2 The Constitution Burning the flag is legal, despite the objections of a majority of American citizens. How can that be? The answer is that it is.

2 The Constitution Burning the flag is legal, despite the objections of a majority of American citizens. How can that be? The answer is that it is speech that is constitutionally protected. The Constitution supersedes ordinary law, even when the law represents the wishes of a majority of citizens.

2 Video: The Big Picture Let’s take a look at what the “law of the land” doesn’t say. What does the Constitution leave out? Author George C. Edwards III delves into why the government becomes deadlocked and how understanding the Constitution allows us to adjust expectations for what the government can—and cannot—accomplish. TO THE INSTRUCTOR: To access the videos in this chapter, please enter your Pearson or MyPoliSciLab username and password after clicking on the link on the slide.

2 Learning Objectives A constitution is a nation’s supreme law. It creates political institutions, allocates power within government, and provides guarantees of rights and liberties to citizens. As the body of rules that govern our nation, the U.S. Constitution has an impact on many aspects of our everyday lives. To understand government and to answer questions about how we are governed and what government does, we must first understand the Constitution. Describe the ideas behind the American Revolution and their role in shaping the Constitution 2.1 Analyze how the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation led to its failure 2.2

2 Learning Objectives Describe the delegates to the Constitutional Convention and the core ideas they shared 2.3 Categorize the issues at the Constitutional Convention and outline the resolutions reached on each type of issue 2.4

2 Learning Objectives Analyze how the components of the Madisonian system addressed the dilemma of reconciling majority rule with the protection of minority interests 2.5 Compare and contrast the Federalists and Anti-Federalists in terms of their background and their positions regarding government 2.6

2 Learning Objectives Explain how the Constitution can be formally amended and how it changes informally Understanding the Constitution 2.7 Assess whether the Constitution establishes a majoritarian democracy and how it limits the scope of government 2.8

2 Video: The Basics It’s not easy starting a government from scratch. What is the purpose of a Constitution? In this video, you will discover the reasons why the framers wrote the Constitution and how the Constitution sets up checks and balances, the protection of liberties, and the framework we need for a functioning democracy.

Origins of the Constitution
2.1 Origins of the Constitution The American Revolution was built on the foundation of belief in natural rights, consent of the governed, limited government, the responsibility of government to protect private property, and the equality of citizens. The Constitution written by the Framers incorporated all of these ideas. Road to Revolution Declaring Independence English Heritage: Power of Ideas American Creed Winning Independence “Conservative” Revolution

Road to Revolution 2.1 Life was good in the colonies Irritants
Life was good for the British colonists before the Revolution. The colonies were prosperous and the British government generally let them govern themselves as they saw fit. They enjoyed an unusual degree of freedom, equality and autonomy for that era – assuming, of course, that you were white, male, and reasonably well-off. But things changed after the French and Indian War, when the Crown decided to recoup costs by imposing a series of taxes on the colonists. Britain also began tightening enforcement of its trade regulations, which were designed to benefit the mother country, not the colonists. Life was good in the colonies (Slaves excepted, of course) Self-governing Irritants New taxes to finance French and Indian War Enforcement of trade regulations No representation in Parliament

FIGURE 2.1: European claims in North America
Following its victory in the French and Indian War in 1763, Britain obtained an enormous new territory to govern. To raise revenues to defend and administer the territory, it raised taxes on the colonists and tightened enforcement of trade regulations.

Road to Revolution 2.1 Irritants Protests and boycotts
The colonists lacked direct representation in Parliament and resented the legislature imposing taxes without their consent. They protested, including the famous dumping of tea into Boston Harbor, and the British responded with force. The colonists decided to send a delegation to Philadelphia to hold a meeting to discuss relations with Britain. Irritants New taxes to finance French and Indian War Enforcement of trade regulations No representation in Parliament Protests and boycotts First Continental Congress – Sept. 1774

Declaring Independence
2.1 Declaring Independence The delegates at the Second Continental Congress gradually shifted their mindset from reconciliation to revolution. Thomas Paine’s fiery tract, Common Sense, had an incendiary effect. Reconciliation or revolution? Thomas Paine’s Common Sense Fanned revolutionary sentiments

Declaring Independence
2.1 Declaring Independence The delegates at the Second Continental Congress formed a committee to compose a declaration of independence. Thomas Jefferson became the primary author. The Declaration listed the ways that the king had abused the colonists. Their audience was not just their fellow colonists or British citizens back home; they would need foreign assistance to mount a successful revolution against the most powerful country in the world, particularly from Britain’s historic enemy, France. Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson The Greatest Break Up Letter EVER!!! Justified revolution Revolutionaries needed foreign assistance

Delegates in Philadelphia
2.1 Delegates in Philadelphia When the signers submitted the Declaration of Independence to Continental Congress President John Hancock, legend has it that Hancock remarked, “We must be unanimous; there must be no pulling different ways; we must hang together,” to which Franklin replied, “We must indeed all hang together, or, most assuredly, we shall hang separately.” The signers were well aware that by signing the Declaration they were committing an act of treason, for which they would be hanged if unsuccessful.

English Heritage: Power of Ideas
2.1 English Heritage: Power of Ideas The writers of the Declaration were educated men, familiar with history and the important political philosophers of the age of enlightenment. The most influential philosopher was John Locke, who articulated his belief in natural rights. These are rights inherent in human beings, not dependent on governments. Natural rights include life, liberty, and property. The sole purpose of governments to protect these rights. If a government fails to do that, the governed have a right to change the government. This was the colonists’ justification for independence. Government must be built on the consent of the governed. It must also be limited government, restricted by the governed in what it is allowed to do. John Locke Natural rights Life, liberty, property Purpose of government is to protect Consent of the governed Limited government

Locke and the Declaration of Independence: Some parallels
2.1 Locke and the Declaration of Independence: Some parallels Let’s look at the wording of the Declaration and see how it reflects the ideas of Locke. Some of the text of the Declaration would be considered plagiarism if Jefferson had been writing a paper for school.

2.1 American Creed, Winning Independence, and the “Conservative” Revolution The ideas in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, have value as individuals, and the right to rule instead of be ruled by a hereditary monarch, had been articulated by philosophers but never put into practice in a real government. In 1776, the colonists declared their independence. It took 8 years of fighting to win independence from Great Britain. The colonists were fighting for independence, not a new way of life. They had not been oppressed and had been content until Parliament had imposed new taxes and regulations. They were not seeking radical change, just the ability to continue as they had been. Individualism Rule by the people New ideas incubated in a unique environment Winning independence not easy A conservative revolution?

2.1 Who was the primary author of the Declaration of Independence?
Now that we’ve discussed the Declaration of Independence, can you answer this question? John Locke Benjamin Franklin Thomas Jefferson John Adams 18

Government That Failed: 1776-1787
2.2 Government That Failed: The Articles of Confederation established a government dominated by the states, without a permanent executive or national judiciary. A weak central government could not raise sufficient funds to support a national defense, regulate commerce to encourage trade, protect property rights, or take action without the unanimous consent of the states. It was doomed to failure from the start, although it took the colonists some years to accept this. Articles of Confederation Changes in the States Economic Turmoil Aborted Annapolis Meeting

Articles of Confederation
2.2 Articles of Confederation The Articles established a government dominated by the states. The United States, according to the Articles, was a confederation, a “league of friendship and perpetual union” among 13 states. The Articles established a national legislature with one house in which each state had one vote, regardless of size. There was no president and no national court. Most authority rested with the state legislatures because the new nation’s leaders feared that a strong central government would become as tyrannical as British rule. State-dominated government League of friendship amongst states Unicameral legislature No judiciary No executive No power to tax No power to regulate commerce Feared strong central government

Key provisions of the Articles of Confederation
2.2 Key provisions of the Articles of Confederation As we can see in this chart, the national government was weak and devoid of almost all power. The Congress had no power to tax and could not pay for an army to defend the states, nor could it regulate interstate commerce, which prevented economic growth.

Changes in the States 2.2 Increases in liberty, democracy
States were liberalizing requirements for voting. This gave less affluent white males, who would previously have been excluded from the franchise by property requirements, a say in state government. The new middle class became the majority voting power in states such as New York, threatening the power of elites. State constitutions concentrated power in the legislatures because most people considered legislators to be closer to the voters. Legislatures often selected the governors and kept them on a short leash, with brief tenures and limited veto and appointment powers. Increases in liberty, democracy If you were a white male New middle class Artisans Farmers Elite power threatened Legislatures held governmental power Controlled governors

2.2 FIGURE 2.2: Power shift: Economic status of state legislators before and after the Revolutionary War After the Revolution, power in the state legislatures shifted from the hands of the wealthy to those with more moderate incomes and from merchants and lawyers to farmers. This trend was especially evident in the northern states.

Economic Turmoil and Aborted Annapolis Meeting
2.2 Economic Turmoil and Aborted Annapolis Meeting A postwar economic depression left small farmers unable to pay their mortgages. As we just noted, the middle class was gaining control of state legislatures. They used their new power to pass laws friendlier to the debtors than the creditors. These policies did not please the economic elite, who formed the creditor class and formerly had control of state governments. Massachusetts was an exception to the trend of debtor-friendly state legislation and in 1786, a band of farmers led by Daniel Shays attacked courthouses to prevent judges from foreclosing on farms. Postwar economic depression Shays’ Rebellion (1786) Farmers attack courthouses to prevent foreclosures Neither national nor state govt. could respond Elites privately put down rebellion

2.2 Shays’ Rebellion Neither the national nor state government had the resources to respond, so elites assembled and paid for a private force to put down the rebellion. News of the small rebellion spread quickly around the country, and some of the Philadelphia delegates thought a full-fledged revolution would result. The event reaffirmed the Framers’ belief that the new federal government needed to be a strong one to protect elites from the rising power of the masses.

Economic Turmoil and Aborted Annapolis Meeting
2.2 Economic Turmoil and Aborted Annapolis Meeting Shays’ Rebellion helped spur the birth of the Constitution. Delegates from five states met in Annapolis, Maryland, in September 1786 and quickly decided to hold a full-scale meeting of all the states in Philadelphia in May 1787 to revise the Articles. Annapolis meeting leads to Constitutional Convention

2.2 What was a weakness of the Articles of Confederation?
Before we continue, let’s focus on the main reason that leaders decided to revise the Articles of Confederation. Can you answer this question? Weak central government No restraints on judiciary Tyrannical executive Legislature too large 27

Making a Constitution: Philadelphia Convention
2.3 Making a Constitution: Philadelphia Convention The Framers of the Constitution were the elites of their states. They were more educated, wealthy, and urban than most Americans. They shared some of the following core ideas: • people were self-interested • the distribution of wealth was the principal source of political conflict • the main object of government was protecting private property • and that power should be set against power to balance government. Activity: Ask students: “If there were to be a constitutional convention today, what would it look like and how would it differ from the one in the 1780s?” Have students link the changes discussed to demography, ideology, political culture, and other topics discussed in this chapter. Ask them which constitutional proposal they would have supported if they had been delegates. The Virginia Plan? The New Jersey Plan? The Connecticut Compromise? Why? Gentlemen in Philadelphia Philosophy into Action

Gentlemen in Philadelphia and Philosophy in Action
2.3 Gentlemen in Philadelphia and Philosophy in Action Fifty-five delegates from 12 states assembled in Philadelphia. These were not average men but the wealthy, educated elite of their respective states. They ignored their instructions to revise the Articles and set about designing a new government. They shared the view expressed by philosopher Thomas Hobbes that humans are self-interested so a strong ruler is necessary to restrain man’s warlike tendencies, but they preferred Locke’s idea of limited government. They also all agreed that the distribution of wealth is the main source of political conflict. In that era, wealth meant land or property. The different sides in political conflict form what we would today call parties or interest groups but which the Framers called factions. The Framers were worried that the majority faction would tyrannize minority factions — specifically, the majority without property would try to use government to redistribute wealth from the wealthy minority composed of themselves. They intended to design a government that would prevent this. Preserving property, they believed, was the principle object of government. But what sort of government? The delegates were influenced by the philosopher Montesquieu, who advocated separating the powers of government into branches that could each check the other branches. This would balance the government and prevent tyranny. Who attended Constitutional Convention? 55 delegates from 12 states Wealthy planters, lawyers, merchants High principles versus self-interest Human nature Political conflict resulting from factions Purpose of government Nature of government

2.3 The Framers chose a limited government based on
See if you can answer this brief question. The idea is central to our system of government. Checks Balances Separation of power All of the above 30

2.3 The Framers chose a limited government based on
Separation of powers was needed to prevent one branch from becoming too powerful. But the way to ensure this was to balance the powers and then give each branch the power to check the other. Checks Balances Separation of power All of the above 31

Video: In the Real World
2.3 Let’s see what others think about how the Constitution works. How well does the system of checks and balances in the United States work, and is it actually fair? Real people voice their opinions on whether or not they believe it is constitutional for Congress to check the power of the president—and vice versa.

Critical Issues at the Convention
2.4 Critical Issues at the Convention Conflicts over equality of representation led to the Connecticut Compromise, the three-fifths compromise, and the decision to leave the issue of voting rights to the states. The greatest inequality of all, slavery, was so contentious an issue that the Framers simply avoided addressing it. The Framers, who belonged to the economic elite, saw that the American economy was in shambles and intended to make the national government an economic stabilizer. They also knew that a strong national government would be better able to ensure the nation’s security. The specificity of the powers assigned to Congress meant that it was to forge national economic policy. Because they believed that the limited government they had constructed would protect freedom, the Framers said little about individual rights in the Constitution. Equality Issues Economic Issues Individual Rights Issues

Equality Issues 2.4 Equality and representation of the states Slavery
The small states and large states disagreed about how states should be represented in Congress. The small states, in the New Jersey Plan, proposed equal representation, while the large states, in the Virginia Plan, suggested that representation would be more equitable based on population. A solution, the Connecticut Compromise, created a bicameral legislature with representation in one chamber by population and in the other by two senators from each state. Can you explain how this compromise gave more power to smaller states? On the issue of slavery, the northern states had to acquiesce to southern states’ demands or the southern states would have simply refused to join the union. The southern states received a promise that the slave trade would not be restricted until at least 1808, that escaped slaves in free states were to be returned to their owners, and that slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a person for purposes of representation in Congress. Still smarting from Shays’ Rebellion, most delegates wanted to restrict voting to men with property but in the end they decided to leave voting qualifications up to the individual states. Equality and representation of the states New Jersey Plan Virginia Plan Connecticut Compromise Slavery Equality in voting

How the Constitution resolved three issues of equality
2.4 How the Constitution resolved three issues of equality This table shows the compromises that resolved debates about equality in representation, slavery, and voting.

Economic Issues 2.4 State of the postwar economy
The postwar economy under the Articles of Confederation was not doing well. States were free to charge interstate tariffs, inhibiting domestic commerce. They also printed their own, essentially worthless, paper money. Congress did not have the power to levy taxes so it was unable to raise money to pay debts or provide for national defense. Since the Framers were creditors who were being paid with worthless paper money or merchants who could not engage in interstate trade, remedying the economic situation was important to them in the design of the new government. To effect this, the Framers gave Congress the power to levy taxes and regulate interstate commerce. They took away state powers that would inhibit economic growth, such as maintaining their own currencies and charging interstate tariffs. The Constitution obligated the new government to repay all $54 million in public debts incurred under the Continental Congress and the Articles of Confederation. State of the postwar economy Interstate tariffs Worthless paper money Congress could not raise revenue Congress given economic power Limited economic interference of states New government must repay debts of $54 million

Table 2.4: Economics in the Constitution
Let’s take a closer look at the powers given to Congress. Congress could raise revenue through taxing and borrowing. Having sound currency and paying off the national debt would encourage free enterprise.

Individual Rights Issues
2.4 Individual Rights Issues It was important to the Framers that the new government preserve certain individual rights, although they had designed a limited government with checks and balances, and state constitutions already protected individual rights. The Constitution says little about personal freedoms except for these specific protections: Except during wartime, habeas corpus, the right of a prisoner to know why he is being detained, may not be suspended. Bills of attainder, which punish people without a judicial trial, are prohibited. Ex post facto laws that punish people for acts that were not illegal when committed were prohibited. Religious qualifications for holding public office were prohibited. Treason was narrowly defined. Criminal defendants had a right to trial by jury. Preserving individual rights a priority Personal freedoms in the Constitution: Suspension of habeas corpus prohibited Bills of attainder prohibited Ex post facto laws prohibited Religious qualifications for office prohibited Strict rules for what constitutes treason Right to trial by jury

2.4 2.4 Which of the following is not a personal freedom protected in the original Constitution? Now that we’ve discussed the Constitution briefly, can you answer this question? Right to run for office without religious qualifications Right to writ of habeas corpus Right to trial by jury Right to freedom of speech 39

Video: In Context 2.4 The U.S. Constitution is the oldest of any republic in the world. Why is it unusual that the United States Constitution has governed so long in its present form? Fordham University political scientist Costas Panagopolos explains why the Constitution is such a rarity and how it has succeeded in an evolving American society.

Madisonian System 2.5 Thwarting Tyranny of the Majority
The Founders reconciled majority rule with minority interests by constraining both the majority and the minority. The Madisonian system did this primarily by dispersing power among separate branches of government, each with a somewhat different constituency. It also gave them shared powers so that each branch had a check on the others. Thwarting Tyranny of the Majority Constitutional Republic End of the Beginning

2.5 James Madison James Madison was the key figure in writing the Constitution. His views on checking power remain at the core of the structure of American government.

Thwarting Tyranny of the Majority
2.5 Thwarting Tyranny of the Majority Madison devised a system to prevent the tyranny of factions in the government. To thwart tyranny of the majority, much of the government’s power was kept beyond its reach. Only members of the House of Representatives were directly elected by the people. Madison’s scheme separated the powers of government into three branches, which shared the limited powers of the government among them. The system of checks and balances system served Madison’s goal of constraining government action. One faction would be unlikely to control all three branches of government at the same time. Finally, the Framers established a federal system of government that divided power between a national government and the states. Most government activity occurred in the states so the Framers saw the federal system as an additional check on the national government. Activity: For an alternative discussion, ask students why minority rights are important. What type of minorities was Madison concerned about? Are minority rights still important in U.S. politics? Ask students to provide specific historical and contemporary examples of “minorities” seeking to protect their rights. How is the political system structured to “balance” minority and majority rights? What values are served by this balance: efficiency, equality, representation? Limiting majority control James Madison’s system Separating powers Creating checks and balances Establishing a federal system

FIGURE 2.3: The Constitution and the electoral process: Original plan
2.5 FIGURE 2.3: The Constitution and the electoral process: Original plan Madison’s plan allowed both direct and indirect elections. Voters directly elected only the House of Representatives. Senators were elected by state legislatures, and presidents by the electoral college, whose members were usually chosen by state legislatures rather than by voters. The president nominated judges. Over the years, Madison’s original model has been substantially democratized. In 1913 the Seventeenth Amendment established direct election of senators by popular majorities. Today, the electoral college has become largely a rubber stamp, voting the way the popular majority in each state votes.

Constitutional Republic and the End of the Beginning
2.5 Constitutional Republic and the End of the Beginning The Framers valued the idea of government by the people. They also knew direct democracy, in which all the people vote on every issue, was neither feasible nor desirable. Instead they created a republic, in which representatives act on behalf of the people. This system favored the status quo. Since each branch could check the other, it was much easier to prevent new policy than to pass it. Ben Franklin argued that the policymaking process was too cumbersome to enable the government to respond effectively to pressing matters. What do you think? Ten of the twelve states present voted in favor of the Constitution and all but three of the remaining delegates signed it. Then everyone adjourned to a tavern for a much-needed drink. Creating a republic Direct democracy not feasible Representative democracy Separating powers and checks and balances make change slow Is policymaking inefficient? Ben Franklin – “policymaking too cumbersome” 10 states vote in favor, then dinner

2.5 FIGURE 2.4: Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances in the Constitution The doctrine of separation of powers allows the three branches of government to check and balance one another. Judicial review, which is the power of courts to hold executive and congressional policies unconstitutional, was not explicit in the Constitution but was soon asserted by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison.

Signing of the Constitution
2.5 Signing of the Constitution George Washington presides over the signing of the Constitution. “The business being closed,” he wrote, “the members adjourned to the City Tavern, dined together and took cordial leave of each other.”

2.5 2.5 How did Madison seek to avoid tyranny of the majority in the design of the new government? I want to see how well you understand Madison’s design for the Constitution by answering this question. Checks and balances Separation of powers Representative democracy All of the above 48

Ratifying the Constitution
2.6 Ratifying the Constitution Ratification of the Constitution was not a foregone conclusion. The Federalists, who were largely from the economic elite, supported a strong national government. They preferred to insulate public officials from public opinion. Anti-Federalists, largely from the middle class, supported a weaker national government. They preferred direct forms of democracy, and wanted stronger protection of individual liberties than the original Constitution offered. As a result, the Federalists promised to propose what became the Bill of Rights. Federalists and Anti-Federalists Ratification

Federalists and Anti-Federalists
2.6 Federalists and Anti-Federalists Before the Constitution could replace the Articles of Confederation as the supreme law of the land, it had to be ratified by 9 of the 13 states. This was by no means a sure thing. Federalists, who favored ratification, were in a minority compared to the Anti-Federalists who opposed it. Three prominent Federalists wrote a series of 85 essays for New York newspapers that argued strenuously in favor of ratification. These essays did little to influence the New York delegates but they remain for us as a record of the Framers’ thinking. The Anti-Federalists were suspicious of the motives of the elite Framers. They worried that states’ power would weaken and were concerned that the Constitution lacked explicit protections for civil liberties. They were correct that the power of the states would be weakened by a more powerful central government. However, the Federalists allayed their fears about civil liberties protections by promising to add them after ratification. They kept their word and the Bill of Rights comprises the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Federalists Supported Constitution Federalist Papers Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay Anti-Federalists Opposed Constitution No protection for civil liberties States’ power would weaken

Federalists and Anti-Federalists Compared
2.6 Federalists and Anti-Federalists Compared Do you see any links between the background and government preferences of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists?

Bill of Rights arranged by function
2.6 Bill of Rights arranged by function The protections in the Bill of Rights fall into several categories of civil liberties.

Ratification 2.6 Ratification by special convention
The Federalists knew they lacked support in state legislatures so they specified that the Constitution be ratified by special conventions in each of the states. Delaware was the first state to ratify, a fact it notes on its license plates to this day. New Hampshire was the ninth state, making the Constitution enter into force. But the ratification of New York and Virginia was still critical as they held 40% of the population between them. The new union would hardly have been possible without their approval. North Carolina and Rhode Island were the last states to ratify, and insisted on the Bill of Rights. Ratification by special convention Got around state legislatures Delaware first to approve New Hampshire made it official New York and Virginia critical North Carolina and Rhode Island hold out

2.6 What was the purpose of the Federalist Papers?
Do you recall the differences between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists that led to the writing of these articles? To argue against the Constitution To argue in support of the Constitution To express concerns about the intent of the Framers To provide a document about the creation of the Constitution 54

Changing the Constitution
2.7 Changing the Constitution Constitutional change, both formal and informal, continues to shape and alter the letter and the spirit of the Madisonian system. The formal amendment process, requiring supermajorities in both houses of Congress and among the states, poses difficult hurdles. However, judicial interpretation, changing political practices, technology, and the increasing demands on policymakers have also changed the constitutional system in fundamental ways, providing a valuable flexibility. Formal Amending Process Informal Processes of Constitutional Change Importance of Flexibility

Formal Amending Process
2.7 Formal Amending Process There are two ways of proposing amendments to the Constitution, and two ways of ratifying them. All but one of the successful amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by Congress and ratified by the state legislatures. The exception is the Twenty-first Amendment which repealed Prohibition and was approved by special state conventions. Proposal Two-thirds vote in each house National convention called by Congress Ratification Legislatures of three-fourths of states Special state conventions

FIGURE 2.5: How the Constitution can be amended
2.7 FIGURE 2.5: How the Constitution can be amended The Constitution sets up two alternative routes for proposing amendments and two for ratifying them. One of the four combinations has been used in every case but one. The goal of most constitutional amendments thusfar has been to make the Constitution more democratic and egalitarian. Amendments have abolished slavery, prohibited discrimination, and expanded the franchise to women, minorities, and citizens over 18.

Suffragettes marching
2.7 Suffragettes marching Amending the Constitution to give women the right to vote was an important step in the women’s rights movement.

Informal Processes of Constitutional Change
2.7 Informal Processes of Constitutional Change Most changes to the Constitution have been informal. The U.S. has a two-party system that the Framers never anticipated. The electors of the Electoral College follow the popular state vote. Television influences the policy agenda and the president is now the driving force in policymaking. Disputes often arise about the meaning of the Constitution. In its opinion in Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court claimed the authority to interpret the Constitution through judicial review. This power gives courts the right to decide whether the actions of the legislative and executive are in accord with the Constitution. The Framers disliked the idea of political parties and never mentioned them in the Constitution. They developed nonetheless and play a key role in policy today. Likewise, the Framers never intended for the president to be chosen by popular vote but, without any formal changes to the Constitution, electors have been relegated to rubberstamping the state’s popular choice for president. Technology has changed the Constitution by putting the president in charge of nuclear weapons and giving rise to a media empire that shapes public opinion. As the U.S. has become a global superpower, the power of the president has increased dramatically. Both his foreign and domestic policy roles have grown as circumstances have dictated enhanced federal government leadership. Most changes have been informal Judicial interpretation Marbury v. Madison (1803) Changing political practice Technology Increased demands for new policy

Importance of Flexibility
2.7 Importance of Flexibility The Constitution is a brief document considering its scope and purpose. It left a lot of the details up to Congress and future generations. Regarding the federal courts, for example, the Constitution simply authorizes Congress to create them as needed. The flexibility of the Constitution has enabled its survival. It is the oldest functioning Constitution in the world. France, for example, had a revolution the same year the Constitution took effect, in 1789, and it has had 12 constitutions since. Activity: Ask students to bring in a news story from the previous week to illustrate a point of contention over the U.S. Constitution. Use these clippings as the basis for class discussion, focusing on how the Founders left the Constitution flexible for future generations. Examples might include gun control (the Second Amendment), the rights of criminal procedure and due process, or the implied right to privacy. Constitution meant to be flexible Many decisions left up to Congress Flexibility key to survival World’s oldest Constitution

2.7 The constitution has lasted for more than 200 years. What events have tested it? Why has it survived?

2.7 What is an example of an informal way the government has changed?
See if you can answer this brief question on how the Constitution has changed. There is a two-party system. Citizens vote directly for senators. The Electoral College chooses the president. Voting rights have been granted to everyone. 62

Understanding the Constitution
2.8 Understanding the Constitution The Constitution did not create a majoritarian democracy. Majorities do not always rule in America. Nevertheless, there has been a gradual democratization of the Constitution. The right to vote has expanded, direct election of senators has been instituted, electors have become agents of political parties, and technology has facilitated direct, two-way communication between office holders and the public. By protecting individual rights, and thus limiting the ability of officials to restrict them, the Constitution limits the scope of government. By dispersing power among institutions, it increases the access of interests to government but also allows these interests to check each other and produce a stalemate. The Constitution and Democracy Constitution and the Scope of Government

Constitution and Democracy
2.8 Constitution and Democracy The original Constitution was not democratic by modern standards, nor was it designed to be. The Framers believed that, as Alexander Hamilton said, the “rich, well-born, and able” were best suited to govern. But the republic they created had the potential to become more democratic over time. As the franchise has been gradually expanded, the American political system has moved from an elitist model to a pluralist model. The Framers left voter qualifications up to the states. These started as quite restrictive, giving the vote to propertied white males only. Gradually, poor white men, minorities, and women were able to vote, and the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18. Senators were directly elected in 1913, and the electors of the Electoral College are pledged to vote for the presidential candidate who wins the state’s popular vote. Modern communication technology also makes it easier for public opinion to reach government officials. Original Constitution created a republic, not a democracy Framers thought elites should govern Representative democracy allowed Constitution to become more democratic From elitism to pluralism Voting qualifications left up to states 5 amendments have expanded electorate More officials chosen by popular election

Constitution and the Scope of Government
2.8 Constitution and the Scope of Government The Constitution was carefully designed to limit government power, protect civil liberties, and, over time, allow broad participation by citizens. The fragmentation of power and the coordination required to enact policy make radical change difficult and favor the status quo. The separation of powers has the effect of allowing interest group access. If a group does not find traction with one branch, it can try another. Civil rights activists, for example, initially found more success with the judicial branch than with the legislative or executive branches. But this ease of entry can lead to a stalemate when it comes to policymaking. Since each branch can check the other, it requires coordination and agreement to pass new legislation. With diverse interests competing, the result can be either no new policy or ineffective, watered-down policy. Constitution designed to limit government and protect liberties Broad participation possible Effects of separation of powers All groups can be heard Encourages stalemate Effects of checks and balances Gridlock or ineffective policy

2.8 Obama and Boehner Because the Constitution decentralizes power, officials usually must negotiate to pass legislation. What do the expressions of President Obama, a Democrat, and the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, tell you about the difficulty of negotiation?

2.8 The Framers chose a system of government called a republic because
Having examined the scope of government within the Constitution, can you answer this question? they feared the power of the majority. they believed in direct representation. they supported a two-party system. they wanted to establish the rights of the individual. 67

2 The Constitution Burning the flag is legal, despite the objections of a majority of American citizens. How can that be? The answer is that it is.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "2 The Constitution Burning the flag is legal, despite the objections of a majority of American citizens. How can that be? The answer is that it is."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

2 The Constitution Burning the flag is legal, despite the objections of a majority of American citizens. How can that be? The answer is that it is.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "2 The Constitution Burning the flag is legal, despite the objections of a majority of American citizens. How can that be? The answer is that it is."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback