James Madison, known historically s the "Father of the Constitution," was an adamant supporter of its contents and ratification because of his understanding and fear that under any other system, the union would not be able to thrive or survive.
After the Revolutionary War ended, Madison was elected as a state legislator in his home state, Virginia. Originally a staunch supporter of the Articles of Confederation, while in the state house he became alarmed at the "fragility of the Articles." (Wikipedia). This fear lead him to draft the Virginia Plan for consideration at the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
Madison's system, which essentially was adopted as the national government system under the Constitution, was motivated by a desire to create unity between the States but also maintain the independence of the individual states. His system was founded on a three-branch government with a bicameral legislature. The purpose of the bicameral legislature was to both ensure the influence of all the states and of the people. In order to keep all States equal, every state, regardless of population size, would have two senators. On the other hand, to ensure the direct participation of the people, each state would have representatives based on population. Further, Madison's plan adopted a checks and balances system to prevent tyranny by any one branch. (Wills).
Madison's reasoning for his passions are best summed up in his pro-ratification public relations campaign outlined in what is now known as the Federalist Papers. Perhaps the most famous of these essays is paper number ten, one actually penned by Madison. In it he sums up his belief by explaining how one large country with numerous interests and factions could support a republican form of government better than a small country, which would be more vulnerable to catering to special interests. (Madison, p. 57).
Bibliography
Hamilton, Alexander, Madison, James, Jay, John. The Federalist Papers. Clinton Rositer, ed. New York: Signet, 2003.
Wikipedia. Hamilton, Alexander. www.wikipedia.com,2006.
Wills, Garry. James Madison. New York: American Presidents Series, 2002.
Federalist Paper #10, James Madison discusses the Union's ability to control and break the influence of specific factions over the governmental process. The paper includes many strengths, and a few weaknesses. Yet the overall paper convinced me of the purpose of the Union in this capacity. Federalist Paper # 10 begins with a discussion of the problem at hand, that of how to control the factions of a nation. The paper
In fact, during the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Slonim notes that the need for a bill of rights was not even a topic of discussion until Virginian delegate George Mason raised the issue just several days before the Convention was scheduled to rise on September 17; Mason suggested that a bill of rights "would give great quiet to the people." Following this assertion, Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts moved that the
The basic materials might include tin cans, fragments of speech, a cough, canal boats chugging or natural snatches of Tibetan chant (all these are in a work called Etude Pathetique). Musical instruments are not taboo: one piece used a flute that was both played and struck. Differences in balance or performance can also be used to extend the range of materials. All of this is very similar to the way
status of federalism within the U.S. It is the thesis of the paper that the President, the Courts and Congress have assumed influential and significant roles in the shaping of federalism in recent decades. Initially, a conceptualization of federalism will be offered as established by the founding fathers. Current literature will then be used to identify factors associated with and the role assumed by the presidency, the Courts and
Such differences may lead us to question whether there are any universal moral principles or whether morality is merely a matter of "cultural taste" (Velasquez, Andre, Shanks and Meyer: 1). If there is no transcendent ethical or moral standard, then cultural relativists argue that culture becomes the ethical norm for determining whether an action is right or wrong. This ethical system is known as cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is the
Catholic church and public policy have remarked that the members of American clergy in general, without even excepting those who do not admit religious liberty, are all in favour of civil freedom; but they do not support any particular political system. They keep aloof from parties, and from public affairs. In the United States religion exercises but little influence upon laws, and upon the details of public opinion; but it
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now