Friday, August 30, 2013

Why is Old Thing Still Working?

“In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit.”(Federalist Paper No. 51)

James Madison main conclusion is this passage is that the need for a bi-cameral legislative system. The bi-cameral legislature notion is the foundation of the legislative structure that is active in Washington today. Interestingly, this idea also solved a major issue for the founding fathers. Many of the smaller states desired a one-house system where by each states received the same number of representatives. However, the larger states argued that voting should be determined by population size. The idea of a House of Representatives and the Senate was implemented to American politics ensuring that each state would be represented equally.

“To what expedient, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary partition of power among the several departments, as laid down in the Constitution? The only answer that can be given is, that as all these exterior provisions are found to be inadequate, the defect must be supplied, by so contriving the interior structure of the government as that its several constituent parts may, by their mutual relations, be the means of keeping each other in their proper places.”(Federalist Paper No. 51)

James Madison introduces the idea of separate, yet equal parts for the new government. What essentially is being described is a structure of government that has different branches that maintain the means of “keeping each other in their proper places.” In other words a government where no one section of the government is more powerful than another, each section has the power to curtail the decision of the other. Thus Madison provides a solution for maintaining that the republic will not slip into the hands of an autocrat or completely crumble. This idea of isolating each branch to the point that they cannot impact another yet still check each other is paramount to the success of this form of government.  

 “A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.”(Federalist Paper No. 10)

Madison explains his concern over the eventual establishment of political parties and states that modern legislation is necessary for the to limit the influence of these groups. He outlines the task of the legislative branch; to make sure that no “interest” or party gains too much influence or power. Yet the legislative branch must not exclude any party for the “necessary and ordinary operations of the government” By finding an equilibrium between these two factors the government provides every party equal say but also prevents any one group form total control.


“In the first place, it is to be remarked that, however small the republic may be, the representatives must be raised to a certain number, in order to guard against the cabals of a few; and that, however large it may be, they must be limited to a certain number, in order to guard against the confusion of a multitude.”(Federalist Paper No. 10)

In this excerpt, Madison contests that a there must always be a majority representing the interests of the people. He states that the government is susceptible to destruction if the pursuits of a few could take priority over those of the people.  However, there are two sides to the same coin. He contends that the government must not also reach a size where it can no longer function and as he puts “guard against the confusion of a multitude. This delicate balance safeguards the integrity of the government, while also assuring that it will remain effective when representing the interests of the people.

                                                                                                                    

2 comments:

  1. Your text is dark, so I cannot read what you have written easily. Although, form what I have read our ideas seem similar, I do not see any big diffrences in thought.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I want to contribute to your statement, which i totally agree with by the way, by offering the idea that this form of conflict about representation in the government has occurred many times through history. The colonist's "No taxation without representation" slogan is a prime example. They did not receive enough, actually no, representation in the political system in England. We can also apply this common dispute to present day property tax issues. For example, in the Santa Clara county, there are land owners that live out of state, but still want representation in the Santa Clara system. Are we to let them be represented, despite where they live?
    I hope this helped further your knowledge by my connections to other times in history:)

    ReplyDelete