#federlist papers

Alexander Hamilton, Jefferson, and Madison wrote under the name of publius

Publius valerius publicola was one of the four Roman aristocrats who over threw the Roman monarchy.

Title: Method of Guarding Against the Encroachments of Any One Department of Government Author: Publius (James Madison) Date: February 2, 1788

Volume: 2 - The Proposed Constitution General topic: The structure of the new government Specific topic: Conventions for public judgment of Government branches

Big Idea:

Jefferson’s plan to hold conventions to let the people decide cases of over-reaching government branches is a good one. We just need to watch out for some concerns.

Favorite Lines:

“The people are the only legitimate fountain of power.”

“The reason of man, like man himself, is timid and cautious when left alone, and acquired firmness and confidence in proportion to the number with which it is associated.”

“It is the reason, alone, of the public, that ought to control and regulate the government. The passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government.”

Paraphrased Outline:

In addition to Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson also wrote a draft of a constitution for Virginia. It took seriously both republicanism and the dangers of over-reaching government.

Jefferson wrote that if one branch of government stepped beyond its power, at least two-thirds of the other two branches could hold a convention to either correct the encroachment or to alter the Constitution of Virginia to allow it.

It makes sense for the different branches of government to hold each other accountable—and for the people to be allowed to make decisions about these cases.

Some people say this might give two of the branches an opportunity to team up against the third, but those two branches would need more than two-thirds of their members to be involved in the conspiracy.

Others say that bringing these cases to the public through a convention would erode the public’s trust in the government’s ability to function, but that would have to be the opinion of the majority before it would have an effect on the public’s perception.

Still others say that getting the public too interested in political discord would distract the public peace, but it is unrealistic to expect that not to happen. (The only reason it hasn’t happened before is that we’ve been united in a revolution.)

And the best objection comes from those who say that the people would not be able to judge fairly in these conventions because they would favor the Executive or Judicial over the Legislature. But the Legislature has the most direct influence on the people.

If we watch out for these concerns, the people should be able to make judgments about the government when needed.

Personal Thoughts:

I like that Hamilton and Madison seem to have read the Anti-Federalist Papers. They make specific references to their opposition’s arguments.

It’s hard to imagine an America that wasn’t divided by political disagreements.

Madison thinks the Legislature is most susceptible to “aggrandizement,” but I think history has shown it’s actually pretty willing to abdicate its powers to the other branches.

Isn’t it a conflict of interest to have members of the legislature participating in a convention to judge the legislature?

It seems like Madison goes from arguing to protect the legislature at the convention to arguing to control it.

“Passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government.” ...Um, what?