Transcript “The powers vested in Congress by this constitution, must necessarily annihilate and absorb the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of the several States,

“The powers vested in Congress by this
constitution, must necessarily annihilate and
absorb the legislative, executive, and judicial
powers of the several States, and produce from
their ruins one consolidated government, which
from the nature of things will be an iron handed
despotism...”
-- Dissent of the Pennsylvania Minority
18 December 1787
“Iron Handed
Despotism”:
Anti-Federalist
Critiques of the U.S.
Constitution and the
“Democratic
Debate”
Overview
I. Historical Background
Articles of Confederation
Constitutional Convention
Ratification Debates
Overview
II. Anti-Federalist Critiques
Liberty
Equality
Democracy
III. Conclusion
The anti-federalists are responsible for much of
what we celebrate in the Constitution today
I.
Historical Background
Articles of Confederation
Written from 1777-1781
Ratified in 1783
Remained in effect until the Constitution
ratified
Articles of Confederation
Basic features:
Power spread among the states, rather than
concentrated at the national level
Power shared equally among the 13 states
National Government consisted of a single
legislative body
• No independent executive
• No national judiciary
Constitutional Convention
Charged with amending the Articles
Amendment requires unanimous consent of
the 13 states
Rhode Island did not send any delegates
George Washington chosen as presiding
officer
Meet secretly through the summer of 1787
Basic features of the Constitution
Creates bicameral legislature (Congress)
• People elect the House of Representatives
• State legislatures elect Senators
Creates independent executive (President)
• Chosen by the Electoral College
Creates national judiciary (Supreme Court)
• Nominated by President; Confirmed by Senate
Basic features of the Constitution
Power concentrated at the national level
“Supremacy” Clause (Article 6)
New Powers
Power to levy/collect taxes
Regulate interstate commerce
Raise and maintain a standing army
enact all laws “necessary and proper”
Constitutional Convention
17 September 1787 Convention adopts
Constitution
Sends to the states for ratification
(approval)
9 states required to ratify and adopt the
Constitution
Ratification by special convention in each
state
Delaware
12/7/1787
30-0
Pennsylvania
New Jersey
Georgia
Connecticut
Mass.
Maryland
So. Carolina
New Hamp.
Virginia
New York
No. Carolina
Rhode Is.
12/12/1787
12/19/1787
1/2/1788
1/9/1788
2/6/1788
4/28/1788
5/23/1788
6/21/1788
6/25/1788
7/26/1788
11/21/1789
5/29/1790
46-23
38-0
26-0
128-40
187-168
63-11
149-73
57-46
89-79
30-27
187-77
34-32
Delaware
12/7/1787
30-0
Pennsylvania
New Jersey
Georgia
Connecticut
Mass.
Maryland
So. Carolina
New Hamp.
Virginia
New York
No. Carolina
Rhode Is.
12/12/1787
12/19/1787
1/2/1788
1/9/1788
2/6/1788
4/28/1788
5/23/1788
6/21/1788
6/25/1788
7/26/1788
11/21/1789
5/29/1790
46-23 (12)
38-0
26-0
128-40
187-168 (10)
63-11
149-73
57-46 (6)
89-79 (6)
30-27 (2)
187-77
34-32
Ratification Calculations
The Constitution would not have been ratified if as
few as 14 votes (about 1% of total cast), had
changed sides in the debate
If 36 votes had changed, a majority of states
would have voted against ratification
Given that it was so close, and that we think of the
Constitution as a great success
Why was it so controversial?
What were the anti-Federalists objections?
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Liberty
“This proposal of altering
our Federal Government is
of a most alarming
nature....you ought to be
extremely cautious,
watchful, jealous of your
liberty; for instead of
securing your rights you
may lose them forever...
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Liberty
“If this new Government
will not come up to the
expectation of the people,
and they should be
disappointed -- their
liberty will be lost, and
tyranny must and will
arise.”
Patrick Henry
(Virginia)
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Liberty
Basis for the critique was the absence of a
Bill of Rights
For example, “Brutus” writes that:
“in all the Constitutions of our own States; there is
not one of them but what is either founded on a
declaration or bill of rights, or has certain express
reservation of rights interwoven in the body of
them. From this it appears, that at a time when the
pulse of liberty beat high, and when an appeal was
made to the people to form Constitutions for the
government of themselves, it was their universal
sense, that such declarations should make a part of
their frames of government. It is, therefore, the
more astonishing, that this grand security to the
rights of the people is not to be found in this
Constitution.” -- “Brutus”
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Liberty
Coupled with much stronger national
government, this seemed to suggest that
tyranny was in the offing, and that the
republic was lost.
Again, “Brutus” spells out the logic here.
That is, if the national government has
ultimate authority, then
“It is therefore not only necessarily implied
thereby, but positively expressed, that the different
State Constitutions are repealed and entirely done
away, so far as they are inconsistent with this, with
the laws which shall be made in pursuance
thereof, or with treaties made, or which shall be
made, under the authority of the United States. Of
what avail will the Constitutions of the respective
States be to preserve the rights of its citizens?”
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
A second area of concern was the likelihood
that the new Constitution would create an
artistocracy
Anti-federalist critics reminded their
audience why we fought the revolution.
For instance, John F. Mercer writes:
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
“When we turn our eyes
back to the zones of blood
and desolation which we
have waded through to
separate from Great
Britain, we behold with
manly indignation that our
blood and treasure have
been wasted to establish a
government in which the
interest of the few is
preferred to the rights of
the many...
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
“When we see a
government so every way
inferior to that we were
born under, proposed as
the reward of our
sufferings in an eight year
calamitous war, our
astonishment is only
equaled by our
resentment.”
John F. Mercer
(1788)
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
“This being the beginning of American freedom, it
is very clear the ending will be slavery, for it
cannot be denied that this constitution is, in its
first principles, highly and dangerously
oligarchical; and it is every where agreed, that a
government administered by a few, is, of all
governments, the worst.
LEONIDAS
30 July 1788
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
Basis for this claim -- the beginning of
aristocracy -- is rooted in the structure of
the new government and the powers of the
new government
For instance:
Senators have 6 year terms, and are not elected
directly by the people
No public galleries in Senate until 1795
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
“A Senate chosen for
six years will, in most
instances, be an
appointment for life...”
-- Mercy Otis Warren
Observations on the New
Constitution (1788)
Currently the median age in the Senate is
63; the oldest is Senator Byrd (D-WVa) at
90; 5 others are in their 80s including
Frank Lautenburg (D-NJ) who is 84 and just won re-election to a new 6 year term
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
Congress sets its own salary
• Potential for pay increases to fleece the taxpayers
and create separate political class
No provision for term limits
• Many state constitutions (e.g., Pennsylvania)
provided for the rotation of offices
• For example, Warren points this out in her
Observations
“As the new Congress are
empowered to determine
their own salaries, the
requisitions for this
purpose may not be very
moderate, and the drain
for public moneys will
probably rise past all
calculation...
History of Congressional pay raises available here.
“There is no provision for
a rotation, nor any thing to
prevent the perpetuity of
office in the same hands
for life; which by a little
well timed bribery, will
probably be done, to the
exclusion of men of the
best abilities...”
Mercy Otis Warren
Re-election rates available here
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Equality
“What then may we expect if the new constitution
be adopted as it now stands? The great will
struggle for power, honor and wealth; the poor
become a prey to avarice, insolence and
oppression. And while some are studying to
supplant their neighbors, and others striving to
keep their stations, one villain will wink at the
oppression of another, the people be fleeced, and
the public business neglected. From despotism and
tyranny good Lord deliver us.” -PHILANTHROPOS
12 December 1786, Virginia Journal
Anti-Federalist Critiques:
Democracy
Many of the Anti-Federalists were also concerned
that the Constitution would destroy democracy
Size of the polity means that representation
becomes ineffectual
Electoral College beyond the reach of the people
The President becomes, basically, a king
No term limit
Too much power
For example, here’s New York Governor George
Clinton’s view of the office:
“And wherein does this
president, invested with
his powers and
prerogatives, essentially
differ from the king of
Great Britain (save as to
name, the creation of
nobility, and some
immaterial incidents, the
offspring of absurdity and
locality)?...
“It is necessary, in order to distinguish him from
the rest of the community, and enable him to keep,
and maintain his court, that the compensation for
his services, or in other words, his revenue, should
be such as to enable him to appear with the
splendor of a prince. He has the power of
receiving ambassadors from, and a great influence
on their appointments to foreign courts; as also to
make treaties, leagues, and alliances with foreign
states, assisted by the Senate, which when made
becomes the supreme law of land...
“He is a constituent part of the legislative power,
for every bill which shall pass the House of
Representatives and Senate is to be presented to
him for approbation. If he approves of it he is to
sign it, if he disapproves he is to return it with
objections, which in many cases will amount to a
complete negative; and in this view he will have a
great share in the power of making peace, coining
money, etc., and all the various objects of
legislation, expressed or implied in this
Constitution...
“He is the generalissimo of the nation, and of
course has the command and control of the army,
navy and militia; he is the general conservator of
the peace of the union-he may pardon all offenses,
except in cases of impeachment, and the principal
fountain of all offices and employments. Will not
the exercise of these powers therefore tend either
to the establishment of a vile and arbitrary
aristocracy or monarchy?”
The New-York Journal
November 8, 1787
Anti-Federalist Critiques
When taken together, Anti-Federal
opposition based on:
Absence of Rights
Creation of an Aristocracy
Assault on Democracy
Conclusion
“Does our soil produce no
more Washingtons? Is
there none who would
oppose the attempt to
establish a government by
force? Can we not call
from the fields, the
counters, the bar, and
mechanics' shops, any
more Generals? Is our soil
exhausted?”
-- AN AMERICAN
Conclusion
In response to the critiques, the federalists
responded with a Bill of Rights
Aware of the debates surrounding the
creation of the presidency, Washington
chose to voluntarily step down after a 2nd
term, thereby setting precedent that would
stand for 152 years (until Franklin D.
Roosevelt)
Conclusion
The debate between the anti-federalists and
federalists shaped the development of the
American political party system
The debate also echoes today in calls for
greater equality, increased power and
responsibilities for states, and warnings
against the unchecked power of the national
government
Reelection Rates
Source: Center for Response Politics
Reelection Rates
Source: Center for Response Politics