This year, Constituting America's 7th annual 90-Day Study is The United States Supreme Court: Landmark Decisions & The Justices Who Made Them. As in previous years, I'll write a few essays for this year's study. You can read all of the essays here.
Constituting America is committed "to reach, educate and inform America's citizens and youth about the importance of the U.S. Constitution." They do a great job.
“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
Monday, February 27, 2017
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
Primer on Electoral College
The Electoral College is an integral element of our
governing system. The purpose is to give people who live in all the states some
influence on the executive leadership of the country. After the recent election,
many are questioning the wisdom of Article II, Section 1. The Electoral College
is immensely important not only to who wins, but how presidential campaigns are
run. Eliminate the Electoral College and the interior will never see another
candidate in their state and heartland primaries will be meaningless.
Inhabitants of the hinterlands often feel dismissed by urbanites
living along one of the two coasts. Unfortunately for our country, the hue and
cry to do away with the Electoral College confirms their worst suspicions. Abolishing the Electoral College will
disenfranchise every American who lives in fly-over country.
Here is a good primer on the Elector College.
Labels:
#AlexanderHamilton,
#constitution,
#democracy,
#economy,
#electoralCollege,
#freedom,
#GOP,
#government,
#government theory,
#history,
#JamesMadison,
#liberty,
#Republicans,
#rights
Thursday, September 22, 2016
Should Government Pay for Higher Education?
Since government provided higher education has become a hot topic, perhaps Milton Friedman can provide some advice.
Wednesday, August 3, 2016
Do readers judge a book by its title?
Everyone knows the old axiom that people judge a book by its cover, but do they also judge books by their title? I don’t know. I suspect a great title can get readers to look further, a horrible title stops further inspection, and a mediocre title doesn't influence sales one way or the other.
The Great Rehearsal might be the worst title I've encountered for a great book. Carl Van Doren wrote one of the top three history books on the Constitutional Convention. (In this amateur historian's humble opinion.)The book was published in 1948, when the United Nations was just starting up and Van Doren thought the 1787 Constitutional Convention was a rehearsal for writing the UN charter. This was a poor title that must have dampened sales of a fine history book. Ironic, since the book never mentions current events except in a slapped together preface.
I still like the title. Perhaps I should have agonized more over my other titles. The Steve Dancy titles: The Shopkeeper, Leadville, Murder at Thumb Butte, The Return, Jenny's Revenge, and Crossing the Animas are pedestrian. I like The Shout Mouth Society because it connotes secret society intrigue, which properly reflects the plot of this contemporary novel. Principled Action is a lousy title and may have affected sales of this nonfiction book about the founding period.
The Barnes and Noble Book Blog posted an article “12 Books With The Most Irresistible Titles.” Good Titles, but I always liked Lonesome Dove because it sounded intriguing.
The Great Rehearsal might be the worst title I've encountered for a great book. Carl Van Doren wrote one of the top three history books on the Constitutional Convention. (In this amateur historian's humble opinion.)The book was published in 1948, when the United Nations was just starting up and Van Doren thought the 1787 Constitutional Convention was a rehearsal for writing the UN charter. This was a poor title that must have dampened sales of a fine history book. Ironic, since the book never mentions current events except in a slapped together preface.
I've never agonized over my own titles, except for Tempest at Dawn, my own book on the Constitutional Convention. Since this was a novelization of the convention, I needed a title that didn't sound like a history book. I also liked the idea that the title reflected the turmoil in the infant country at the time of the convention.
I still like the title. Perhaps I should have agonized more over my other titles. The Steve Dancy titles: The Shopkeeper, Leadville, Murder at Thumb Butte, The Return, Jenny's Revenge, and Crossing the Animas are pedestrian. I like The Shout Mouth Society because it connotes secret society intrigue, which properly reflects the plot of this contemporary novel. Principled Action is a lousy title and may have affected sales of this nonfiction book about the founding period.
Authors may not be the best at selecting titles, but I’m not sure focus-group driven editors are better. My title for my computer technology book was Dinosaurs and Whippersnappers, but Wiley insisted on The Digital Organization. I still prefer my title.
![]() |
| Honest stories filled with dishonest characters. |
Friday, July 1, 2016
Alexander Hamilton Fixed a Broken Nation
Due to the groundbreaking play, Alexander Hamilton has
vaulted skyward to become an icon of popular cultural. It couldn’t happen to a better man. Hamilton
was my favorite character when writing Tempest at Dawn. At the time of the
Constitutional Convention he was only thirty years of age, yet he had already proved
his physical courage and mental agility.
When writing my novel, I used the following excerpt to illustrate the
economic conditions faced by the infant nation. Most of the states had not paid
off the war bonds that financed the Revolution, foreclosures were rampant,
inflation raged, there was no common money, and production, especially for
ships and foodstuffs, had declined to the point of alarm. These were the dire circumstances
inherited by Alexander Hamilton when he became our first Secretary of the
Treasury. In a tour de force, he righted the country’s finances and economy by
the end of Washington’s first term.
When Baldwin emerged from behind the building, he failed to notice his friends on the other side of the road, so he walked into the tavern. He spent only a few minutes inside and emerged with a wooden bowl and an oversized spoon. Looking around, he finally spotted Sherman and Hamilton on the log across the way.
As he took a seat next to Sherman, Baldwin asked, “What’s this?”
Hamilton leaned forward to look around Sherman. “Squirrel, I think.”
“God, I hate traveling.”
“Throw it away, and I’ll give you a pear.”
Baldwin dipped his spoon deep into the concoction and let the goo plop back into the bowl. “This looks like pig swill.” He ceremoniously turned the bowl over, and they all watched the pottage spill onto the ground in bumpy chunks.
“My money says that blob will still be there on my return trip,” Hamilton said.
Baldwin turned the pear a couple times and then took a huge bite. After a noisy chomp, he spoke with a mouth half full. “I’ll not take that bet; forest animals have more dignity.”
Thursday, May 19, 2016
The First Presidential Campaign—George Washington, 1788-89
The following essay was first published in Constituting America.
George
Washington won the first presidency under the newly established Constitution.
He ran unopposed, professed not to want the job, and remained for the most part at
Mount Vernon, yet won unanimously. Many believe he never campaigned, but instead
acquiesced to a call to duty from his countrymen. Perhaps it was not so simple.
People
think of Washington as a man of honor who won a war through strength of character
and perseverance, and as a president who didn’t cling to power. From our
perspective in time, he appears etched-in-marble and stiff as a board. Washington
was tall, stately, reserved, and preoccupied with his reputation, but he also
loved to dance, play cards, socialize over meals, and attend the theater. He
was a superb horseman, ran his plantation with a sharp eye for profit, and
attended church regularly. Washington was a vibrant, athletic man who wanted
most of all to be loved by his countrymen.
Washington
was the preeminent politician of his age and maintained good relationships with
all the significant people in the country. To say he didn’t campaign for the
presidency is to ignore decades of relentless politicking. (When Dwight
Eisenhower was told he was not a politician, he replied that no one could
become General of the Army without being a politician.) Washington bragged he
never ate alone, made sure he was a central figure in all the founding events,
collected a cadre of bright and capable people, and understood branding well
before Madison Avenue had a clue.
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Historical Novels Need a Fictional Title
Coming up with a good book title is difficult. Ideally, you want the title that will grab a buyer’s attention in three or so words. The title is actually only half of a selling partnership. The cover and title work together to entice a purchase. People do judge a book by its cover. The cover entails an image with a few words, and if either appears incongruent, buyers move on to the next offering.
My favorite is Tempest at Dawn. Since the book is a dramatization of the Constitutional Convention, I wanted a title that sounded like a novel, not a nonfiction history book. The cover design put the title in context: a stormy sky over the Pennsylvania State House flying a thirteen star flag. For me, the title evoked a troubled nation at its founding, but some criticized the title as unrelated to the story. I still like it.
In my Western series, I wanted the sub-title prominent to remind readers that there were more Steve Dancy Tales, so I chose simple titles that included:
The covers are black and white because I wanted a design that indicated that these were a different type of Western: different from books with loud, colorful cover illustrations showing action or looming violence. The series has been very successful, so hopefully this is partly due to the covers and titles because I intend to continue the pattern for the remaining books in the series.
Sunday, February 14, 2016
The Intrigue of Presidential Elections
Tomorrow, Constituting America will initiate its sixth
annual 90 Day Study. You can read previous essays here.
Those prior essays address:
- The Federalist Papers,
- The Constitution,
- The amendments,
- Classics that influenced the Constitution
- Erosion of checks and balances.
Constituting
America is co-chaired by Janine Turner and Cathy Gillespie.
This year’s
study is titled: The Intrigue of Presidential Elections and Their
Constitutional Impact, A Study of America's Past 56 Presidential Elections:
1789-2012.
I feel privileged
to again be invited to participate with some of the best constitutional
scholars in the nation.
Friday, January 8, 2016
Power To The Regulators!
The Founders believed that consolidating executive, legislative, and judicial powers would threaten liberty, so to avoid this tragedy, they built our constitutional framework with checks and balances. James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, wrote in Federalist 47 that “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
Whew! Thank goodness we avoided that kind of government.
On second thought, we didn’t. Despite the Founders best efforts, Congress has concentrated executive, legislative, and judicial powers into regulatory agencies. Lazy legislators pass vague laws and then permit regulators to fill in the devilish details. Many of these regulatory agencies employ their own adjudication panels with internal appeal boards that judge the rightness or wrongness of their own actions. (A final appeal may be made to outside courts, but usually not until all of the agency’s protocols have run their course.) Lastly, regulatory agencies execute their own interpretation of laws, with—if White House responses to regulatory scandals are to be believed—no oversight by the top executive.
Surely, this can’t be right. It would violate every precept of the Founders.
Unfortunately, it’s true. In fact, amassing vast powers in regulatory agencies has become so commonplace, few take notice anymore. At least, few took notice until the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau raised this liberty-sapping drift to a brand new level.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Can Words On Parchment Constrain Executive Overreach?
“Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed.”
The
Declaration of Independence used these words to legitimize our founding as a
nation. Fifteen simple words, but they embodied a world-shattering idea. Kings
supposedly derived their authority from God, but the Declaration declared that
“all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.” These subversive words flipped the divine right of kings on its
head. Instead of kings, God endowed all of mankind with natural rights.
Words can be
powerful.
That is,
unless they’re ignored. The Constitution is the “supreme law of the land,” but
many don’t accept that enumerated powers limit government action. Elected
officials “solemnly swear … to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of
the United States,” but many view the words as cant uttered during a
swearing-in ritual. Lesser laws are based on a reasonable man’s interpretation
of the language, but many regard the “supreme law of the land” as a living
document that can mean whatever we need it to mean on any particular day.
Thursday, November 19, 2015
A Tale of Serendipity
I took historical accuracy seriously when I wrote Tempest at Dawn. I not only read dozens of
books about the Constitutional Convention, but studied books on Eighteen Century
lifestyle and technology; Philadelphia, New York, and New Haven; the
international scene; and numerous biographies of the principle Framers of the
Constitution. I also made numerous visits to New Haven, New York, Mount Vernon, Montpelier, and
Philadelphia as part of my research.
The events and locations outside of the State House were as
accurate as I could portray them. Two major venues in the book were the Indian
Queen and City Tavern. (City Tavern remains intact, but alas, the Indian Queen
is long gone.) In my penchant for accuracy, I tried to lodge the delegates in
the appropriate Inns, homes, and taverns, but I couldn’t find where Roger
Sherman stayed during the convention. After looking at every source I could
find, I finally decided I would need to make something up. He was not rich, so
he would probably stay at a boarding house. I used my wife’s maiden name and
put him in a room at Mrs. Marshall’s boarding house. This was a fictional
contrivance, but not my only one. I left my other protagonist, James Madison,
at the upscale Indian Queen for the duration of the convention when he actually
moved elsewhere at some point for privacy.
Wednesday, September 23, 2015
I Owe a Great Debt to One of The Founding Fathers
For Constitution Day, Steve Bartin wrote an American
Thinker article about Roger Sherman, my favorite Founding Father. Sherman
was a powerful influence on our founding and his progeny have been
exceptionally influential in our nation’s history. I’m biased, course. In
writing Tempest
at Dawn, I wanted to present a personal perspective on the major
conflicts at the Constitutional Convention. I stumbled around with a few different
approaches until I decided to alternate point of view between James Madison and
Roger Sherman. Each chapter would switch between these two characters to give
the reader a personal as well as fact-based perspective. It worked far better
than I expected.
Roger Sherman and James Madison provide a great contrast.
Sherman was one of the few who could look the tall George Washington straight
in the eye, while a wag described Madison as smaller than a used piece of soap.
Sherman was the second oldest delegate and Madison among the youngest. Sherman
was an abolitionist, while Madison owned over one hundred slaves. Sherman was
taciturn, while Madison was talkative. (Sherman once dedicated a bridge by
stomping on it, remarked that it appeared well built, and then walked away.)
![]() |
| Roger Sherman and James Madison |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)










