“The infant periods of most nations are buried in silence, or veiled in fable, and perhaps the world has lost little it should regret. But the origins of the American Republic contain lessons of which posterity ought not to be deprived.” —James Madison
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
Mr. Madison Writes a Letter to Mr. Jefferson
“Wherever there is an interest and power to do wrong, wrong will generally be done.” James Madison
Prior to championing a Bill of Rights
in the First Congress, James Madison wrote a revealing letter to Thomas Jefferson
in October of 1788. Interestingly, much of the letter was written in a secret
code only the two of them shared. The following extract from the letter gives
insight into Madison’s mindset and the thinking of many of the Founders.
"It is true nevertheless that not a few,
particularly in Virginia have contended for the proposed alterations from the
most honorable and patriotic motives; and that among the advocates for the
Constitution, there are some who wish for further guards to public liberty and
individual rights. As far as these may consist of a constitutional declaration
of the most essential rights, it is probable they will be added; though there
are many who think such addition unnecessary, and not a few who think it
misplaced in such a Constitution. There is scarce any point on which the party
in opposition is so much divided as to its importance and its propriety. My own
opinion has always been in favor of a bill of rights; provided it be so
framed as not to imply powers not meant to be included in the enumeration. At
the same time I have never thought the omission a material defect, nor been
anxious to supply it even by subsequent amendment, for any other reason than
that it is anxiously desired by others.
Wherever the real power in
a government lies, there is the danger of oppression. In our governments the
real power lies in the majority of the community, and the invasion of private
rights is chiefly to be apprehended, not from acts of government contrary to
the sense of its constituents, but from acts in which the government is the
mere instrument of the major number of the constituents. Wherever there is an
interest and power to do wrong, wrong will generally be done.
The restrictions however strongly marked on paper
will never be regarded when opposed to the decided sense of the public; and
after repeated violations in extraordinary cases, they will lose even their
ordinary efficacy."
Monday, September 23, 2013
First Principles
Leading Journal of the Enlightenment |
The Enlightenment concepts of first principles and natural rights
were important to the Founders. They served as the basis for the Declaration of
Independence, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and many founding state constitutions and declarations.
Interestingly,
the 9th and 10th Amendments are imbued with
the Founding Principles, oftentimes called First Principles. The amendments read:
9th
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to
deny or disparage others retained by the people.
10th
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to
the people.
Forty-nine words. That’s all it took for the First Congress to
articulate these founding principles:
- Rights naturally reside with people—rights are not bestowed by government
- Political power comes from the American people—the government has no claim to any power without prior and formal delegation by Americans.
- Powers are to be dispersed, and balanced between different branches and levels of government.
- The Constitution is a written agreement intended to restrict government.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
Commentary: The Heavy Hand of Government Trumps Capitalism
“The Great Depression, like most other periods of severe
unemployment, was produced by government mismanagement rather than by any
inherent instability of the private economy.”—Milton Friedman
If you read the financial press, you
can almost hear the gurus scratching their heads. They study past business
cycles and can’t understand why robust growth isn’t the order of the day. Since
WWII, strong recoveries have always followed recessions. And the deeper the
recession, the faster the climb back to prosperity. Considering the depth of
our latest crash, we should be rip-roaring into the stratosphere. What’s
going on?
All the supposed stimulants have
failed. Since December of 2008, interest rates have been near zero. The Fed has
pumped so much cash into the economy that all of our wallets ought to be
bulging. Bail-outs have increased government control of whole industries.
Congress rammed through a huge health care entitlement, and celebrated with the
kind of fanfare befitting simultaneous victory over hunger, global warming, and
the common cold. Despite horrific deficits, our dear Congress continues to
throw money around like it was confetti. Yet underemployment stays embarrassing, productivity is anemic, everyone is husbanding resources, and foreigners lecture us on irresponsible spending.
Friday, September 20, 2013
A Capacity to Annoy or Injure
“There
is not a syllable in the plan [the Constitution] which directly empowers the
national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the
Constitution.” Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 81
During
the Constitutional Convention and state ratification conventions, the judiciary
was the least discussed branch of the national government. From a design
perspective, almost all of the debate and alarm seemed to have been focused on
the executive and the legislature. The simplest explanation is that the
judiciary was familiar and non-controversial. Hamilton wrote in Federalist 78, “[T]he 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.”
Every delegate knew what a judge did and understood their
role in the government, and their only concern was insuring their independence.
A few anticipated that judges might legislate from the bench, but most of the
delegates were more concerned about politicians putting undue pressure on judges.
The Framers solution to this threat was to give justices life tenure.
For
nearly one hundred and fifty years, the Supreme Court restricted itself to
evaluating laws based on what today would be called an originalist perspective.
The Commerce, General Welfare, and Necessary and Proper clauses and Bill of
Rights were interpreted on a generally narrow basis. The court took the
enumerated powers seriously, showed deference to state authority, and restricted
interference with contracts.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
Protecting Liberty
“If
Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will
promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one…” James Madison
The Founders believed in limited government in the form of a
representative republic. They distrusted a direct democracy, because majorities
had historically taken advantage of minorities. A limited representative republic was the best
form of government to safeguard minority rights. James Madison constantly
preached against any system that allowed special interests (factions) to gain
control of major elements of the government. He showed that throughout history,
majority factions tyrannized minorities, whether those minorities were based on
race, wealth, religion, political affiliation, or even geography.
When you study the political formation of the United Sates,
one is struck by the recurrence of the checks and balances theme—in Madison’s
convention notes, the Constitution itself, the Federalist Papers, the minutes
of the ratification conventions, and even the Anti-Federalist papers. There can
be no doubt that the Founders believed that liberty depended on each part of
the government acting as an effective check on all the other parts of the
government, and that meant not only between the three national branches, but
also between the states and the national government.
Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty, or give me death" |
Checks and balances were not enough, however. They also
wanted to specifically define powers to limit the intrusion of government into
personal lives. The Constitutional Convention looked at two different ways of
defining national powers. They debated long and hard about whether to call out
each power individually or, alternately, to list restrictions on general powers.
Basically they had to decide whether to write down what the federal government
could do or what the federal government could not do.
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Happy Constitution Day!
The Framers would be proud that we continue to celebrate our Constitution, but probably say we picked the wrong date. They would prefer June 21, the date in 1788 when New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the Constitution, which made it the supreme law of the land. After all, the delegates did not believe they held the power to define a government. Each firmly believed this power resided with the people.
Roger Sherman—The Forgotten Founder
“The question is, not what rights naturally
belong to man, but how they may be most equally and effectually guarded in
society.” Roger Sherman
Sculptors haven’t chiseled a lot of marble to honor Roger
Sherman, yet he was one of the most important of the Founding Fathers. He was
the only Founder to sign all the major documents of the era, and he was on the
final committees for the Declaration of Independence, Articles of
Confederation, and the Constitution. At the Constitutional Convention, Sherman
proposed and engineered approval of the Great Compromise which gave each state
two senators. He was an ally of James Madison in the First Congress and instrumental in guiding the Bill of Rights through the congressional quagmire.
Sherman was a small businessman
who had once owned two general stores, but he became impoverished because he invested
his life savings in Connecticut bonds to support the Revolution. Throughout his
life, he was a major benefactor of Yale, acting as the university’s treasurer
for many years and promoting construction of a college chapel. After
ratification of the Constitution, Sherman was first a congressman and then a
senator for a short period before his death.
What did his contemporaries think of him?
Monday, September 16, 2013
James Madison—Father of the Constitution?
In his later years, James Madison protested being referred
to as the Father of the Constitution.
He said the document was not “the off-spring of a single brain.” Our
Constitution was actually the off-spring
of fifty-five brains, although none were as potent as Madison’s. A few
historians have denigrated Madison’s informal title, saying he had merely
outlived the other Framers and his convention notes gave him more credit than
he would have received from an impartial observer. These critics also point out
the final Constitution diverted appreciably from the Virginia Plan that Madison
initially supported as the correct governmental system.
Despite revisionists seeking a unique angle, James Madison
was still the most important Framer—before, during, and after the Constitutional
Convention of 1787.
James Madison |
Sunday, September 15, 2013
Real Jeopardy
“It is to be remembered that the general
government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and
administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects” James Madison, Federalist 14
The Founders did not trust unrestrained government. Their own
experience and study of history taught them that overly powerful governments invariably turned oppressive. But they also knew government was necessary. In fact, they knew they needed a government stronger than the one they had at the beginning of our nation. By the time the
Constitutional Convention convened in May of 1787, a consensus had developed
that the Articles of Confederation were severely flawed, but there was
uncertainty about what kind of government could sustain a republic through the
ages. They knew it couldn't be too weak, but it also couldn't be too strong.
The Founders did not seek a Goldilocks government. Instead
they designed an elaborate set of checks and balances so they could give the
government enough power to govern, while harnessing it with Lilliputian ropes to hold it in place so it wouldn't trample the little people.
From our high school civics class we learned about the checks and balances
between the three branches, but teachers seldom mention the intended check of
the national government by the states. Nor were we taught that the Founders
wanted our national leaders selected and elected by different means as yet
another check on a runaway government. Lastly, the Constitution itself was
supposed to be the premier check to prevent our government from becoming
oppressive.
Gouverneur Morris, the Penman of the Constitution
“This magistrate is not the king. The people are
the king.” Gouverneur Morris
Gouverneur Morris |
At the end of the Constitutional Convention, Morris was
assigned to the Committee of Style. This
committee’s task was to take the work of the Committee of Detail and compose a
clear and coherent constitution.
For example, the preamble from
the Committee of Detail read:
"We the people of the States of New Hampshire, Massachussetts,
Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina, and
Georgia, do ordain, declare, and establish the following Constitution for the
Government of Ourselves and our Posterity.”
Morris volunteered to take this
draft home and prepare a more polished version. He did a masterful job. Beyond
organizing the document and language clarification, Morris wrote a short, but eloquent
preamble.
We the People of the United States, in Order to
form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility,
provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the
Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish
this Constitution for the United States of America.
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Why a Written Constitution?
The British have an unwritten
constitution. The colonies were part of the British Empire, and for the most
part, they were populated by British subjects. Why did they depart from the
English tradition of an unwritten constitution?
The most obvious reason is
that the English Constitution and common law evolved, while our forefathers
were starting fresh with a blank slate. As Thomas Paine said in Common Sense, “We have it in our power
to begin the world over again. A situation similar to the present, hath not
happened since the days of Noah.”
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Benjamin Franklin—The Other Indispensable Man
“Our new Constitution is now established, and has
an appearance that promises permanency; but in this world nothing can be said
to be certain, except death and taxes.” Benjamin Franklin
During the second half of the eighteenth century, the United
States was blessed with numerous renaissance men. Thomas Jefferson was a
planter, architect, revolutionary, author, agricultural scientist, inventor,
and politician, among other things. George Washington started life as a
surveyor, but then became a successful planter, military commander, politician,
entrepreneur, and agricultural innovator. Many of the Founders were
equally skillful at multiple endeavors. None, however, compared with
Benjamin Franklin.
Franklin’s humorous aphorisms are so embedded in our culture and
he’s been caricatured so often, we sometimes think he must have been the class
clown of the Revolution. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Franklin was arguably the second most important person in securing our
independence. Despite Washington’s greatest efforts, our domestic
military and treasury could never have defeated the British Empire. We
needed help. Franklin did more than flirt with the ladies in Paris, he
charmed a nation in order to gain access to the French court. The thing
to understand about Franklin is that everything he did had a purpose.
Once granted access to the back rooms of Versailles, he did the impossible and
got the United States desperately needed money, warships, and international
legitimacy.
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
The man who saved America from financial ruin
“The circulation of confidence is better than
the circulation of money.” James Madison
As
Americans celebrated New Year’s Day in 1790, the new nation’s economy was
tittering on the brink of collapse. The cumulative debt of the states and
nation was enormous, soldiers who had served in the Revolution hadn’t been
paid, farm foreclosures were so rampant that mobs burned courthouses, there was
no national coin or currency, in many states inflation raged out of control,
and international trade was near impossible because the nation had no credit.
It looked likely that the American experiment would fail.
The
newborn country might have failed, except the United States had three enormous
assets that it had not possessed just ten months earlier. A new government had
been formed under the recently ratified United States Constitution, George
Washington had been sworn in as the first president, and Washington had a
cabinet member with a plan. The man with a plan was Secretary of the Treasury,
Alexander Hamilton. On January 14, 1790, the secretary presented his economic plan to Congress.
Alexander Hamilton |
Hamilton’s
goal was to renew confidence in the government, and “to promote the increasing
respectability of the American name; to answer the calls of justice; to restore
landed property to its due value; to furnish new resources both to agriculture
and commerce; to cement more closely the union of the states; to add to their
security against foreign attack; to establish public order on the basis of an
upright and liberal policy.”
The
major elements of his plan included: 1) Assumption of Revolutionary War debts of
over $54M, 2) issuance of tiered debt instruments to finance the retirement of existing
loans, 3) retirement of all prior debt at face value, 4) a national bank 80%
privately owned, 5) a sinking fund to retire new debt, 6) a sound national
currency backed by gold and silver specie, and 7) tariffs to raise revenue and
protect fledgling commerce.
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Limited Government is a Founding Principle
“The
essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands,
will ever be liable to abuse.” James Madison
“In
questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind
him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Thomas Jefferson
The design of the government under the Constitution was not haphazard.
Our Founding Fathers understood that governments can oppress people. They knew
it from their own experience—and they knew it from their extensive scrutiny of
governmental forms throughout history.
Despite the risk, they had no choice but to
frame a workable government. What to do? A
number of things, actually. To prevent the government from becoming overly
powerful, the Framers agreed on eight measures:
Labels:
1787,
check and balance,
constitution,
first principles,
founders,
founding,
founding fathers,
founding principles,
framers,
government theory,
political science,
ratification,
rights
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)