Alexander Hamilton wrote at the end of The Federalist Papers: “A nation without a national government is, in my view, an awful spectacle.” Today, he might write: “A nation with a government like this is, in my view, an awful spectacle.”
On the day that I write this review, the U.S. Senate – supposedly “the world’s most deliberative body” – passed, by a purely partisan vote, in the middle of the night, greased with backroom bribes, loaded with porkbarrel spending, a health care bill that will amount to a government takeover of 14% of the American economy.
Perhaps it is time for American citizens to analyze: (a) the kind of government the founders intended, (b) what we have today, (c) how we got here, and (d) what can be done about it. One essential step will be to read, for ourselves, our founding documents. I recently read some of them. They show a level of political genius never attained by any generation or any nation before or since. I agree with the opinion of several of the founders themselves: that the American experiment was miraculous, as God’s providential hand helped them to overcome seemingly impossible odds and irreconcilable differences to produce a republic that has given more liberty and more wealth to more people than any other nation in the history of the earth.
Declaration of Independence
This is a superb statement of the nature and purpose of civil government and their philosophical underpinnings: “the laws of nature and of nature’s God,” self-evident truths such as: all men being created equal, possessing unalienable rights (specifically life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness); that governments are to effect their citizens’ safety and happiness, and derive their powers from the consent of the governed; and that obedience to tyrants is disobedience to God.
One must admire their inspiring rhetoric and admit their inescapable logic (given their premises), but there are a couple of debatable points:
- Does the phrase, “the laws of nature and of nature’s God,” indicate that the founders’ thinking stood on the slippery slope of Deism instead of Biblical Christianity? Admittedly, Jefferson, the primary author, was probably a Deist – and maybe Franklin – but probably 50 of the other 54 signers were orthodox Christians, and it seems unlikely to me that they would let that phrase stand if it could have been understood (or rather, misunderstood) that the “Divine Providence” mentioned at the end of the document as anything other than the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
- Does the premise of “unalienable rights” rise beyond the level of self-evident truth (in the Enlightenment ideal) to the level of religious dogma? In other words, did the civil disobedience in which the colonists were about to engage have Biblical justification and divine sanction? They certainly thought so, though reasonable Christians might disagree.
The Articles of Confederation
This first attempt at a constitution leaned far in the direction of the sovereignty of the states – so far in that direction that it nearly caused the colonies to lose their war for independence (soldiers and money were requested by the Congress, but could be refused by the States, and sometimes were refused). It declares that the States entered into “a firm league of friendship with each other,” but in the end left the national government at the mercy of the States’ own self-interests. It did, however, teach the Continental Congress many lessons that they would bring to bear when they convened to construct a much more perfect document: the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Constitution
The balance this wonderful document strikes at many levels is quite remarkable:
- Between individual liberty, states’ sovereignty, and a powerful national government;
- Between majority rule and minority rights;
- Between the three branches of the federal government itself;
- Between the temptations of power, enlightened self-interest, and accountability to the people.
Article One deals with the legislative branch: the Congress.
Article Two deals with the executive branch: the President.
Article Three deals with the judicial branch: the Supreme Court.
Article Four deals with the powers and interactions of the States.
Article Five deals with the amendment process for the Constitution.
Article Six deals with public debt, federal jurisdiction, and the election of members of Congress.
Article Seven deals with the ratification of the Constitution.
Simple. Sublime. Compared to the legislative bills of today, that number in the thousands of pages of incoherent and incomprehensible legal gibberish, this is a document of absolute genius. Its supreme value can be seen in the results that have accrued in America’s relatively brief history. The liberty it has afforded American citizens, coupled with the stability it has produced in our government, has been unparalleled in world history. The foresight of the founders is demonstrated in that, despite the dramatic changes in American society that have occurred from then till now, this document has only been amended 26 times. While in the last 2 centuries other, older nations have had many forms of government (with changes often violent, and durations often brief), the transfer of power from one party to another in America -with one notable and tragic exception, between 1861 and 1865 – has been smooth and enduring, and the envy of the world.
The Federalist Papers
“It…seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force” (Federalist 1). This statement shows the very clear sense on the part of the founders of America’s great destiny. That destiny depended, in part, on a vigorous federal government that corrected the weaknesses that the United States had suffered under the Articles of Confederation. That is why Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay wrote a series of articles appealing to the citizens of the state of New York to ratify the new Constitution.
I had read only parts and portions of The Federalist Papers until recently. Reading them in their totality have to be the equivalent in any civics course in any college in the country. I’ll mention here only a few of the salient themes (some with illustrative quotes).
They recognized that governments keep the baser human passions in check, but that they are manned by people of like passions: “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” (Federalist 51).
They lobbied for the federal power to levy taxes, but only for the legitimate purposes of government, and always with a view toward the general welfare: “A judicious exercise of the power of taxation [requires that] the person in whose hands it is should be acquainted with the general genius, habits, and modes of thinking of the people at large” (Federalist 35).
I will say that the authors did misjudge two things, both having to do with safeguards against the encroachments of a tyrannical central government, and both having to do with situations that they could not even conceive as possible to come about.
- They believed that the States would guard the liberties of their citizens. “The State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if anything improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the voice, but, if necessary, the arm of their discontent” (Federalist 26). I guess they could never have foreseen the day when the States would be so fiscally irresponsible as to go deeply into debt, and that States (like California!) would apply to Washington for bailouts, so that the feds could hold the States hostage for the ransom of federal dollars. My friends, that’s what the $787 billion so-called “stimulus package” passed in early 2009 is all about!
- They believed that the People would be ever vigilant and would never tolerate infringements of their liberties. “The House of Representatives…can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society. …If it be asked what is to restrain the House from making legal discriminations in favour of themselves and a particular class of society? I answer: the genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and above all, the vigilant, and manly spirit which actuates the people of America – a spirit which nourishes freedom, and in return is nourished by it. If this spirit shall ever be so far debased as to tolerate a law not obligatory on the legislature, as well as on the people, the people will be prepared to tolerate anything but liberty” (Federalist 57). My friends, we have lived to see the day: this happens all the time now. What does this say about Congress, and about us?
Perhaps if a critical mass of Americans would spend some time with our founding documents, we would recover the “manly spirit” that gave birth to this great nation, and it would help us to regain our moral and political compass before the nation is negatively transformed beyond recognition and beyond repair.