be the establishment of a stronger
central government.
VI. Drafting the Constitution
A. Who Were the Delegates? Establishing a stronger central government would prove to be
a very difficult task. A major obstacle was the Republicans, who opposed any
centralization of power. Those who favored a stronger government became known as
Federalists. However, there was no agreement among the Federalists concerning the
structure and division of power for this new government.
B. The Working Environment: heat, humidity, swarms of flies and secrecy.
C. Factions among the Delegates. The beliefs of the delegates ranged from the nearmonarchism of Hamilton to definite decentralized republicanism. Some of these last
people left when they saw the federalist tenor of the proceedings.
D. Politicking and Compromises.
1. The Virginia Plan. This was actually fairly close to a parliamentary system, with
power concentrated in a lower house that was to choose the executive. The major
problem with it was that representation was strictly by population, to the
disadvantage of the small states.
2. The New Jersey Plan. A one state, one vote plan that would have created a relatively
weak central government. Again, the executive was to be elected by the Congress.
3. The “Great Compromise.” The Great Compromise was a compromise between more
populous states, which advocated representation based on population (the Virginia
Plan) and the small states, which advocated equal representation for each state (the
New Jersey Plan). The Great Compromise (or the Connecticut Plan) provided for a
bicameral legislature with one house based on population, the other with equal
representation for each state. In this plan, Congress did not choose the president.
4. The Three-Fifths Compromise. Another compromise concerned the issue of slavery.
Northern states wanted to ban the importation of slaves, while southern states did
not. Southern states wanted slaves counted in the population for the purposes of
determining the number of members each state sent to the House of Representatives.
The Three-Fifths Compromise provided that 3/5 of the slaves would be counted (or
each slave would count as 3/5 of a person. It also decided that Congress would not
be able to ban the importation of slaves until 1808.)
5. Other Issues. To the benefit of the agricultural South, export taxes were banned. As
a compromise, both the president and the Senate had a role in choosing the
membership of the Supreme Court.
E. Working toward Final Agreement.
1. The Madisonian Model—Separation of Powers. The legislative, executive, and
judicial powers were to be independent of each other.
2. The Madisonian Model—Checks and Balances. Each of the three branches was to
check the others. The founders produced a government that did have considerably
more power than under the Articles of Confederation. However, it is also clear that
these men were distrustful of those who would hold this power and of the people
who would select the governmental officials. Power was divided between the three
major branches and each branch was encouraged to confront the other two branches.
This idea was based on the assumption that “ambition must be made to counteract
ambition.” Since each branch of government would attempt to gain more power,
each branch would serve to check the power of the other two branches.
3. The Executive. An Electoral College meant that the president was not to be chosen
by Congress, but not by a popular vote, either.
VII. The Final Document
A summary of the results: popular sovereignty, a republican government, a limited
government, separation of powers, and a federal system where both the national and the state
governments each have their own sphere of influence.
VIII.
The Difficult Road to Ratification
A. The Federalists Push for Ratification.
1. The Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were an attempt to persuade the
public to support the new form of government. Federalist #10 and Federalist #51
(see Appendix C in the text) provide an excellent view of James Madison’s
political theory concerning human nature. Madison’s ideas are as relevant today as
they were in 1787.
2. The Anti-Federalist Response. Those opposed to the Constitution looked to the
fact that it was written by aristocrats and would create an overbearing central
government hostile to personal liberty.
B. The March to the Finish. The vote by the Virginia ratification convention was essential
and somewhat close. The New York vote was even closer and put the Constitution “over
the top.” At this point, North Carolina and Rhode Island had little choice but to join.
C. Did the Majority of Americans Support the Constitution?
1. Beard’s Thesis. Historian Charles Beard argued that the Constitution was put
through by an undemocratic elite intent on the protection of property.
2. State Ratifying Conventions. These conventions were elected by a strikingly small
part of the total population.
3. Support Was Probably Widespread. Still, the defense of property was a value that
was by no means limited to the elite. The belief that the government under the
Articles was dangerously weak was widespread among all classes.
IX. The Bill of Rights
A. A “Bill of Limits.” The package was assembled by Madison, who culled through almost
two hundred state suggestions.
B. No Explicit Limits on State Government Powers. Contrary to popular belief, the Bill of
Rights did not apply to state governments. The restrictions were applicable only to the
national government until the 14th amendment incorporated some of these rights. Even
though these restrictions were only applicable to the national government, they were
nevertheless still very important for the protection of the people.
X. Altering the Constitution: The Formal Amendment Process
The founders realized the Articles of Confederation were too difficult to alter. Therefore, the
amendment process to the Constitution was made less difficult, but it still would be a
rigorous process. The basic reasoning for this was that every government needs to be able to
cope with new and unforeseen problems and changes in the original document would be
necessary. However, any change should be taken with extreme caution. If the process to
amend the Constitution is rigorous, there should be ample time to consider the merits of such
a change.
A. Many Amendments Proposed, Few Accepted. How difficult is it to amend the
Constitution? From 1789 through 2002, 27 amendments passed, which represents one
amendment every 7.8 years—a misleading ratio since 10 of those amendments came
within the first four years. From 1791 through 2002 there have only been 17
amendments, a statistic which averages one amendment every 12.4 years. Although
there are always numerous recommendations for alterations to the Constitution, few of
these recommendations, especially controversial ones, have a realistic chance of success.
B. Limits on Ratification. Recent amendments have usually been accompanied by time
limits for ratification, though this is not a Constitutional requirement.
C. The National Convention Provision. Such a convention could be called and could
rewrite the entire Constitution. Naturally, many people find this possibility frightening.
The product of such a convention, however, would have to be ratified by the states in the
same way as any amendment.
XI. Informal Methods of Constitutional Change
While it is very difficult to amend the Constitution, the Constitution has changed through
interpretation. Since the case of Marbury v. Madison, the federal courts have made major
decisions concerning the meaning of the Constitution.
A. Congressional Legislation. Such interpretation has not been limited to the federal
judiciary. Both the legislative and executive branches have interpreted the Constitution.
Once an interpretation has been made and there is no challenge to this type of action,
there has been a change in the meaning of the Constitution.
B. Presidential Actions. These actions can affect the interpretation of the Constitution as
well.
C. Judicial Review. Key concept: the power of the courts to declare a law or action
unconstitutional.
1. Not a Novel Concept. It was based on English and colonial traditions.
2. Allows the Court to Adapt the Constitution. The rejection of “separate but equal”
(Jim Crow laws) is an example.
D. Interpretation, Custom, and Usage. Ultimately, the Constitution is not just the short
document in the appendix to Chapter 2, but the entire body of judicial and other
understandings that have emerged to give it life.
XII. Features
A. What If . . . Roe v. Wade Were Overturned?
The overturning of Roe v. Wade would not signal the end of abortion as a practice in this
nation, but rather would shift the debate to the states. South Dakota enacted
legislation intended to force the Supreme Court to reconsider Roe.
B. Politics and Diversity—Could the Founders Have Banned Slavery Outright?
The banning of slavery would have been a difficult endeavor, given that even the most
anti-slavery founders valued national unity above all else, and the fact that many southern
delegates would have bolted rather than accept limits on the institution.
C. Beyond Our Borders—Foreign Laws and Judicial Review.
An exploration of whether and to what extent international law and the practices of other
nations should be used by the Supreme Court in interpreting the U.S. Constitution.
Burns/Wilson Notes:
Ch. 2 The Living Constitution
--took effect 1789
--shortest, oldest,
--4543 words --each generation reinterprets and renews
--adaptable and flexibility
Natural law --lave that defines right from wrong that is higher than human law
Read paragraph p. 25 for introduction
Checking power with power
--Framers wanted a stronger and more effective national government than the Articles of
Confederation, but they realize the people would not accept too much control
--Efficiency and order were critical but liberty was more important
--they allotted power toe the national government and reserved the rest to the states, but
added additional means to limit the national government
it called for Free and fair elections enabled voters to throw out of office those who abuse
power but the Founders did not completely trust the people’s judgement.
The constitution also deprive minorities of their rights
Separation of Powers—distribution of constitutional authority among three branches of
national government, with the legislative branch making law, executive applying and
enforcing the law, and the judiciary interpreting the law. The dispersion of power was
necessary to avoid tyranny/abuse of power. Separation was not enough and a checking
system was necessary.
Checks and balances constitutional grant of powers that enables each of the three
branches of government to check some acts of the others and therefore ensure that no
branch can dominate. Each branch has a role in the actions of the others see figure 2-1
--Vetoes- the president has vetoed over 2500 acts of Congress. Congress has overridden
presidential vetoes more than 100 times
--judicial review- The Supreme Court has ruled 155 congressional acts or parts
unconstitutional.
--impeachemnt-The house of representatives has impeached 17 federal officials, 2
presidents, and 15 federal judges; of these, the Senate has convicted 7 judges but has not
convicted 7 judges but has not convicted a president
--confirmation- the Senate has refused to confirm 9 cabinet nominations, and many other
cabinet and subcabinet apportment were withdrawn because of likely Senate rejection
More examples: The Supreme Court can declare laws passed by Congress and signed by
the president unconstitutional, but the presidents appoints the justices and all federal
judges with the Senate’s approval.
The president administers the laws but Congress provides money. Senate and House
have an absolute veto power over each other in the enactment of a law, because both
houses must approve bills
=Each branch then has some authority over the others, yet each is independent of the
others.
Voters in each local district choose members of the House, voters in each state choose
Senators, the presidents elects all voters, presidents appoint federal judges to lifetime
positions.
MODIFICATIONS OF CHECKS AND BALANCES
1. Rise of National Political Parties
-political parties can serve as unifying factors helping to bridge the separation of powers
Yet if one party controls the Congress and the other the White House (divided
government) generally the case since WWII. In this case parties may intensify checks
and balances rather that moderate them. Divided government may lead to so much
competition between the legislative and executive branches “each institution protecting
and promoting itself” As a result, they are battles over presidential impoundment of
funds appropriated by Congress, budget gridlock, and angry/hostile confirmation
hearings over presidential appointments. Presidents blame members of congress and
congress blames presidents.
Framers wanted the president to be chosen by the Electoral College—wise, independent
citizens free from popular passions and hero worship—rather than by ordinary citizens.
Expanding the electorate: 1. initially only white property owning males could vote now
all citizens over the age of 18. 2. direct primaries voters elect party nominees for the
House and Senate and even for president; 3. initiatives—permitting the voters in about
half the states to propose and vote on laws 4. referendums allows voters to reconsider
actions of the legislature 5. recall voters remove elected state and local officials from
office
2.--Establishment of agencies designed to exercise legislative, executive, and judicial
functions --- Beginning in 1887, Congress created independent regulatory commissions
such as the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Communications
Commission and more recently the the Environment Protection Agency and Homeland
Security.
3. Technology- has added to the powers of presidents by permitting them to appeal
directly to millions of people and giving them immediate access to public opinion
4. The emergence of presidential power—The president’s role on the world stage and
media coverage of summit conferences has enhanced his status. The chief executive and
the presidential staff have great visibility
Judicial Review – the power of a court to declare unconstitutional a law or a government
regulation that in the opinion of the judges conflicts with the Constitution.
--Origins –the framers clearly intended that the Supreme Court have the power to declare
state legislation unconstitutional, but whether they intended to give it to the same power
over congressional legislation is not clear. The Federalists—those who urged the
ratification of the Constitution and controlled the national government until 1801—
generally supported a strong role for the federal courts and favored judicial review. Their
opponents, the Jeffersonian Republicans, were far less enthusiastic and advocated the
state legislatures had the ultimate power to interpret the Constitution with the Kentucky
and Virginia Resolutions (1798, 1799) Jefferson and Madison. The Resolutions seemed
to question whether the Supreme Court even had final authority to review state
legislation.
--Marbury versus Madison
the election of 1800 marked the rise to power of Jefferson Republicans. President John
Adams and the Federalists did not take the defeat easily. The outgoing Federalist
Congress then created dozens of new federal judicial posts. By March 1801, Adams had
appointed and the Senate had confirmed loyal Federalists to all these new positions.
Adams signed the commissions and turned them over to John Marshall, his secretary of
state, to be sealed and delivered. Marshall had just received his own commission as chief
justice of the US. Some commissions (mainly justices of the peace) were left for the
Adams successor to deliver. One of which was for William Malbury and when Jefferson
instructed his clerk in the Dept of State not to deliver them, Malbury took action himself.
A writ of mandamus (citing section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789) is a court order
directing the official, such as a secretary of state, to perform a duty about which the
official has no discretion, such as delivering a commission. Marbury requested the
Supreme Court to issue a writ to force James Madison, the new secretary of state to
deliver the commission. The Supreme Court delivered it opinion. Marbury was entitled
to his commission, and Madison should have to deliver it. Section 13 appeared to give
the Supreme Court original jurisdiction???. Marshall wrote is we follow Section 13 we
have original jurisdiction while the Constitution gives no jurisdiction. Marshall stated
that the Constitution is the supreme and binding law, but by limiting the court’s power to
what is granted in the Constitution, Marshall gained the much more important power to
declare laws passed by Congress unconstitutional. Today, building on Marshall’s
precedent the Court has taken the commanding position as the authoritative interpreter of
the Constitution.
THE CONSTITUTION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF GOVERNMENT
--the written constitution is only the skeleton of our system.
--Congress laid the the foundations of our national judicial system w/ Judiciary Act of
1789
--Impeachment is a formal accusation against a public official and the first step in
removal from office. p. 34 see graphic/picture and description
--Presidential Practices—1. executive orders carry the force of law. They may make
major policy changes such as withholding federal contracts from businesses engaging in
racial discrimination or they may be formalities such as presidential proclamation of
Earth Day. 2. executive privilege the right to confidentiality of executive
communications, especially those that relate to national security.
3. impoundment by a president of funds previously appropriated by Congress, 4. the
right to send our armed forces into hostilities 5. the right to propose legislation and work
actively to secure its passage by Congress.
Judicial interpretation – As social and economic conditions have changed and new
national demands have developed, the Supreme Court has changed its interpretation of
Constitution accordingly. Because the Constitution adapts to changing times, it does not
require frequent formal amendment.
Changing the Letter of the Constitution
--The Amending Power p 36
-Approval by the legislatures in 3/4ths of the state or approval by specially called
ratifying conventions in 3/4ths of the states
-All amendments except one Twenty first amendment ( to repeal the Eigthteenth,
Prohibition Amendment) have been submitted to the state legislatures for ratification see
figure 2-3
--figure 2-2 Four Methods of Amending the Constitutions p37
--Equal Rights Amendment ERA first introduced in 1923 and frequently thereafter,
Equal Rights Amendment ERA did not get much support until the 1960s. Betty
Friedan, The Feminine Mysitique 1963 challenged stereotypes about the role of women.
The National Organization for Woman NOW formed in 1966 made passage of ERA its
central mission. By the 1970s the ERA had overwhelmed support in both houses of
Congress and in both national party platforms. Every president from Truman to Reagan
supported it, and many of their wives endorsed the amendment. Over 450 organizations
and a total membership of more than 50 million were on record in support of ERA.
Passed by Congress in 1972 submitted to the states, ratified by 22 states by the end of
1972. Opposition under the articulate leadership of Phyllis Schlafly, a prominent
spokesperson for conservative causes and the ERA became controversial.
Opponents argued women would subjected to military draft, combat duty, lose state
domestic relations code and labor law advantages, passage would jeopardize the power of
states and Congress to regulate abortion and would compel public funding of abortions.
Despite an extension of the seven year limit on ratification by 3 years, the amendment fell
three states short of ratification
AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION
The founders designed the amendment process to be difficult , preventing Congress from
easily adding so many amendments, causing the original document to have less meaning.
Formal Amendments
The Constitution may be formally amended in four ways:
Amendments may be proposed by a 2/3 vote of each house Congress and ratified by at
least ¾ of the state legislatures. All but one of the amendments have been added through
this process.
Amendments may be proposed by a 2/3 vote of each house of Congress and ratified by
specially called conventions in at least ¾ of the states. This method was used once—for
the 21st Amendment that repealed Prohibition—because Congress believed that the state
legislatures might not vote for it.
Amendment may be proposed by a national constitutional convention requested by at
least 2/3 or state legislatures and ratified by at least ¾ of the state legislatures.
Amendments may be proposed by a national constitutional convention and ratified by
specially called conventions in at least ¾ of the states. (Burns, page 37)
Ch. 2 The Living Constitution
Critical Questions
1. Explain the various ways the framers tried to limit government including
federalism, free elections, and checks and balances.
Checking power with power
--Framers wanted a stronger and more effective national government than the Articles of
Confederation, but they realize the people would not accept too much control
--Efficiency and order were critical but liberty was more important
--they allotted power toe the national government and reserved the rest to the states, but
added additional means to limit the national government
it called for Free and fair elections enabled voters to throw out of office those who abuse
power but the Founders did not completely trust the people’s judgement.
The constitution also deprive minorities of their rights
Separation of Powers—distribution of constitutional authority among three branches of
national government, with the legislative branch making law, executive applying and
enforcing the law, and the judiciary interpreting the law. The dispersion of power was
necessary to avoid tyranny/abuse of power. Separation was not enough and a checking
system was necessary.
Checks and balances constitutional grant of powers that enables each of the three
branches of government to check some acts of the others and therefore ensure that no
branch can dominate. Each branch has a role in the actions of the others see figure 2-1
--Vetoes- the president has vetoed over 2500 acts of Congress. Congress has overridden
presidential vetoes more than 100 times
--judicial review- The Supreme Court has ruled 155 congressional acts or parts
unconstitutional.
--impeachment-The house of representatives has impeached 17 federal officials, 2
presidents, and 15 federal judges; of these, the Senate has convicted 7 judges but has not
convicted 7 judges but has not convicted a president
--confirmation- the Senate has refused to confirm 9 cabinet nominations, and many other
cabinet and subcabinet apportment were withdrawn because of likely Senate rejection
More examples: The Supreme Court can declare laws passed by Congress and signed by
the president unconstitutional, but the presidents appoints the justices and all federal
judges with the Senate’s approval.
The president administers the laws but Congress provides money. Senate and House
have an absolute veto power over each other in the enactment of a law, because both
houses must approve bills
=Each branch then has some authority over the others, yet each is independent of the
others.
Voters in each local district choose members of the House, voters in each state choose
Senators, the presidents elects all voters, presidents appoint federal judges to lifetime
positions.
2. Describe the concept of separation of powers and its relationship to checks and
balances in detail.
Separation of Powers—distribution of constitutional authority among three branches of
national government, with the legislative branch making law, executive applying and
enforcing the law, and the judiciary interpreting the law. The dispersion of power was
necessary to avoid tyranny/abuse of power. Separation was not enough and a checking
system was necessary.
Checks and balances constitutional grant of powers that enables each of the three
branches of government to check some acts of the others and therefore ensure that no
branch can dominate. Each branch has a role in the actions of the others see figure 2-1
--Vetoes- the president has vetoed over 2500 acts of Congress. Congress has overridden
presidential vetoes more than 100 times
--judicial review- The Supreme Court has ruled 155 congressional acts or parts
unconstitutional.
--impeachemnt-The house of representatives has impeached 17 federal officials, 2
presidents, and 15 federal judges; of these, the Senate has convicted 7 judges but has not
convicted 7 judges but has not convicted a president
--confirmation- the Senate has refused to confirm 9 cabinet nominations, and many other
cabinet and subcabinet apportment were withdrawn because of likely Senate rejection
More examples: The Supreme Court can declare laws passed by Congress and signed by
the president unconstitutional, but the presidents appoints the justices and all federal
judges with the Senate’s approval.
The president administers the laws but Congress provides money. Senate and House
have an absolute veto power over each other in the enactment of a law, because both
houses must approve bills
=Each branch then has some authority over the others, yet each is independent of the
others.
Voters in each local district choose members of the House, voters in each state choose
Senators, the presidents elects all voters, presidents appoint federal judges to lifetime
positions.
3. Imagine you are discussing Judicial Review with a friend or family member who
is not familiar with the term and help them to understand it.
Judicial Review – the power of a court to declare unconstitutional a law or a government
regulation that in the opinion of the judges conflicts with the Constitution.
--Origins –the framers clearly intended that the Supreme Court have the power to declare
state legislation unconstitutional, but whether they intended to give it to the same power
over congressional legislation is not clear. The Federalists—those who urged the
ratification of the Constitution and controlled the national government until 1801—
generally supported a strong role for the federal courts and favored judicial review. Their
opponents, the Jeffersonian Republicans, were far less enthusiastic and advocated the
state legislatures had the ultimate power to interpret the Constitution with the Kentucky
and Virginia Resolutions (1798, 1799) Jefferson and Madison. The Resolutions seemed
to question whether the Supreme Court even had final authority to review state
legislation.
4. Explain the case Marbury v. Madison in a step-by-step manner.
--Marbury versus Madison
the election of 1800 marked the rise to power of Jefferson Republicans. President John
Adams and the Federalists did not take the defeat easily. The outgoing Federalist
Congress then created dozens of new federal judicial posts. By March 1801, Adams had
appointed and the Senate had confirmed loyal Federalists to all these new positions.
Adams signed the commissions and turned them over to John Marshall, his secretary of
state, to be sealed and delivered. Marshall had just received his own commission as chief
justice of the US. Some commissions (mainly justices of the peace) were left for the
Adams successor to deliver. One of which was for William Marbury and when Jefferson
instructed his clerk in the Dept of State not to deliver them, Marbury took action himself.
A writ of mandamus (citing section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789) is a court order
directing the official, such as a secretary of state, to perform a duty about which the
official has no discretion, such as delivering a commission. Marbury requested the
Supreme Court to issue a writ to force James Madison, the new secretary of state to
deliver the commission. The Supreme Court delivered it opinion. Marbury was entitled
to his commission, and Madison should have to deliver it. Section 13 appeared to give
the Supreme Court original jurisdiction???. Marshall wrote is we follow Section 13 we
have original jurisdiction while the Constitution gives no jurisdiction. Marshall stated
that the Constitution is the supreme and binding law, but by limiting the court’s power to
what is granted in the Constitution, Marshall gained the much more important power to
declare laws passed by Congress unconstitutional. Today, building on Marshall’s
precedent the Court has taken the commanding position as the authoritative interpreter of
the Constitution.
THE CONSTITUTION AS AN INSTRUMENT OF GOVERNMENT
--the written constitution is only the skeleton of our system.
--Congress laid the the foundations of our national judicial system w/ Judiciary Act of
1789
5. Explain how the checks and balances system has been modified by the rise of national
political parties, creation of an independent regulatory commission, changes in the
electoral system, changes in technology, and in international affairs.
MODIFICATIONS OF CHECKS AND BALANCES
1. Rise of National Political Parties
-political parties can serve as unifying factors helping to bridge the separation of powers
Yet if one party controls the Congress and the other the White House (divided
government) generally the case since WWII. In this case parties may intensify checks
and balances rather that moderate them. Divided government may lead to so much
competition between the legislative and executive branches “each institution protecting
and promoting itself” As a result, they are battles over presidential impoundment of
funds appropriated by Congress, budget gridlock, and angry/hostile confirmation
hearings over presidential appointments. Presidents blame members of congress and
congress blames presidents.
Framers wanted the president to be chosen by the Electoral College—wise, independent
citizens free from popular passions and hero worship—rather than by ordinary citizens.
Expanding the electorate: 1. initially only white property owning males could vote now
all citizens over the age of 18. 2. direct primaries voters elect party nominees for the
House and Senate and even for president; 3. initiatives—permitting the voters in about
half the states to propose and vote on laws 4. referendums allows voters to reconsider
actions of the legislature 5. recall voters remove elected state and local officials from
office
2.--Establishment of agencies designed to exercise legislative, executive, and judicial
functions --- Beginning in 1887, Congress created independent regulatory commissions
such as the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Communications
Commission and more recently the the Environment Protection Agency and Homeland
Security.
3. Technology- has added to the powers of presidents by permitting them to appeal
directly to millions of people and giving them immediate access to public opinion
4. The emergence of presidential power—The president’s role on the world stage and
media coverage of summit conferences has enhanced his status. The chief executive and
the presidential staff have great visibility
6. Explain the impeachment and removal power.
--Impeachment is a formal accusation against a public official and the first step in
removal from office. p. 34 see graphic/picture and description
7. Discuss the two methods of proposing and for ratifying amendments to the
Constitution.
Changing the Letter of the Constitution
--The Amending Power p 36
-Approval by the legislatures in 3/4ths of the state or approval by specially called
ratifying conventions in 3/4ths of the states
-All amendments except one Twenty first amendment ( to repeal the Eigthteenth,
Prohibition Amendment) have been submitted to the state legislatures for ratification see
figure 2-3
--figure 2-2 Four Methods of Amending the Constitutions p37
8. Summarize the controversies in the ratification politics of the ERA.
--Equal Rights Amendment ERA first introduced in 1923 and frequently thereafter,
Equal Rights Amendment ERA did not get much support until the 1960s. Betty
Friedan, The Feminine Mysitique 1963 challenged stereotypes about the role of women.
The National Organization for Woman NOW formed in 1966 made passage of ERA its
central mission. By the 1970s the ERA had overwhelmed support in both houses of
Congress and in both national party platforms. Every president from Truman to Reagan
supported it, and many of their wives endorsed the amendment. Over 450 organizations
and a total membership of more than 50 million were on record in support of ERA.
Passed by Congress in 1972 submitted to the states, ratified by 22 states by the end of
1972. Opposition under the articulate leadership of Phyllis Schlafly, a prominent
spokesperson for conservative causes and the ERA became controversial.
Opponents argued women would subjected to military draft, combat duty, lose state
domestic relations code and labor law advantages, passage would jeopardize the power of
states and Congress to regulate abortion and would compel public funding of abortions.
Despite an extension of the seven year limit on ratification by 3 years, the amendment fell
three states short of ratification
CHAPTER 2
KEY TERMS
QUIZ
--Presidential Practices—1. executive orders carry the force of law. They may make
major policy changes such as withholding federal contracts from businesses engaging in
racial discrimination or they may be formalities such as presidential proclamation of
Earth Day. 2. executive privilege the right to confidentiality of executive
communications, especially those that relate to national security.
3. impoundment by a president of funds previously appropriated by Congress, 4. the
right to send our armed forces into hostilities 5. the right to propose legislation and work
actively to secure its passage by Congress.
Judicial interpretation – As social and economic conditions have changed and new
national demands have developed, the Supreme Court has changed its interpretation of
Constitution accordingly. Because the Constitution adapts to changing times, it does not
require frequent formal amendment.
1. initially only white property owning males could vote now all citizens over the age of
18. 2. direct primaries voters elect party nominees for the House and Senate and even
for president; 3. initiatives—permitting the voters in about half the states to propose and
vote on laws 4. referendums allows voters to reconsider actions of the legislature 5.
recall voters remove elected state and local officials from office
Ch. 2 The Living Constitution
Critical Questions
1. Explain the various ways the framers tried to limit government including federalism,
free elections, and checks and balances.
2. Describe the concept of separation of powers and its relationship to checks and
balances in detail.
3. Imagine you are discussing Judicial Review with a friend or family member who is
not familiar with the term and help them to understand it.
4. Explain the case Marbury v. Madison in a step-by-step manner.
5. Explain how the checks and balances system has been modified by the rise of national
political parties, creation of an independent regulatory commission, changes in the
electoral system, changes in technology, and in international affairs.
6. Explain the impeachment and removal power.
7. Discuss the two methods of proposing and for ratifying amendments to the
Constitution.
8. Summarize the controversies in the ratification politics of the ERA.
Ch. 2 The Constitution
Enduring Questions
1. What view of human nature is embodied in the Constitution?
2. Is representative democracy possible without political compromise?
3. How can any government be strong enough to govern without threatening freedom?
4. Has the system of separate institutions sharing powers protected liberty and promoted
equality as the Framers envisioned it would?
The American Revolution was fought for liberty.
THE PROBLEM OF LIBERTY
Initially, colonists believed that their liberties could be protected while they remained a
part of the British Empire. But agitation forced a growing number to shift their thinking
to embrace the idea that the colonies would have to become independent of Great Britain.
They feared the abuses of political power.
The Colonial Mind
--Many Colonists came to assume that English politicians (most politicians in fact)
tended to be corrupt and the English constitution could not guarantee the liberty of
citizens. Colonists accepted the idea that the essential rights (life, liberty, and property)
should be protected. Jefferson changed the words to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness in the Declaration of Independence.
Unalienable rights --rights based on nature and Providence, and not on the whims or
preferences of people. For example, Jefferson charged that King George III had allowed
the slave trade to continue and was inciting slaves to revolt against their masters. In the
final draft, the scathing discussion of the slave trade was omitted.
The Real Revolution
According to John Adams “radical change in the principles, opinions, and sentiments,
and affections of the people.” Government by royal prerogative was rejected, and
government based on the consent of the governed was considered legitimate. A written
constitution would be the foundation for such a government. Government should respect
liberty and the legislative branch of government should be superior to the executive
branch.
--Colonies adopted state constitutions based on the revolutionary ideas with personal
liberties and elected representatives as the key factors/parts in 1776.11 years later
delegates signed a national constitutional (1787).
Weaknesses of the Confederation
13 states formed a confederation based on the Articles of Confederation in 1781 which
was essentially a “league of friendship” that could not levy taxes or regulate commerce.
Each state retained its sovereignty and independence, each state regardless of size had
one vote in Congress, nine of the 13 were required to pass any law, and delegates were
picked and paid for by the state legislatures. Congress had the power to make peace (eg
1783 treaty with England. It could coin money, appoint key officers, operate a post
office. There was someone appointed to president but he never showed up for the job.
No judicial system to settle disputes among the states. And to amend the Articles all 13
states had to agree.
Many leaders of the Revolution saw the need for a stronger central government
(particularly in the area of trade regulation) They decided to meet and address the defects
of the Confederation.
The Constitutional Convention
1787 in Philadelphia in a meeting designed to revise the Articles, four months later they
emerged with a completely new government.
-The Lesson of Experience
Framers looked to ancient Greece and Rome, and to modern confederacies in various
areas in Europe. They did not want a government that it would trample on personal
liberties.
-State Constitutions--Two state models the Framers looked to to craft the national
constitution. The Pennsylania and Massachusetts exemplied two aspects of the
problem. PA one house (unicameral) legislature, the Assembly, the members of which
were elected annually (one year terms). No governor or president. Critics claimed the
Assembly had too much power--disfranchised Quakers, persecuted objectors to the war,
ignored the requirement of trial by juries, and manipulated the judiciary. TOO STRONG
MA featured separation of powers in among the various branches of government, the
directly elected governor could veto acts of the legislature, judges served for life. Voters
and officeholders were property owners and key office holders had to swear that they
were Christians. TOO WEAK
Shays’s Rebellion
Jan 1787 group of Revolutionary War soldiers and officers plagued by debts and high
taxes and fearful of losing their property to creditors and tax collectors, forcibly
prevented the courts in western Massachusetts from sitting. The governor of MA asked
the Continental Congress to send troops to suppress the rebellion but it could not raise the
money or the manpower. State leaders began to feel that state governments were about to
collapse from internal dissension. As a result, many were convinced that the
Constitutional Convention was necessary
The Framers
The Philadelphia convention attracted 55 delegates, Rhode Island had no representation.
Delegates were generally young but experienced. Eight had signed the Declaration of
Independence, 34 lawyers, 7 had served as governors, most were well off and a few were
wealthy.
The document is today the world’s oldest written national constitution. The defense of
liberty was central to the numerous debates. Delegates had been influenced by English
philosopher John Locke--all men cherish and seek to protect their life, liberty, and
property. Government had to be limited--and based on the consent of the governed.
People will not agree to be ruled by a government that threatens their liberty.
The task: How to devise a government strong enough to preserve order but not so strong
that it would threathen liberty.
The Virginia Plan--called for a strong national union organized into three governmental
branches--legislative, executive, and judicial. Legislature consisted of two houses--one
elected directly by the people and the other chosen by the first house from among the
people nominated by state legislatures. The executive was to be chosen by the national
legislature as were members of the national judiciary. Key features: 1 a national
legislature would have supreme powers on all matters on which the separate states were
not competent to act, as well as the power to veto any and all state laws 2. at least one
house of the legislature would be elected directly by the people.
The New Jersey Plan
Concerned the larger states would dominate the national legislature, William Paterson of
New Jersey introduced a new plan. The plan proposed to amend, not replace, the Articles
of Confederation. Each state would have one vote and Congress would remain the
creature of the state governments.
The Compromise
The Great Compromise (aka Connecticut Compromise)/it reconciled the interests of
small and large states by allowing the former to predominate in the Senate and the latter
in the House.
--A House of Representatives consisting initially of 65 members apportioned among the
states roughly on the basis of population and elected by the people
--a Senate consisting of two senators from each state to be chosen by the state legislatures
The Constitution and Democracy
Does the American government represent a true democracy (do the people have the direct
political influence)?
Republic--a government in which a system of representation operates
Judicial review The power of the Supreme Court to declare an act of Congress
unconstitutional
The Key principles of America’s representative democracy:
1. Separation of powers--three separate branches of government see p29 Checks and
Balances )
2. federalism--political authority is divided between a national government and several
state governments
--faction--each interests constitutes a faction (eg diverse interests rich and poor,
northerner and southerner, farmer and merchant, Protestant and Catholic, creditor and
debtor.
The Constitution and Liberty
Federalists - proponents of the Constitution (aka nationalists)
see Federalist papers p32-33
Views/Arguments:
Madison, Jay, and Hamilton hoped to influence the ratification of the new Constitution in
New York state convention. They published a series of articles defending and explaining
the document in the NYC newspapers. They wrote 85 articles
Anti-Federalists opponents of the Constition came to be known as the Antifederalists
(states’ rights)
Views/Arguments:
--a strong national government would be distant from the people and would use its power
to annihilat or absorb the functions that properly belonged to the states.
--Feared heavy taxation, Supreme court overruling state courts, large standing army
controlled by the president
--the believed the nation needed a loose confederation of states with most of the powers
of government kept firmly in the hands of the state legislatures and state courts
--some insisted that a bill of rights be added to the constitution
read Federalist No. 10 and No. 51
--to be put into effect the Constitution had to be approved at ratifying conventions in at
least nine of the states. Remember the Article of Confederation were still in effect which
meant all 13 states had to agree on the Constitution. The Framers realized they could not
reach unanimity. North Carolina and Rhode Island initially rejected the Constitution.
--coalition -an alliance
Constitution: specific guarantees of individual liberty
--right of trial by jury in criminal cases
--writ of habeas corpus (look up)
--bill of attainder (look up)
--ex post facto law (look up)
Need for a Bill of Rights
(most states had Bill of Rights in 1787) p 35
Constitution was ratified in 1789 (all 13 states by 1790)
The Constitution and Slavery
Black slaves represented 1/3rd of the population at the time but the Constitution does not
have the word slave or slavery in it. Three provisions, however, dealt with slavery.
1. the apportionment of seats in te House of Representatives was to be made by counting
all free persons and 3/5ths of all other persons (slaves)
2. Congress was forbidden to prohibit the importation of persons (slaves) before 1808
3. Any person held to service or labor (slaves) were to escape from a slave owning state
and get to a free state, that perosn would not become free but would be returned to the the
master
Problem: the Constitutions contradicted the Declaration of Independence “all men are
created equal”
Why? many were slaveholders and the others did not want to offend slaveholders
The MOTIVES of the Framers
Men with political opinions, economic interests, and human failings
economic interests: some were wealthy, some owned slaves, some loaned money others
were in debt,
In the end, the Framers tended to represent their states’ interests on important matters.
They were influenced by personal beliefs and economic interests.
Amending the Constitution p.41 two ways to propose and two ways to ratify it very
important
line-item veto-- 1996 Clinton signed the Line item veto act the law gave the president
the authority to selectively eliminate individual items in large appropriations bills,
expansions, in certain income-transfer programs and tax breaks
Clinton et al. v. New York et al. (1998) The Supreme Court struck down the 1996 law,
holding 6 to 3 that the Constitution does not allow the president to cancel specific items
in tax and spending legislation. Deals with the line item veto
Ch. 2 The Constitution
Assignment
I. Enduring Questions
1. What view of human nature is embodied in the Constitution?
2. Is representative democracy possible without political compromise?
3. How can any government be strong enough to govern without threatening freedom?
4. Has the system of separate institutions sharing powers protected liberty and promoted
equality as the Framers envisioned it would?
5. Discuss English philosopher John Locke’s writings influence on Thomas Jefferson.
6. Why did the American colonists reject royal prerpgatve?
II. Define the following terms:
Unalienable rights
Republic--a government in which a system of representation operates
Shays’s Rebellion
Judicial review The power of the Supreme Court to declare an act of Congress
unconstitutional
The Key principles of America’s representative democracy:
1. Separation of powers--three separate branches of government see p29 Checks and
Balances )
2. federalism--political authority is divided between a national government and several
state governments
--faction--each interests constitutes a faction (eg diverse interests rich and poor,
northerner and southerner, farmer and merchant, Protestant and Catholic, creditor and
debtor.
coalition
--writ of habeas corpus (look up)
--bill of attainder (look up)
--ex post facto law (look up)
.
Bill of Rights
line-item veto-- 1996 Clinton signed the Line item veto act the law gave the president the
authority to selectively eliminate individual items in large appropriations bills,
expansions, in certain income-transfer programs and tax breaks
Clinton et al. v. New York et al. (1998) The Supreme Court struck down the 1996 law,
holding 6 to 3 that the Constitution does not allow the president to cancel specific items
in tax and spending legislation. Deals with the line item veto
III. Describe the Articles of Confederation and its weaknesses.
Many leaders of the Revolution saw the need for a stronger central government
(particularly in the area of trade regulation) They decided to meet and address the
defects of the Confederation.
IV. Discuss the Constitutional Convention and the political influences of the framers.
1787 in Philadelphia in a meeting designed to revise the Articles, four months later they
emerged with a completely new government.
-The Lesson of Experience
Framers looked to ancient Greece and Rome, and to modern confederacies in various
areas in Europe. They did not want a government that it would trample on personal
liberties.
-State Constitutions--Two state models the Framers looked to to craft the national
constitution. The Pennsylania and Massachusetts exemplied two aspects of the
problem. PA one house (unicameral) legislature, the Assembly, the members of which
were elected annually (one year terms). No governor or president. Critics claimed the
Assembly had too much power--disfranchised Quakers, persecuted objectors to the war,
ignored the requirement of trial by juries, and manipulated the judiciary. TOO STRONG
MA featured separation of powers in among the various branches of government, the
directly elected governor could veto acts of the legislature, judges served for life. Voters
and officeholders were property owners and key office holders had to swear that they
were Christians. TOO WEAK
Jan 1787 group of Revolutionary War soldiers and officers plagued by debts and high
taxes and fearful of losing their property to creditors and tax collectors, forcibly
prevented the courts in western Massachusetts from sitting. The governor of MA asked
the Continental Congress to send troops to suppress the rebellion but it could not raise
the money or the manpower. State leaders began to feel that state governments were
about to collapse from internal dissension. As a result, many were convinced that the
Constitutional Convention was necessary
V. Who were the men that are known as the Framers? Give a basic profile and
general description of these individuals.
The Philadelphia convention attracted 55 delegates, Rhode Island had no representation.
Delegates were generally young but experienced. Eight had signed the Declaration of
Independence, 34 lawyers, 7 had served as governors, most were well off and a few were
wealthy.
The document is today the world’s oldest written national constitution. The defense of
liberty was central to the numerous debates. Delegates had been influenced by English
philosopher John Locke--all men cherish and seek to protect their life, liberty, and
property. Government had to be limited--and based on the consent of the governed.
People will not agree to be ruled by a government that threatens their liberty.
The task: How to devise a government strong enough to preserve order but not so strong
that it would threathen liberty.
VI. Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey Plans. Then describe the details
of the Great Compromise.
--called for a strong national union organized into three governmental branches-legislative, executive, and judicial. Legislature consisted of two houses--one elected
directly by the people and the other chosen by the first house from among the people
nominated by state legislatures. The executive was to be chosen by the national
legislature as were members of the national judiciary. Key features: 1 a national
legislature would have supreme powers on all matters on which the separate states were
not competent to act, as well as the power to veto any and all state laws 2. at least one
house of the legislature would be elected directly by the people.
The New Jersey Plan
Concerned the larger states would dominate the national legislature, William Paterson
of New Jersey introduced a new plan. The plan proposed to amend, not replace, the
Articles of Confederation. Each state would have one vote and Congress would remain
the creature of the state governments.
The Compromise
The Great Compromise (aka Connecticut Compromise)/it reconciled the interests of
small and large states by allowing the former to predominate in the Senate and the latter
in the House.
--A House of Representatives consisting initially of 65 members apportioned among the
states roughly on the basis of population and elected by the people
--a Senate consisting of two senators from each state to be chosen by the state
legislatures
The Constitution and Democracy
Does the American government represent a true democracy (do the people have the
direct political influence)?
VII. Discuss the opposing views and arguments of the Federalists and AntiFederalists.
Federalists - proponents of the Constitution (aka nationalists)
see Federalist papers p32-33
Views/Arguments:
Madison, Jay, and Hamilton hoped to influence the ratification of the new Constitution in
New York state convention. They published a series of articles defending and explaining
the document in the NYC newspapers. They wrote 85 articles
Anti-Federalists opponents of the Constition came to be known as the Antifederalists
(states’ rights)
Views/Arguments:
--a strong national government would be distant from the people and would use its power
to annihilat or absorb the functions that properly belonged to the states.
--Feared heavy taxation, Supreme court overruling state courts, large standing army
controlled by the president
--the believed the nation needed a loose confederation of states with most of the powers
of government kept firmly in the hands of the state legislatures and state courts
--some insisted that a bill of rights be added to the constitution
read Federalist No. 10 and No. 51
--to be put into effect the Constitution had to be approved at ratifying conventions in at
least nine of the states. Remember the Article of Confederation were still in effect which
meant all 13 states had to agree on the Constitution. The Framers realized they could
not reach unanimity. North Carolina and Rhode Island initially rejected the
Constitution.
-- -an alliance
Constitution: specific guarantees of individual liberty
--right of trial by jury in criminal cases
Need for a
(most states had Bill of Rights in 1787) p 35
Constitution was ratified in 1789 (all 13 states by 1790)
VIII. How does the United States Constitution deal with the issue of slavery?
Black slaves represented 1/3rd of the population at the time but the Constitution does not
have the word slave or slavery in it. Three provisions, however, dealt with slavery.
1. the apportionment of seats in te House of Representatives was to be made by counting
all free persons and 3/5ths of all other persons (slaves)
2. Congress was forbidden to prohibit the importation of persons (slaves) before 1808
3. Any person held to service or labor (slaves) were to escape from a slave owning state
and get to a free state, that perosn would not become free but would be returned to the the
master
Problem: the Constitutions contradicted the Declaration of Independence “all men are
created equal”
Why? many were slaveholders and the others did not want to offend slaveholders
The MOTIVES of the Framers
Men with political opinions, economic interests, and human failings
economic interests: some were wealthy, some owned slaves, some loaned money others
were in debt,
In the end, the Framers tended to represent their states’ interests on important matters.
They were influenced by personal beliefs and economic interests.
IX. Discuss the two ways to amend the Constitution.
p.41 two ways to propose and two ways to ratify it very important
X. In your opinion, why has the U.S. Constitution endured?
Ch. 2 The Constitution
QUIZ
A. Define five (5) of the following terms: (10 points)
Unalienable rights
Republic
Shays’s Rebellion
Separation of powers
federalism
faction
coalition
writ of habeas corpus
bill of attainder
ex post facto law
Bill of Rights
line-item veto
B. Describe the Articles of Confederation and its weaknesses. (10 points)
C. Who were the men that are known as the Framers? Give a basic profile and
general description of these individuals. (10 points)
D. Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey Plans. Then describe the
details of the Great Compromise. (10 points)
E. Discuss the opposing views and arguments of the Federalists and AntiFederalists. (20 points)
F. How does the United States Constitution deal with the issue of slavery?
(10 points)
G. Discuss the two ways to amend the Constitution. (10 points)
H. What are the Federalist Papers? What were the issues addressed in Federalist
No. 10 and Federalist 51? (20 points)