A majority of Americans think the federal government poses a threat to rights of Americans, according to a new national poll.
Fifty-six percent of people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Friday say they think the federal government's become so large and powerful that it poses an immediate threat to the rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens. Forty-four percent of those polled disagree.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Followup on Attitudes Toward Concentrated Power
A new poll reinforces a point that we discussed in class this past week. CNN reports:
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Tocqueville at the Summit
The day after we discussed Tocqueville's analysis of the tyranny of the majority, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) mentioned it during the health care summit:
So this is the only place, the Senate, where the rights to the minority are protected and sometimes, as Senator Byrd has said, the minority can be right. I remember reading Alexis de Tocqueville's books, which most of us have read, and he said in his "American Democracy" that the greatest threat to the American democracy would be the tyranny of the majority.
Thought question: did this comment reflect what Tocqueville actually wrote? Do you think that anybody in the room had read Democracy in America?
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
The Riddles
On the following pages, you each have three questions. Answer two. (Give a different answer to each question: do not write one essay covering both.) Each answer must have at least four different sources, two of which must be hardcopy or microform books or government publications. In other words, you must go to the library.
Your sources may include specialized references such as The Almanac of American Politics, but do not cite general-purpose encyclopedias such as Encyclopaedia Britannica and Encyclopedia Americana. And especially do not count on Wikipedia, which is sometimes unreliable. (You might be able to get leads from Wikipedia, but then go elsewhere for verification and citable sources.) In your answer, you should not merely identify persons or concepts. You should also explain the subject matter’s political significance.
- Assignments should be typed, stapled, and double-spaced, and no more than four pages long. (Each answer should take about two pages.) Use 12-point type and one-inch margins.
- Put your name on a cover sheet. Do not identify yourself on the text pages.
- You may use endnotes or parenthetical references. Either way, put your documentation in proper format such as Turabian.
- Watch your spelling, grammar, diction and punctuation. Errors will count against you.
- Return assignments by the start of class, 10 March. Essays will drop one gradepoint for one day's lateness and a full grade for two or more days’ lateness. I will grant no extensions except for illness or emergency.
Adams,
- He led DOA and later became a prophet. Describe his policies.
- Mahoney helped found it. In 1966, fighting Rocky, it captured Row C! Explain.\
- Gilpin argued for the government. On the other side were Baldwin and the famous MA guy. Did the latter’s argument really track with the version that audiences saw
Adomian, Garrison
- He was on the AIP ticket. Four years earlier,
- Tell how Eaton’s `05 victory inspired a song.
- The whip quit because of dealings in speculative-grade bonds. He was close to a dealer (future jailbird). Explain.
- He was not from
- Why did the Railsplitter send the scion to the Court of St. James?
- The
Bamidele, Stephanie
- Why did the former SAG prexy invite the man with one white glove to the White House? Why did a future SCOTUS member object to a followup letter?
- Did Jacobson provide uppers to the MA president? Explain the consequences.
- House shrink colluded with tappers?
Bellman, Erica
- Did Stone the scribe (who graduated 49th) take Kremlin gold? Explain the controversy.
- At DOL,
- Dr. Pitney was its father. Today it has many slots. What happened when a recent leader disappeared? A sign of corruption?
Christensen, Daniel
- After CCP (part of a trio) declined to offer a sixpence, the
- Why did Jack send Dean to tell Charles about the quarantine?
- Fact was not factual, and AZ solon collected. Explain.
Daily, Robert
- Stewart’s Bailey had a B&L. What prompted #41 to sign a bailout of similar outfits?
- Why did Dana `65 (onetime WH ghost) back C. Wilson’s signature cause?
- Ethel and her husband fried after the chief said his brethren would not step in. Now cables strongly suggest that they indeed worked for Uncle Joe. Explain.
de Avila, Alexander
- Did Tiny’s beating lead TR to hold a WH meeting? Explain.
- Bill, of
Downs, Brian
- EDS, Shah, Isaiah 40:31 – what is the connection?
- How did a future justice help a future president in an
- Pitney’s business associate was a sot. Explain the impact on his son.
Eames, Anna
- “Legacy” project of bearded “pledge” guy has changed many names. Explain his success. (Hint: Cassavetes co-star.)
- Love, RN’s czar? His successor was much more energetic. Explain. (Hint: son was a dud candidate in 2002.)
Eldred, Christopher
- Sightless Sooner solon's grandson read to him while going to school. The lad grew up to seek office more than once. What happened?
- Prexy with a deformed arm sought the top job but fell by a few points. Explain.
- Ms. Reynolds caused big trouble for Cabinet secretary, who eventually came clean in print. Explain.
Haddad, Noor
- Former DOD guy supported creation of DOT, which he would deal with as a CEO. But most memorable role was as dad. Explain.
- Hawks flown from
- Rust, some said, perpetuated lockjaw in sensitive places. Explain.
Hollander, Matthew
- A model for one of Jack’s roles, the brother of the former UM prexy was a political issue. Explain.
- In July of 1952, he made a major mag cover. How did he end up on the Hill? (Hint: gold.)
- Why did “the Plumbers” go after the therapist of the man who copied the “Papers”?
Joseph, Anna
- Jill and Jane (alumnae of same school) did a tome on the Pin Point guy. A hatchet job?
- ALP split in `44. Rose: no red! Explain.
- Diminutive
Langdon, Stephen
- What happened when
- Why did solon, former “Captive Warrior,” complain about material on Enola Gay?
- Former Light Crust Flour spokesperson thwarted future prez in `41. Explain.
Lee, Beth
- Why would Ms. Varney’s outfit have an interest in the equilibria analyzed by a Crowe character?
- In the capital where Carcieri is currently #1, grad’s dad did not want to hear from rabbi. He fought and eventually won. Tell how.
- Did Lee’s 8 terms wreck the city of elms?
McDonald, Brendan
- How did the Reds kill the MD who belonged to JBS and became an MC?
- WASP worked for JEC and earned the soubriquet “Mad Dog.” Did his work on a “clash” justify the name? (Hint: high school)
- Why did the former “irreconcilable” join with the Little Flower to ban yellow dogs?
Miller, Sydney
- Why did TNR refer to Gertrude’s son as Hoosier’s brain?
- Veep contender ended up in Amex ads. Explain his significance.
- Future novelist presided over the decision to hang a Zurich-born soldier. Did the proceedings set a precedent?
Olesen, Erin
- Why did the
Pai, Aditya
- Dad of “The All-American” girl did best in ID, with over 9 percent. (But he got less than 2 percent in the home state he shared with his foe.) Why did he run?
- Bearing the name of a fragrant fruit, he helped cause the biggest bankruptcy of its kind and ended up in stir. Explain.
- Green won. Black disagreed, saying 1901 lines were unfair. Explain.
Perkins, Alexander
- On 9/2/58, POTUS’s signature started a program that would eventually bear the name of the Hindman guy. Explain its significance.
- GA guy tried to make nice at Hampton Roads, but his old Hill pal stonewalled. Explain.
- Why did the former Ms. Rosenbaum face attack from the writer who had once been “Crosley”?
Saisekar, Avantika
- How does Dr. Blumenthal’s spouse (BC `68) want to fix the safety of rides?
- How did the former
- How did the mayor (future veep) rouse the Philly convention and prompt a breakaway?
Stern, Sara
- Dunham `60 studied the land of “The Year of Living Dangerously.” Explain the personal toll of the field work.
- Maggie, helming Commerce panel, took on
- Tell how the last bearded chief shot down the Blue Eagle.
Sutter, Brian
- RAT (fat guy’s son) took heat for opposing the trials of the jerries. Why did he do so?
- LAS bears his name. Did he inspire Spradlin’s role?
- Scoop backed RN on Spartan and Sprint. Why?
Widmann, Michael
- He joined fellow former LI solon to form DMG. But before that, he led the trade group for suds. Explain its significance.
- Stone’s fictional kids are a reax to leftish bias, according to
- The
Monday, February 22, 2010
Constantine, Tocqueville, and Suffragettes
When Emperor Constantine faced religious heresy in Rome's North African provinces, he first attempted to persecute the heretics out of existence. They soon became martyrs, so he tried a different strategy. Rather than oppose the heretics, he ignored them and lavished attention on North Africa's orthodox believers. The heretic movement fizzeled out from a simple lack of p.r.
I was surprised to open Democracy in America and be reminded of Constantine's politics. Tocqueville's comments about the tyranny of the American majority make it clear that it acts as a sort of Constantine, crushing his opponents by making them voiceless shades amongst the living.
"[The master] does say: ' You are free not to think as I do... but from this day you are a stranger among us.... When you approach your fellows, they will shun you as an impure being...Go in peace. I have given you your life, but it is a life worse than death'" (Tocqueville 255-6).
If the majority actually was consistently right, such a system would work wonderfully. Unfortunately, when I think of major social movements --particularly women's rights -- I remember that they were only able to finally prevail by using modern media to force the public's attention. How saddening it is to think of the generations of young women before me who might have been able to fully enjoy the fruits of citizenship, had they not been condemned to silence by a majority whose claim to enlightenment rested solely on its numbers.
I was surprised to open Democracy in America and be reminded of Constantine's politics. Tocqueville's comments about the tyranny of the American majority make it clear that it acts as a sort of Constantine, crushing his opponents by making them voiceless shades amongst the living.
"[The master] does say: ' You are free not to think as I do... but from this day you are a stranger among us.... When you approach your fellows, they will shun you as an impure being...Go in peace. I have given you your life, but it is a life worse than death'" (Tocqueville 255-6).
If the majority actually was consistently right, such a system would work wonderfully. Unfortunately, when I think of major social movements --particularly women's rights -- I remember that they were only able to finally prevail by using modern media to force the public's attention. How saddening it is to think of the generations of young women before me who might have been able to fully enjoy the fruits of citizenship, had they not been condemned to silence by a majority whose claim to enlightenment rested solely on its numbers.
A Few Matters of Style
A quotation should never suddenly appear out of nowhere. Some kind of information about the quotation is needed. Name the author, give his or her credentials, name the source, give a summary. You won't do all of these each time, but you should usually name the author. For example:
a. But John Jones disagrees with this point, saying, "Such a product would not sell."
b. In an article in Time Fred Jackson writes that frogs vary in the degree ofshyness they exhibit: "The arboreal tree frogs seem to be especially. . . ."
Superscripted footnote numbers follow punctuation: apostles,1 “Jesus said, ‘Love your neighbor.’”1 Avoid footnote markers within sentences. Put them at the end.
[Y]ou should use single quotation marks (') only to set off quoted material (or a minor title) inside a quotation. "I think she said `I will try,' not `I won't try,'" explained Sandy.
Quotation marks with other punctuation:
Keep periods and commas within quotation marks.
So, for example:
According to Professor Jones, Lincoln "feared the spread of slavery," but many of his aides advised him to "watch and wait."
In the above example, both the comma and period were enclosed in the quotation marks. The main exception to this rule involves the use of internal citations, which always precede the last period of the sentence. For example:
According to Professor Jones, Lincoln "feared the spread of slavery," but many of his aides advised him to "watch and wait" (Jones 143).
Note, however, that the period remains inside the quotation marks when your citation style involved superscript footnotes or endnotes. For example:
According to Professor Jones, Lincoln "feared the spread of slavery," but many of his aides advised him to "watch and wait."2
"Patriotism is slavery" ~ Tolstoy
When I hear the word Patriotism I think of 911. I think of all the American flags flying across the country after the terrorist attack. I think of a country torn by tragedy uniting against a common evil. In this sense, patriotism has a positive connotation to me. It makes me proud to be an American.
On the other hand, I do not usually think about the fact that American leaders have rallied support for internment, censorship and other actions that as an American I am not proud of.
In thinking about patriotism I came across two different individuals with contrasting ideas. The first, Leo Tolstoy, is famous for his quotes regarding the evil of patriotism, saying the flag is the banner of war.
A public opinion exists that patriotism is a fine moral sentiment, and that it is right and our duty to regard one's own nation, one's own state, as the best in the world; and flowing naturally from this public opinion is another, namely, that it is right and our duty to acquiesce in the control of a government over ourselves, to subordinate ourselves to it, to serve in the army and submit ourselves to discipline, to give our earnings to the government in the form of taxes, to submit to the decisions of the law-courts, and to consider the edicts of the government as divinely right. And when such public opinion exists, a strong governmental power is formed possessing milliards of money, an organized mechanism of administration, the postal service, telegraphs, telephones, disciplined armies, law-courts, police, submissive clergy, schools, even the press; and this power maintains in the people the public opinion which it finds necessary.
This quote brought me back a couple of chapters to the idea of federalism and how the federal government has been able to grow and gain authority in times of conflict. As a proud American I am not ready to accept the cosmopolitan viewpoint and still want to believe that allegiance to one's country can be positive. However, Tolstoy and other opponents of patriotism define it as blind support of one's country and argue that a patriot must support their country over another regardless. This type of patriotism clearly leads to moral conflicts and would suggest an allegiance to mankind not a specific nation is the only way.
The second individual is Stephen Nathanson, whose essay "In defense of 'Moderate Patriotism'" examines Tolstoy's accusations against patriotism. Nathanson argues that people can love and be loyal to their own country as long as they do so in a moral way.
American Civic Culture
He wrote: "The religious atmosphere of the country was the first thing that struck me on arrival in the United States." (p. 295 of Lawrence-Mayer ed.) See here for relevant data.
In June 2006, Barack Obama gave an important speech on religion in politics. See prepared text here.
Covenant for a New America here.
Remarks at 2010 National Prayer Breakfast:
Individualism
Religion
- Comparative data on religion.
- Comparative data on evolution.
- A closer look at US attitudes on evolution.
Patriotism
Service
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Census
At the Washington Post, demographer William Frey lists five myths about population and the census:
1. Immigration is the biggest force behind the nation's racial and ethnic diversity.
2. The country is getting uniformly older.
3. Big states will keep getting bigger -- especially in Congress.
4. The census is the main source of information about our population.
5. New technology gives us much more demographic data than the census can.
Census forms go out in a few weeks. Where do you fill out yours? Watch:
Speaking of Facebook...
Something to consider long before you apply for scholarships, internships or jobs:
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Assimilation, Citizenship, and Tocqueville
A banner at Ellis Island:
From the Pew Hispanic Center:
Nearly all Hispanic adults born in the United States of immigrant parents report they are fluent in English. By contrast, only a small minority of their parents describe themselves as skilled English speakers. This finding of a dramatic increase in English-language ability from one generation of Hispanics to the next emerges from a new analysis of six Pew Hispanic Center surveys conducted this decade among a total of more than 14,000 Latino adults.From the Center for Immigration Studies:
Immigrants account for one in eight U.S. residents, the highest level in 80 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. Overall, nearly one in three immigrants is an illegal alien. Half of Mexican and Central American immigrants and one-third of South American immigrants are illegal. Since 2000, 10.3 million immigrants have arrived — the highest seven-year period of immigration in U.S. history. More than half of post-2000 arrivals (5.6 million) are estimated to be illegal aliens.
- Short biography
- Reasons for coming to America
- Itinerary
- Map of his travels, along with journal entries
- The Tocqueville Fraud
From Tocqueville, p. 237:
The common man in the United States has understood the influence of the general prosperity on his own happiness, an idea so simple but nevertheless so little understood by the people. Moreover, he is accustomed to regard that prosperity as his own work. So he sees the public fortune as his own, and he works for the good of the state, not only from duty or from pride, but, I dare almost say, from greed.
There is no need to study the institutions or the history of the Americans to recognize the truth of what has just been said, for their mores are sufficient evidence of it. The American, taking part in everything that is done in his country, feels a duty to defend anything criticized there, for it is not only his country that is being attacked, but himself; hence one finds that his national pride has recourse to every artifice and descends to every childishness of personal vanity.
Nothing is more annoying in the ordinary intercourse of life than this irritable patriotism of the Americans. A foreigner will gladly agree to praise much in their country, but he would like to be allowed to criticize something, and that he is absolutely refused.
Page 244:
Democracy does nor provide a people with the most skilful of governments, but it does that which the most skilful government often cannot do ; it spreads throughout the body social a restless activity, superabundant force, and energy never found elsewhere, which, however little favoured by circumstance, can do wonders. Those are its true advantages.
Tocqueville wrote: "The religious atmosphere of the country was the first thing that struck me on arrival in the United States." (p. 295 of Lawrence-Mayer ed.) See here for relevant data.
Monday, February 15, 2010
American Citizenship
Ways of becoming a citizen
Fourteenth Amendment
The Oath of Allegiance
I hereby declare, on oath,
that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all
allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince,
potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I
have heretofore been a subject or citizen;
that I will support and defend the Constitution and
laws of the United States of America against all
enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States
when required by the law;
that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed
Forces of the United States when required by the
law;
that I will perform work of national importance under
civilian direction when required by the law;
and that I take this obligation freely without any
mental reservation or purpose of evasion;
so help me God.
Click here to see a graph showing the foreign-born population of the US 1850-2000.
Data on foreign-born population 2007
Fourteenth Amendment
The Oath of Allegiance
I hereby declare, on oath,
that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all
allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince,
potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I
have heretofore been a subject or citizen;
that I will support and defend the Constitution and
laws of the United States of America against all
enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States
when required by the law;
that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed
Forces of the United States when required by the
law;
that I will perform work of national importance under
civilian direction when required by the law;
and that I take this obligation freely without any
mental reservation or purpose of evasion;
so help me God.
- Note requirements for naturalization.
- New citizenship test.
- Craig Ferguson is a citizen. No kidding:
Click here to see a graph showing the foreign-born population of the US 1850-2000.
Data on foreign-born population 2007
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Federalism
Federalism and medical marijuana.
Federalism and alcohol
Attitudes toward government waste
Professor Darrell West in The Politico:
Attitudes toward government waste
Professor Darrell West in The Politico:
"Opt-out” has become the most powerful phrase in the health care debate, thanks to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s decision to include it in Senate legislation. When elected officials were searching for votes last week in favor of a filibuster-proof public option and appeared to come up short, Democratic Sens. Tom Carper of Delaware and Chuck Schumer of New York promoted the novel idea of a state-level “opt-out.” If particular jurisdictions do not like a public option, they simply can exit the government health insurance system for uninsured residents.
It is a very American idea. Our founders established the notion of federalism to allow states that felt strongly about public policy to operate under different laws and procedures. Currently, states have broad latitude to set their own rules in areas such as insurance, education and welfare. Indeed, state-level differences are so widespread that the late University of Chicago Professor Morton Grodzins described America as having a “marble cake” federalism with complex textures and contradictory policies ...
But there are serious logistical questions in terms of implementation. How do states opt out? Must state legislatures decide or can they use public referenda to allow voters to make the decision?
...
From a governance standpoint, the public option creates a worrisome precedent for other policy areas. If states don’t like congressional decisions on gun control, climate change or immigration, will state legislators demand an opt-out? If this were 1965 and there were a Medicare opt-out, it is conceivable we would have ended up with two-thirds of the country having Medicare, while one-third did not.
With any comprehensive reform, there always are unanticipated consequences. [emphasis added]
Monday, February 8, 2010
Citizenship: More than just Voting?
While reading the news this morning, an interesting article about Obama's tendency to "scold" the American people caught my eye. Though Obama has been known to tell people "not just want they want to hear but what they need to hear"1 since his campaign began in 2007, he has recently drawn a lot of fire from Republicans and Democrats alike for criticizing and advising everyone from average citizens to the Supreme Court. While almost all of his suggestions, such as eating healthier and exercising more, are good ideas, many question whether or not it is the President's place to lecture the American citizenry.
Undoubtedly, Obama's position is understandable. Passing health care reform, for example, proves useless without lifestyle changes (such as healthier eating) by individuals receiving such care. Popular support and participation is vital to the success of almost any law, and the policies Obama has planned are no exception. The environmental, health, and educational reforms he has planned all will require a great deal of effort from both the people and the government. Yet the public attitudes Obama faces are everything but the sort required for his plans to work: Americans' expectations of their government are extreme and unbounded, whereas their willingness to contribute and sacrifice is often minimal, at best. This is not to say that no one goes out and volunteers or, for example, takes shorter showers to help improve their nation and world. These types of people and actions are very present in our society, but, unfortunately, they are by no means the standard. Statistics such as obesity rates and fast food sales indicate all the more how unwilling, or at the very least unable, most Americans are to change their actions for their own good, let alone for the greater good. Thus, officials like Obama may find it difficult and even frustrating to try and serve a general populace that all too often behaves more like a whiny toddler (all take and no give) than a group of mature adults.
That said, I don't know that it is entirely justifiable or politically apt for Obama to be criticizing in the manner he has. Obviously, these trends of warped expectations and inaction need to change, but should he be the catalyst? What Obama is talking about is changing our social values - he is asking for something more than our democratic duties outlined by the Constitution and 200+ years of tradition - and so he may be overstepping his boundaries, even if his advice falls perfectly within the realm of free speech. Alternatively, the lifestyle changes he suggests do serve the greater good, and since he isn't mandating these changes, there is really no infringement upon our personal freedoms. Ultimately, though, the more important question is whether or not our civic duty should include contributing to our community through observing these social values.
Personally, I believe that if we expect our government to achieve a public goal, it is wrong and unfair of us to purposefully act against that goal. If we want Medicare, Medicaid, and future legislation to ensure our health, we shouldn't eat supersized meals from the dollar menu to the point where we're having heart attacks in our 30s and 40s. As long as we have high expectations of our government, so must we set the bar for ourselves. The jury may still be out on a presidential role in enforcing these civic values, but, realistically, if we want things to work, we have to pitch in too.
What do you think? Should healthy living and environmentalism, for example, be part of our civic values? Should President Obama, or any public official for that matter, remind us of or even define what these values are?
1. (according to Josh Earnest, White House Deputy Press Secretary)
The Federalist and Federalism
In response to Chris's question (see earlier post), see Hamilton's speech of June 18, 1787. Also see drafts of the Constitution. Contrast the US Constitution with the Confederate Constitution.
Ron Chernow's biography undercuts the notion that Alexander Hamilton was a well-born defender of privilege. Here is a passage summing up what the born-out-of-wedlock Hamilton and his brother faced in their youth:
Concerns of war, peace, and security
Let us pause briefly to tally the grim catalog of disasters that had befallen these two boys between 1765 and 1769: their father had vanished, their mother had died, their cousin and supposed protector had committed bloody suicide, and their aunt, uncle, and grandmother had all died. James, 16, and Alexander, 14, were now left alone, largely friendless and penniless. At every step in their rootless, topsy-turvy existence, they had been surrounded by failed, broken, embittered people. Their short lives had been shadowed by a stupefying sequence of bankruptcies, marital separations, deaths, scandals, and disinheritance. Such repeated shocks must have
stripped Alexander Hamilton of any sense that life was fair, that he existed in a benign universe, or that he could ever count on help from anyone. That this abominable childhood produced such a strong, productive, self-reliant human being -- that this fatherless adolescent could have ended up a founding father of a country he had not yet even seen -- seems little short of miraculous.
Concerns for deliberative democracy:
- Federalist 1: "[O]f those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants."
- Federalist 5: "The history of Great Britain is the one with which we are in general the best acquainted, and it gives us many useful lessons. We may profit by their experience without paying the price which it cost them. Although it seems obvious to common sense that the people of such an island should be but one nation, yet we find that they were for ages divided into three, and that those three were almost constantly embroiled in quarrels and wars with one another."
- Federalist 6: "The genius of republics (say they) is pacific; the spirit of commerce has a tendency to soften the manners of men, and to extinguish those inflammable humors which have so often kindled into wars. Commercial republics, like ours, will never be disposed to waste themselves in ruinous contentions with each other. They will be governed by mutual interest, and will cultivate a spirit of mutual amity and concord."
- Federalist 7: "IT IS sometimes asked, with an air of seeming triumph, what inducements could the States have, if disunited, to make war upon each other?"
- Federalist 8; "To be more safe, they at length become willing to run the risk of being less free."
Federalism
- Federalist 9: The proposed Constitution, so far from implying an abolition of the State governments, makes them constituent parts of the national sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign power. This fully corresponds, in every rational import of the terms, with the idea of a federal government.
- Federalist 39: The proposed Constitution, therefore, is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both. In its foundation it is federal, not national; in the sources from which the ordinary powers of the government are drawn, it is partly federal and partly national; in the operation of these powers, it is national, not federal; in the extent of them, again, it is federal, not national; and, finally, in the authoritative mode of introducing amendments, it is neither wholly federal nor wholly national.
- Federalist 45: "The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State. The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security."
- Federalist 46: It has appeared also, that the prepossessions of the people, on whom both will depend, will be more on the side of the State governments, than of the federal government. So far as the disposition of each towards the other may be influenced by these causes, the State governments must clearly have the advantage. But in a distinct and very important point of view, the advantage will lie on the same side. The prepossessions, which the members themselves will carry into the federal government, will generally be favorable to the States; whilst it will rarely happen, that the members of the State governments will carry into the public councils a bias in favor of the general government. A local spirit will infallibly prevail much more in the members of Congress, than a national spirit will prevail in the legislatures of the particular States.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)