constitution » Federalist Papers http://constitution.laws.com Constitution- Constitution Law, US Constitution, The Constitution, Constitutional Law Thu, 02 Feb 2017 18:20:05 +0000 en-US hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.18 What It Meant to be a Federalist http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/federalists http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/federalists#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 What It Meant to be a Federalist


Upon earning its independence from the British Monarchy in 1776 merely twelve years prior to the creation of the Federalist Papers, the American colonies still had yet to establish an accepted form of government on a national level; A governmental structure that would counter the previous monarchical rule under which they had existed at the mercy of British monarch King George II. The Continental Congress, the inaugural governing body put in place subsequent to the ratification of the Declaration of Independence, contracted out a team of writers to create a legislative doctrine that would outline a governmental process that would take place within the United States of America.


 


Due in part to a residual unrest on a national level resulting from perceived exploitation and neglect at the hands of a tyrannical, totalitarian ruling body, as well as a national desire to uphold a governmental model antithetical to the British Monarchy, the authors of the Articles of Confederation penned a doctrine that allowed each individual State to operate as an individually sovereign entity within the realm of a nation. 




Although the central Government would be afforded certain powers, such as the establishment and maintenance of a military and a postal service, as well the regulation of foreign affairs and the coining of currency, it would be devoid of legislative fortitude and the ability to enforce taxation. Legislation could be proposed by the central Government; however, the passing of any respective piece of legislation was commensurate with its unanimous approval on the part of all thirteen states of the Union. In addition, the central Government was placed in a position where mere suggestions could be offered in the attempt to enforce legislation and taxation.


 


In its attempts to repay its collective debts, as well as maintain the legislative components over which it was allowed jurisdiction and coupled with the overarching precept it was prohibited from enforcing the collection of taxes from each individual State, the central Government under the Articles of Confederation was nearing financial insolvency. 


 


As a means of remedying the financial crisis, the central Government began to print money that was absent of substantial backing which advanced inflation, as well as the devaluation of currency on a national scale. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay took advantage of the dissatisfaction shared by the inhabitants of the American colonies by presenting a framework of governmental process and structure found in The Federalist Papers that contradicted the maxims of a monarchy, as well as maintained legislative power that was evenly-dispersed and non-consolidated. 


 


In addition, the governing body proposed in the Federalist Papers would act to serve the needs of its citizens rather than its citizens existing in servitude to a governing body, as was the case under King George III. The authors of the Federalist papers saw the existence of civilian revolt and a general lack of nationalism and solidarity manifested throughout the United States of America as a prime opportunity to educate the American citizenship about the benefits of a strong central government subservient to its citizens. 

]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/federalists/feed 0
What It Meant to be an Anti-Federalist http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/anti-federalist http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/anti-federalist#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:04 +0000 What It Meant to be an Anti-Federalist

The precepts set forth by the Articles of Confederation rendered the American Government powerless to involve itself in matters concerning the individual legislation of any of the 13 states of the Union. Operating as individual, sovereign entities per the guidelines for the new American Government set forth by the Articles of Confederation, the 13 states of the Union were sanctioned to maintain their individual State legislative bodies or congressional bodies. Each individual and sovereign State was permitted to regulate all matters that took place within its borders.

As a result, amongst a nation of 13 states existed 13 separate congressional bodies – a dynamic that nearly led to nationwide devastation. Because no nationwide legislation existed, tariffs, trade rates, and all other taxable commercial ventures were subject to the discretion of the individual State’s Congress.

Almost immediately, both domestic and international commerce came to halt as a result of erratic and sometimes unpredictable state-imposed tariffs and taxes. Certain states refused to engage in trade relations with others and foreign nations were unwilling or unable to accommodate 13 different foreign policies.

A Federalist proposal, outlined in both the Federalist Papers as well as The Constitution, that called for the creation of a nationally-consolidated American Government and Congress comprised of representatives from each of the 13 states of the Union was met with differing responses from each State. Larger states with larger populations demanded their representation in the proposed national Congress to be commensurate with their respective population. Conversely, smaller states were apprehensive about the possibility of having their sovereignty usurped in a legislative forum that would attribute power based on population. The populations of smaller states such as Rhode Island and Delaware could not have possibly competed with the populations of larger states such as New York and Pennsylvania.

The Federalist Papers warned that without a nationwide Congress, the minorities could ostensibly control the majority. In order to illustrate this concern, James Madison postulated that according the Articles of Confederation, the approval of at least 9 of the 13 states was required to pass a new piece of legislation. Therefore, 9 of the smaller states could establish an alliance in which they might all agree to vote unanimously in every Congressional hearing, thus swaying every election in the favor of the hypothetical 9-state alliance.

As a result, the Federalist Papers devised a system in which all states would be equally represented in a nationwide Congressional forum. Each state, regardless of size, would be entitled to 2 Senatorial representatives. This proposal not only prevented the establishment of any potential alliance, but also allowed for the equal treatment of every state in the Union.

As a result of the system of Congressional representation outlined in the Federalist Papers, every state, regardless of size, was represented equally. In addition, individual State legislatures were re-modified as to avoid disproportionate tax and tariff rates. Larger states and their smaller counterparts would be neither penalized nor favored on account of their respective sizes.

 
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/anti-federalist/feed 0
An Overview of the Federalist Papers http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers-summary http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers-summary#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:03 +0000 An Overview of the Federalist Papers
The Federalist Papers were a vehicle to promote the ideals of the Constitution, while garnering the support for its ratification throughout the American colonies. Only twelve years since declaring their independence from England in 1776, the newly-autonomous American colonies, renaming themselves the United states of America, were still without a stable form of government. 
Though several fleeting governing bodies were put into place, such as the Continental Congress as well as the Articles of Confederation, none of the initial gubernatorial endeavors had a substantial amount of staying power. The Federalist Papers were constructed as a means to counteract absolute power of a single governing body and reshape the constructs of the European gubernatorial model – monarchy. 
Prior to the independence of the United States of America in 1776, monarchical rule – the consolidation of power under a single governing body – was commonplace throughout the world. Leaders governing through the employment of absolute power, such as Napoleon, Caesar, and even King George II, were heralded and lauded. The authors of the Federalist Papers sought out to ensure that the collective interests a nation’s citizens would be the primary concern of any newly-appointed governing body.
Since gaining their independence from the British Monarchy in 1776 just twelve years  prior, the American colonies still had yet to establish an accepted form of government that would counter the previous monarchical rule under which they had existed at the hands of British monarch King George II. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay took advantage of the dissatisfaction shared by the inhabitants of the American colonies by presenting a framework of governmental process and structure found in the Federalist Papers that contradicted the maxims of a monarchy.
In September of 1787, the Constitution was accepted by the Confederation Congress, the acting government at the time. After approving the Constitution, the document was disseminated to each of the 13 individual states for consideration. After reviewing the document, the representatives of each respective state would be asked to decide whether or not they were in favor of the installment of the Constitution as the new dogmatic doctrine under which the United States would be governed. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay created the Federalist Papers in order to serve as a textual accompaniment to the Constitution, advocating the benefits of its ratification. 
The essays contained persuasive speech coupled with formulaic outlines and descriptions of the principles introduced in the Constitution. The creation of a democratic governing body, whose concern would be the welfare of its citizens, was the main tenet that the authors of the Federalist Papers had hoped to portray. Within the first paragraph of document, the authors of the Federalist Papers assigned the word ‘union’ to the United States of America in order to illustrate the deconstruction of inequality between a governing body and its citizens.
The authors of the Federalist Papers were aware that the wake of the American Revolution was an ideal time to advocate for an alternate form of government. By strategically contrasting the totalitarian aspects of a failed monarchy with the optimism of a democratic nation, the Federalist Papers were both informative and persuasive.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers-summary/feed 0
The Goals of the Federalist Party http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/federalist-party http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/federalist-party#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:03 +0000 The Goals of the Federalist Party
The primary goal of the publication of the Federalist Papers was to serve as a portable advocate for the ratification of the Constitution. However, the authors of the Federalist Papers were well-aware of the implications of any doctrine that was considered to be dogmatic; the ambiguity of interpretation. The polarity between ‘written’ and ‘oral’ translation was of great concern to Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. The advent of technology, progress, and future enlightenment left little room for any permanence – the authors viewed the absolute power of archaic doctrines to be akin to the absolute power of a totalitarian ruler. 
Yet, the two authors of the Federalist Papers (Madison was in favor of the Bill of Rights) were opposed to the creation of a Bill of Rights, a document that could potentially serve as a vehicle to ensure the relevancy and timelessness of the Constitution. 
The creation of a Bill of Rights would allow the principals and focal points of the Constitution to evolve in tandem with the evolution of the society that it serves. However, two of the authors of the Federalist Papers were adamant about not only regulating the power granted to individuals, but the transfer and distribution of that power as well. 
For instance, Hamilton regaled in the ambiguity of the Constitution’s text because it never concluded a finite amount of rights to which each citizen of that nation would be entitled. He feared that if a Bill of Rights were to be constructed, then that would create a limit to the rights of the citizens. He feared that the creation of limitation would remove the equilibrium that existed between the government body and the citizens it served.
Many political thinkers of the time disagreed with the logic of the two authors of the Federalist Papers, claiming that the lack of definition paired with the abundance of ambiguity would propel the citizens of the nation into slavery. Critics of the Federalist Papers claimed that by disallowing amendments to a dogmatic doctrine (under which a nation were to be ruled), such limitations would jeopardize the relevancy of the document and future citizens might be subject to archaic laws. 
In addition, many suggested that the modification of a dogmatic doctrine allowed the current governing body, whose prime concerns would be that of its citizens, would allow for more citizens’ rights because it would cater to the needs of modernity rather than the stale needs of antiquity.
Hamilton was concerned with preventing the oral translation of a dogmatic doctrine. By doing so, the Constitution would be impervious to both human error, as well as the any self-serving gains of a single individual.
However, many argued that the establishment of a governing body as a ‘servant’ of its citizens ensures that not only will power be dispersed fairly among multiple governing factions,  thus preventing tyranny, but also solidifies that the role of a democratic government will always include the service of its citizens. 
The dispute between oral and written translation was a target of debate during the deciding moments of the ratification of the Constitution. Though the two opposing authors of the Federalist Papers were opposed to the fate of a dogmatic doctrine being resigned to the translation or interpretation of a human being, the Bill of Rights was passed in 1791.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/federalist-party/feed 0
What was The Federalist Society? http://constitution.laws.com/american-history/federalist-papers/federalist-society http://constitution.laws.com/american-history/federalist-papers/federalist-society#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:03 +0000 What was The Federalist Society?

The Federalist Papers are a collection of 85 political essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay between 1787 and 1788. Though both Jay and Madison contributed articles to this publication, Alexander Hamilton was responsible for the majority of the content. Hamilton is credited with authoring 59 essays, Madison with 29, and Jay with 5.

Primarily, the inception of the Federalist Papers was a means to bolster support for the enactment of the Constitution of the United States. The authors chose to publish the entirety of the Federalist Papers in public journals and newspapers, albeit in the form of individual articles, in hopes that the dissemination of the ideas of the collective authors would both educate readers about the tenets of the Constitution, as well as influence them to accept its commencement.

Topics and principles addressed in the 85 essays that compile the Federalist Papers cover the entire spectrum of government, both addressing, as well as structuring, all three gubernatorial branches – executive, federal, and legislative.
Alexander Hamilton represented New York State at the Constitutional Convention, the national hearing that would decide the fate of the Constitution. He would later become the first Secretary of Finance. James Madison, a Virginia native would later become the fourth President of the United States. John Jay became the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Realizing the defects in monarchical rule, the authors of the Federalist Papers constructed a method of leadership that dispersed power, therefore disallowing a single ruling body an abundance of it. As a result, three gubernatorial factions of government were established: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. The Federalist Papers maintained that distributing power throughout three branches of Government, rather than one totalitarian governing body, laws would be more specific, focused, and created in the interest of the citizens of that nation.

The Federalist Papers are recognized for their implementation of a system comprised of checks and balances, which limits the decision-making power of a single faction. For instance, the relationship between all appointed leaders, including the maintenance of that balance of power, falls under the scope of the executive branch headed by the President of the United States. The inception and the creation of laws are the responsibility of the legislative branch, which includes the Senate and Congress. Finally, the translation of those laws is controlled by the judicial system, which includes the Supreme Court.

As a result of the Federalist Papers, the governing bodies that create the laws are kept separate from the governing bodies that approve of them, as well as interpret them, thus avoiding a consolidation of power or a monarchy.
Though no definitive assessment can be made in regards to influence of the Federalist Papers over the decision to ratify the Constitution, the Federalist Papers outline the structural building blocks of a democratic nation.

]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/american-history/federalist-papers/federalist-society/feed 0
A Look At Federalist Papers 10 http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers-10 http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers-10#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:47:03 +0000 A Look At Federalist Papers 10
Amongst the many critics who voiced their grievances against the Articles of Confederations, few were more prominent than Federalists Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. The Federalists were primarily dissatisfied with the governmental structure, or lack thereof, that was set forth in the text of the Articles of Confederation. 
Written by a committee appointed by the Continental Congress and ratified soon after in 1781, the Articles of Confederation established a form of government that retained no power over matters involving any of the 13 individual states, ultimately allowing each of the 13 states of the Union to act as separate, sovereign entities. The central Government was given power to organize and control both a national military and postal service. The central Government was also granted the power to: regulate the coining of currency, manage foreign relations, and regulate westward expansion. However, the Federalists ascertained that the nature of any ‘national’ power allowed to the central Government was illusory due to the fact that no nationalism existed as a result of the sovereignty of each individual state. 
Federalist Alexander Hamilton stated that despite the presence of a national militia, the states were allowed to maintain their own respective state militias and, as a result, any or all state funding would be invested in the interest of that individual state – in this case, the state militia – before it was invested in any national interests. The Federalists noted that the 13 states of the Union were quickly establishing themselves as a republic of sovereign states rather than as a nation, thus undermining the independence from the British monarchy for which they fought so tirelessly. 
The central Government was neither permitted to enforce any legislation onto any of the 13 states of the Union nor levy any taxes from them. Although the central Government was able to present new and existing laws to which each of the 13 states were suggested to adhere, the legislative body of the central Government was powerless to enforce them to do so. In addition, funding from the individual states could be requested by the central Government. However, the state possessed the power to choose whether or not it was willing to comply. This dynamic invariably allowed the individual states to translate the central Government’s request for funds into suggested donations.
Eventually, as the Federalists had predicted, the central Government was teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. With its complete financial insolvency quickly approaching, the central Government began to print money in a reckless manner in order to both support the national military, as well as maintain the general upkeep of the nation. Adequate funding from the states rarely, if ever, came. As a result, paper currency was devalued to such a profound extent that many members of the merchant classes, which also included laborers and farmers, were forced into foreclosure and/or debtors prison. 
Many of the states were forced to resort to similar desperate financial measures, which included the escalation of their tax and tariff rates. When these erratically-adjusted commercial rates became unmanageable by the merchant class, debts escalated, riots ensued, and the United States had quickly found itself in the midst of economic devastation. 
The Federalists were well-aware of the blatant fundamental inefficiencies, both legislative and financial, which existed in a gubernatorial model that denies a central government sufficient legislative power – the same governmental model established in the Articles of Confederation. The Federalists penned The Federalist Papers in reaction the disarray caused by the Articles of Confederation with the hopes of persuading the citizens of the United States to adopt the Constitution.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers-10/feed 0
Understanding Writings on Representation and the Legislature http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/writings-on-representation-and-the-legislature http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/writings-on-representation-and-the-legislature#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:46:10 +0000 Understanding Writings on Representation and the Legislature
The precepts set forth by the Articles of Confederation rendered the American Government powerless to involve itself in matters concerning the individual legislation of any of the 13 states of the Union. Operating as individual, sovereign entities – as per the guidelines for the new American Government set forth by the Articles of Confederation – the 13 states of the Union were sanctioned to maintain their individual State legislative, or Congressional, bodies. Each individual and sovereign State was permitted to regulate all matters that took place within its border. As a result, amongst a nation of 13 states existed 13 separate Congressional bodies – a dynamic that nearly led to nationwide devastation.
Because no nationwide legislation existed, tariffs, trade rates, and all other taxable commercial ventures were subject to the discretion of the individual State’s Congress. Almost immediately, both domestic and international commerce came to halt as a result of erratic, and sometimes unpredictable, State-imposed tariffs and taxes. Certain states refused to engage in trade relations with others, and foreign nations were unwilling – or unable – to accommodate 13 different foreign policies.
A Federalist proposal – outlined in both the Federalist Papers, as well as The Constitution – that called for the creation of a nationally-consolidated American Government and Congress comprised of representatives from each of the 13 states of the Union was met with differing responses from each State.
Larger states with larger populations demanded their representation in the proposed national Congress to be commensurate with their respective populations. Conversely, smaller states were apprehensive about the possibility of having their sovereignty usurped in a legislative forum that would attribute power based on population. The populations of smaller states such as Rhode Island and Delaware could not have possibly competed with the population of larger states such as New York and Pennsylvania.
The Federalist Papers warned that without a nationwide Congress, the minorities could ostensibly control the majority. In order to illustrate this concern, James Madison postulated that according to the Articles of Confederation, at least 9 of the 13 states were required to pass a new piece of legislation. Therefore, 9 of the smaller states could establish an alliance in which they might all agree to vote unanimously in every Congressional hearing, thus swaying every election in the favor of the hypothetical 9-State alliance.
As a result, the Federalist Papers devised a system in which all states would be equally represented in a nationwide Congressional forum: each State, regardless of size, would be entitled to 2 senatorial representatives. This proposal not only prevented the establishment of any potential alliance, but also allowed for the equal treatment of every State in the Union.
As a result of the system of Congressional representation outlined in the Federalist Papers, every State, regardless of size, was represented equally. In addition, individual State legislation was re-modified as to avoid disproportionate tax and tariff rates. Larger states and their smaller counterparts would be neither penalized nor favored on account of their respective sizes.
 
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/writings-on-representation-and-the-legislature/feed 0
Understanding The Writings on Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/writings-on-separation-of-powers-and-checks-and-balances http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/writings-on-separation-of-powers-and-checks-and-balances#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:46:10 +0000 Understanding The Writings on Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances
The Federalist Papers proposed a multi-tiered gubernatorial model, complete with a systematic separation of powers enforced on the 3 separate branches that comprised a Federalist central government: Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. This separation of powers would be maintained by a system of checks and balances – a construct in which the power allotted to the central government would be dispersed between all 3 of its branches. Furthermore, a system of checks and balances would ensure that each branch could protect itself from any potential abuse of power on the part of the other branches. Each branch was given a set amount of power, which was specific to the nature of the branch itself.
For example:
 
●    The Legislative branch – comprised of both Congress, as well as each representative from each State of the Union was given authority to create laws. Once a law was proposed, a vote was cast in order to determine the validity of the law. In the event that the majority of the collective State legislative bodies voted in favor of passing the law, it could be sent to the Executive branch for approval, thus ensuring a separation of power between all 3 branches of the central government.
●    The Executive branch – or ‘the Administration’ as outlined in the Federalist Papers – was to be comprised of both the President of the United States, as well as selected representatives whose selection required approval by the Legislative branch. This process furthered the notion of separation of powers by disallowing the same governmental branch the power to both create and approve legislation.
 
●    The Judicial branch was outlined to review the actions of the other 2 branches from a legal standpoint. Without any lawmaking authority, the Judicial branch was simply permitted to regulate the actions of the central government solely within the confines of preexisting, predetermined legislation. In the event that the actions of one (or any) of the 3 Federal branches comes into question, the Judicial branch is permitted to review those actions under the system of checks and balances.
 
A separation of powers in the form of a system of checks and balances was proposed by the authors of the Federalist Papers in order to ensure the existence of a competent, yet democratic central government in the United States.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/writings-on-separation-of-powers-and-checks-and-balances/feed 0
All You Need To Know About The Federalist Papers http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:46:09 +0000 All You Need To Know About The Federalist Papers
Background

In the wake of the American Revolution, both the citizens as well as the political leaders of the recently independent United States of America were determined to establish a process of government that contrasted with the previous monarchical rule of British King, George II. Though multiple ruling bodies were instated, none had either the resiliency or the functionality to maintain that which served the interest of the citizens. As a result, the Constitution was penned. This document ensured that absolute, totalitarian power would no longer exist.
The Constitution separated governing power into three parts: executive, legislative, and judicial. The Federalist Papers were considered the prime advocates of the ratification of the Constitution, thus ensuring a government based on serving the needs of its citizens rather than a single ruling body.
Authorship and Purpose

The Federalist Papers are a collection of 85 politically-charged essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay between the years 1787 and 1788. In 1787, the ratification of the Constitution was contingent on each of the thirteen states’ acceptance and approval of its contents as the dogmatic doctrine under which the United States would be ruled. The Federalist Papers were published and disseminated in order to bolster support, educate, and advocate for the ratification of the Constitution; a document that would instate a democratic government in the United States of America. The Federalist Papers were written in the hopes of contrasting the previous monarchical government under King George II with a newly-formed democracy that both served its citizens, while limiting the amount of power that any one gubernatorial faction could possess.
Arguments & Purpose

The purpose of The Federalist Papers was to ensure the democratic government in the United States of America. Though Hamilton, Madison, and Jay collectively authored The Federalist Papers, the three were not in full agreement on the future of the nation under the Constitution. Both Hamilton and Jay agreed that the creation of a Bill of Rights – a collection of Amendments to the Constitution – would place a limitation on the amount of rights afforded to its citizens.
Calls for Federalism

Alexander Hamilton, considered to be the most prominent Federalist of his day, was adamant about revamping the governmental structure set forth in the Articles of Confederation. Due to the injustices suffered by the colonists under the British monarchy of King George II, individual State legislation sought out to establish a weak central government that was devoid of power over each of the individual 13 states.
Writings on Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances
Between the years 1776 and 1787, the authors of the Federalist Papers had witnessed two failed governmental regimes: the British monarchy under both King George II and King George III, as well as a fallacious central government rendered powerless by flawed stipulations set forth in the Articles of Confederation. Determined to retain the positive aspects of each governmental structure, Hamilton, Madison, and Jay created a system of checks and balances in order to ensure the separation of powers between the 3 branches of the central government.
 
In order to solidify a central government that was both strong, yet controlled, required the strategic disbursement of power throughout its 3 branches. Each branch would have a set amount of power, which would exist in symbiotic fashion with the other branches. In essence, each branch’s power and functionality would be commensurate with the power and functionality of its fellow branches.
Republicanism
The concept of republicanism was rooted in the philosophy of Plato, the Greek philosopher who composed his text of the same name – The Republic – in 380 B.C. Plato hypothesized that an ideal form of government is one in which the interest of its citizens are prioritized. Federalist James Madison, who introduced the concept of republicanism in the Federalist Papers, shared in the ideology set forth by Plato over more than one-thousand years prior.
 
However, James Madison expanded on Plato’s ideology, proposing a form of government in which the citizens not only controlled the body that governed them, but also were given the opportunity to allow themselves to be governed by it. Rather than a ruling body primarily concerned with the needs of the privileged aristocracy, a minority in every nation, republicanism called for a governing body to be in servitude to the interests of its citizens, who were considered the majority.
Writings on Representation and the Legislature
In order to solidify a methodology of representation that was both functional and unbiased, the authors of the Federalist Papers employed a Congressional, or legislative, system that would dissolve any arbitrary advantages that states had over one another strictly due to size. Under the Articles of Confederation, larger states were concerned about their smaller counterparts forming alliances and swaying elections. However, smaller states were initially opposed to the Federalist proposal of a nationwide legislation for fear that representation would be commensurate on population. As a result, smaller states were uneasy about resigning their individual sovereignty, and potentially allowing their power to be usurped.
 
In order to address the various concerns of every State, both large and small, the Federalists introduced a nationwide methodology of Congressional representation that would allow 2 representatives for every state, regardless of the size of its population. The added benefit would be two-fold: Firstly, states would no longer be able to form unjust, subjective alliances since representation would not be reliant on population of the respective State. Secondly, a nationwide tariff legislation would be instated so that every State of the Union would be subject to identical taxation.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/feed 0
Arguments & Importance of The Federalist Paper http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/arguments-importance http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/arguments-importance#comments Tue, 07 Apr 2015 18:46:09 +0000 Arguments & Importance of The Federalist Paper
The primary goal of the publication of The Federalist Papers was to serve as a portable advocate for the ratification of the Constitution. However, the authors of The Federalist Papers were well-aware of the implications of any doctrine that was considered to be dogmatic: the ambiguity of interpretation. The polarity between ‘written’ and ‘oral’ translation was of great concern to Hamilton, Madison, and Jay. The advent of technology, progress, and future enlightenment left little room for any permanence. The authors viewed the absolute power of archaic doctrines to be akin the absolute power of a totalitarian ruler. Yet, the two authors of The Federalist Papers (Madison was in favor of the Bill of Rights) were opposed to the creation of a Bill of Rights, a document that could potentially serve as a vehicle to ensure the relevancy and timelessness of the Constitution.
The creation of a Bill of Rights would allow the principals and focal points of the Constitution to evolve in tandem with the evolution of the society that it serves. However, two of the authors of The Federalist Papers were adamant about not only regulating the power granted to individuals, but the transfer and distribution of that power as well. For instance, Hamilton regaled in the ambiguity of the Constitution’s text because it never concluded a finite amount of rights to which each citizen of that nation would be entitled. He feared that if a Bill of Rights were to be constructed, then that would create a limit to the rights of the citizens. 
He feared that the creation of limitation would remove the equilibrium that existed between government body and the citizens it served. Many political thinkers of the time disagreed with the logic of the two authors of The Federalist Papers, claiming that the lack of definition – paired with the abundance of ambiguity – would propel the citizens of the nation into slavery. Critics of The Federalist Papers claimed that by disallowing amendments to a dogmatic doctrine (under which a nation were to be ruled), such limitations would jeopardize the relevancy of the document and future citizens might be subject to archaic laws. In addition, many suggested that the modification of a dogmatic document allowed the current governing body – whose prime concerns would be that of its citizens – would allow for more citizen’s rights because it would cater to the needs of modernity, rather than the stale needs of antiquity. 
Hamilton was concerned with preventing the oral translation of a dogmatic doctrine. By doing so, the Constitution would be impervious to both human error, as well as any self-serving gains of a single individual. However, many argued that the establishment of a governing body as a ‘servant’ of its citizens ensures that not only will power be dispersed fairly among multiple governing factions, thus preventing tyranny, but also solidifies that the role of a democratic government will always include the service of its citizens. 
The dispute between oral and written translation was a target of debate during the deciding moments of the ratification of the Constitution. Though the two opposing authors of The Federalist Papers were opposed to the fate of a dogmatic doctrine being resigned to the translation or interpretation of a human being, the Bill of Rights was passed in 1791.
]]>
http://constitution.laws.com/federalist-papers/arguments-importance/feed 0