Federalist #15 (p. 63--68) Political disunity -> danger False arguments have led the people to astray. It is widely agreed that the confederate government is weak, but detractors of the federal system refuse to give it all its strength. 64 Nationally humiliated - The government cannot pay foreign or domestic debts - There are still outposts of foreign enemies in rightful US territory Like Mississippi river. Ambassadors don't have any real power, so the US is a mockery abroad. The Confederacy cannot call upon troops. Land values have dropped because credit is not backed by a federal treasury. 65 Opponents of a federal system don't support giving it the powers that it needs (treasury, raising troops, I think). More generally, refuse to give the Union any power over the states This lack of powers intrinsic to the Confederation has specific structural issues. The federal gov't cannot raise money or men, relying on the cooperation of states and individuals (i.e. powerless). "substitute the violent and sanguinary agency of the sword to the mild influence of the magistracy" 66 Treaties with real ties have to have real sanctions, so if the States do intend to stand in a protective alliance, in order to reduce infighting and jealousy to the instability of the nation, there must be a central government with - the power to make and enforce laws (by coercion of the sword) - the responsibility to the people rather than collective states 67 But, in confederacy, military coercion means war while courts and the magistrate have more power in a union. Just assuming that these won't be needed is idealist because government is required to restrain men. The Confederacy allows power-seeking by states to succeed in stalling the national government, when fast action is required to gain respect 68 Under the confederation, concurrence of thirteen wills is requisite. The government is failing because it isn't supported by its constituents Federalist #53 (p. 239--243) (oops) Annual elections as a specific time frame for ensuring democracy is a myth. 240 But having exactly one period, as defined constitutionally, for an election is necessary. In Britain, parliament extended its own rule by four years---a precedent dangerous to free government. So a fixed election cycle is sufficient and necessary, but what election cycle is most valuable? 241 Annual elections maintain freedom, but biennial elections are more effective. Lawmakers require deep knowledge of the vast states, which is easier to develop over the longer period of two years. 242 Federalist #51 (231--234) "The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments" The government's different chambers should be each drawn from the people, but some deviation is acceptable. The judiciary requires specific special qualifications and a permanent term, making the executive and legislature most qualified to make those initial choices. 232 "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition" Checks and balances are personal, power-oriented motives for each branch to maintain their own power by reducing/checking the ambition and power of the others. "The private interests of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights." Legislative is the strongest branch, so it's weakened with a bicameral legislature. But the power of executive > legislature isn't enough, so the legislature must be motivated to support the executive (vetos?) 233 State governments also protect against abuses of power on the federal level, so the federal government must be sufficiently divided to maintain this more local power ("double security"). Basic rights should also be protected in the checks and balances / constitutional system. Tyranny of the majority is prevented by multiplicity of views at a social level and the judicial system at an organizational level. The *federal principle* maintains the *republican cause* 1) According to Hamilton in Federalist #15, why is a strong central government needed? Please explain your answer. Hamilton argues that the Confederacy's national government has so little power as to make an international mockery of itself. Hamilton expects the government to make and enforce laws with a national militia, be able to conduct war/military action outside of its borders, naming a specific target: "Are we entitled by nature and compact to a free participation in the navigation of the Mississippi? Spain excludes us from it." (64) The idea that military intervention is the root of national power follows through arguments towards collection of funds and of signing of international treaties. Hamilton believes that the Articles of Confederation make the US to be an international joke: "The imbecility of our government even forbids them to treat with us." (64) Hamilton argues that the way that this would be developed in a confederacy is by the enforcement of war. The only way, if courts are laughable, to control states is by leveraging tyranny: "nor would any prudent man choose to commit his happiness to it." (67) 2) Madison writes in Federalist #51, "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition". What do you think this means and why does he make this argument? Ambition is the personal/private interests of each branch and individual in the government. He sees ambition as a search for power, which is reasonable to expect. This essay, while spending much of its time apologizing for where the government doesn't appear to be sufficiently weakened (the executive selecting the judicial (232)). Madison also develops the idea of self-defense of a department against the other departments rather than just restriction, and the development of the federal system to prevent an overall unjust government (the nation) from opressing the people by a "double security." (232) Madison acknowledges that these measures are often redundant but that the best way to ensure that nothing gets through the cracks is this system. Finally, he declares that the federal system prevents the tyranny of the majority by preventing even the ambition of a majority group from oppressing a minority.