James Madison published the Federalist Essays in 1787-1788 to encourage people living in the newly independent colonies to support ratification of the Constitution. Here is my analysis of two of the essays, followed by a modern day example, all of which answer the question “Why does the American form of government work?”
Federalist Essay #10
“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.”
In this passage from the Federalist Essay #10, James Madison discusses the ideal separation of power between local, state, and national government as proposed by the Constitution. Throughout this essay, Madison talks about the prevalent threat that factions pose to republican nations. According to Madison, the size of a representative’s jurisdiction can play a role to eradicate this problem while making sure the voice of the majority is heard. He says that if each representative represents too many citizens, he or she will not truly be acquainted with the views and desires of the people, while representing too few citizens would cause representatives to lose sight of the nation as a whole, which would put the idea of majority rule at risk. Madison claims that the power gradient from local legislatures up to the national legislature creates a system of representatives that are able to both speak for their jurisdiction’s desires and be wary of the big picture. When considering the question, “Why does the American government work?” the separation between local, state, and national power is an important factor to consider. When the Americans were creating the Constitution and deciding how to govern themselves, their soon-to-be nation was fairly large in size; today, it is huge. How can the national government function while respecting the decisions of the majority and addressing the needs of the minority? The answer lies in the multi-pronged system of mayors, city councils, and district Congressmen who can attend to local needs while assisting the legislative branch in addressing the needs of the country at large.
“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.”
This passage appears towards the end of the essay, as Madison wraps up his argument in support of the representative system in the Constitution’s proposed republic government. Madison reiterates that a republic is the most effective method of giving democratic rights to the people of a large union without inducing chaos. Madison posits that those who are elected to representative positions, although only human, will have some merit that will allow them to successfully represent their fellow Americans. Madison goes on to argue that the power balances ensure that one party will not be able to “outnumber and oppress the rest.” According to Madison, the American government system will even protect against any unjust wishes that the majority may have. This idea in particular, which Madison also talks about in Essay #51, is one of the key reasons why the American form of government works. Not only are people able to decide things by majority rule, but a system of checks is in place to majority rule to infringe on minority rights.
Federalist Essay #51
“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.”
Federalist Essay #51 is all about the separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. In this passage, Madison clarifies not only why this separation of powers is necessary, but also how government officials can take the initiative to make sure the separation exits. Madison writes that members should be “as little dependent as possible on those of the others.” This is vital to a functioning republic; if different departments of the government were interdependent on each other, the goals and desires of one department could quickly become the goal of all the departments. In that case, the government would not be carrying out the will of the majority of the citizens, but rather government officials would be seeing to their own personal goals. Madison therefore implores government officials to be ambitious in their defense against this. He says that it is human nature to go against the rule of separation of powers, and it is therefore necessary to take action against the “abuses of government.” Madison goes on to make several philosophical musings about how human nature is reflected in not only the wrongdoings of government, but in the necessity of government itself. But philosophical thoughts aside, his main point is that for separation of powers and a truly just government to exist, the government officials must hold themselves to the highest moral standards, and check others by holding each other to the same standards.
“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….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 this passage Madison addresses the concern of the rights of the minority. The idea of majority rule can cause problems for minorities, as their voices can be left unheard and their rights trampled. Madison provides two solutions, the first of which deviates completely from the entire premise of republican government. His next solution is the one he promises the US government will follow. He says that society will be so diverse that the minority will have no need to worry about the majority trampling their rights. With such a diverse community, Madison implies that any majority will in itself be made up of a groups and subsets of minority groups, such that no groups are singled out and deprived of rights. Now, we must remember that any one minority must not take over the actions made by the government, as this would no longer be a republic. However, it is imperative to integrate the rights and thoughts of minorities into every decision made, so that the minorities are not oppressed by the majority. To me, this idea is perhaps one of the most important answers to the question “Why does the American form of government work?” America was so diverse when it first became a country (let alone how diverse it is now – we’ll get to that in a second) without successful protection of minority rights, it would have fallen apart in a matter of years.
Tying it all together – The American form of government at work today
The main ideas Madison presented in these two particular essays revolve around some common themes: separation of power, balance of power, and majority rule/minority rights. To examine how these things are at work today, I thought about an extremely current example: the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) being overturned in June of this year. DOMA, which stated that the federal government and state governments were not required to recognize same-sex marriages, was enacted in 1996. Before being signed into law by President Clinton, or the executive branch, it had to be passed by the legislative branch. In this case, both the House of Representatives and the Senate passed this act with majority. DOMA was enacted by majority rule in the legislative branch, but it undeniably took away rights from the LGBT minority of the entire nation. However, thanks to the same system of checks and balances and separation and power that Madison discussed in these essays, DOMA was eventually overturned, albeit seventeen years too late. The judicial branch the branch of government that overturned DOMA by deeming it unconstitutional. The overturning of DOMA does not, by any means, mean that same-sex marriages are allowed throughout the country. At this point, we can turn our attention to the state government. Even though there is no longer a federal law that says states don’t have to recognize same-sex marriages, there is no law that says that they are required to recognize same-sex marriages, and this distinction can be made due to the separation of state and federal government. For the reasons stated above, the ongoing struggle for rights of the LGBT community (which is by no means over, and by no means includes only marriage equality), can be examined as an example of how our government works today and how the Constitutional ideals of government that Madison advocated for in his Federalist Essays shape our nation’s government.
What other modern examples of these ideals of American government can be seen on the news these days?
Federalist Essay #10
“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.”
In this passage from the Federalist Essay #10, James Madison discusses the ideal separation of power between local, state, and national government as proposed by the Constitution. Throughout this essay, Madison talks about the prevalent threat that factions pose to republican nations. According to Madison, the size of a representative’s jurisdiction can play a role to eradicate this problem while making sure the voice of the majority is heard. He says that if each representative represents too many citizens, he or she will not truly be acquainted with the views and desires of the people, while representing too few citizens would cause representatives to lose sight of the nation as a whole, which would put the idea of majority rule at risk. Madison claims that the power gradient from local legislatures up to the national legislature creates a system of representatives that are able to both speak for their jurisdiction’s desires and be wary of the big picture. When considering the question, “Why does the American government work?” the separation between local, state, and national power is an important factor to consider. When the Americans were creating the Constitution and deciding how to govern themselves, their soon-to-be nation was fairly large in size; today, it is huge. How can the national government function while respecting the decisions of the majority and addressing the needs of the minority? The answer lies in the multi-pronged system of mayors, city councils, and district Congressmen who can attend to local needs while assisting the legislative branch in addressing the needs of the country at large.
“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.”
This passage appears towards the end of the essay, as Madison wraps up his argument in support of the representative system in the Constitution’s proposed republic government. Madison reiterates that a republic is the most effective method of giving democratic rights to the people of a large union without inducing chaos. Madison posits that those who are elected to representative positions, although only human, will have some merit that will allow them to successfully represent their fellow Americans. Madison goes on to argue that the power balances ensure that one party will not be able to “outnumber and oppress the rest.” According to Madison, the American government system will even protect against any unjust wishes that the majority may have. This idea in particular, which Madison also talks about in Essay #51, is one of the key reasons why the American form of government works. Not only are people able to decide things by majority rule, but a system of checks is in place to majority rule to infringe on minority rights.
Federalist Essay #51
“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.”
Federalist Essay #51 is all about the separation of powers between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. In this passage, Madison clarifies not only why this separation of powers is necessary, but also how government officials can take the initiative to make sure the separation exits. Madison writes that members should be “as little dependent as possible on those of the others.” This is vital to a functioning republic; if different departments of the government were interdependent on each other, the goals and desires of one department could quickly become the goal of all the departments. In that case, the government would not be carrying out the will of the majority of the citizens, but rather government officials would be seeing to their own personal goals. Madison therefore implores government officials to be ambitious in their defense against this. He says that it is human nature to go against the rule of separation of powers, and it is therefore necessary to take action against the “abuses of government.” Madison goes on to make several philosophical musings about how human nature is reflected in not only the wrongdoings of government, but in the necessity of government itself. But philosophical thoughts aside, his main point is that for separation of powers and a truly just government to exist, the government officials must hold themselves to the highest moral standards, and check others by holding each other to the same standards.
“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….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 this passage Madison addresses the concern of the rights of the minority. The idea of majority rule can cause problems for minorities, as their voices can be left unheard and their rights trampled. Madison provides two solutions, the first of which deviates completely from the entire premise of republican government. His next solution is the one he promises the US government will follow. He says that society will be so diverse that the minority will have no need to worry about the majority trampling their rights. With such a diverse community, Madison implies that any majority will in itself be made up of a groups and subsets of minority groups, such that no groups are singled out and deprived of rights. Now, we must remember that any one minority must not take over the actions made by the government, as this would no longer be a republic. However, it is imperative to integrate the rights and thoughts of minorities into every decision made, so that the minorities are not oppressed by the majority. To me, this idea is perhaps one of the most important answers to the question “Why does the American form of government work?” America was so diverse when it first became a country (let alone how diverse it is now – we’ll get to that in a second) without successful protection of minority rights, it would have fallen apart in a matter of years.
Tying it all together – The American form of government at work today
The main ideas Madison presented in these two particular essays revolve around some common themes: separation of power, balance of power, and majority rule/minority rights. To examine how these things are at work today, I thought about an extremely current example: the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) being overturned in June of this year. DOMA, which stated that the federal government and state governments were not required to recognize same-sex marriages, was enacted in 1996. Before being signed into law by President Clinton, or the executive branch, it had to be passed by the legislative branch. In this case, both the House of Representatives and the Senate passed this act with majority. DOMA was enacted by majority rule in the legislative branch, but it undeniably took away rights from the LGBT minority of the entire nation. However, thanks to the same system of checks and balances and separation and power that Madison discussed in these essays, DOMA was eventually overturned, albeit seventeen years too late. The judicial branch the branch of government that overturned DOMA by deeming it unconstitutional. The overturning of DOMA does not, by any means, mean that same-sex marriages are allowed throughout the country. At this point, we can turn our attention to the state government. Even though there is no longer a federal law that says states don’t have to recognize same-sex marriages, there is no law that says that they are required to recognize same-sex marriages, and this distinction can be made due to the separation of state and federal government. For the reasons stated above, the ongoing struggle for rights of the LGBT community (which is by no means over, and by no means includes only marriage equality), can be examined as an example of how our government works today and how the Constitutional ideals of government that Madison advocated for in his Federalist Essays shape our nation’s government.
What other modern examples of these ideals of American government can be seen on the news these days?
Maya, this is a superb analysis of Madison's essays. Your individual analysis of each quote does not simply summarize what the author is saying, but includes a deal of your own commentary. In the analysis for the final quote from Essay Number 51, you make a great argument in pointing out the significance that diversity plays in the role of government, especially to minority groups. This can also be seen in your conclusion with the excellent modern day example of DOMA, which ties all of Madison's ideas together very well.
ReplyDelete