The Federalist Arguments on the Ratification of the American Constitution
Paper No. 51: The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances between the Different Departments
This paper is regarded as one of the most essential pieces in supporting the idea of ratification of the Constitution. The article’s primary purpose is to support the separation of powers, the checks and balances, and the liberty of different departments in the Constitution. It spells out the need for the American Constitution to have three distinct forms of power: legislative, exercised by Congress; executive, headed by the president; and judicial, led by the Supreme Court of America.
For example, Madison states, “It is important to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government.” He declares that to preserve liberty, it is essential that no person or group exercises all three powers (Madison). That means the government, through the Constitution, can allow each branch to oversee the other for optimal function. The best way to ensure the expected independence of every branch of the national government is to prevent any connection between branches in the selection of their members.
The Antifederalists’ Arguments on the Ratification of the American Constitution
Paper No. 51. Do Checks and Balances Secure the Rights of the People?
The article argued against the ratification of the American Constitution for several reasons. The author criticizes the current structure of the Constitution, which does not effectively empower the people. Accumulation of power by a single body of the government is one of the greatest threats to peace and liberty. The accrual of authority is rather a limitation to achieving the people’s rights (Madison).
In other words, the article argues that at no single point should the legislative and the executive powers operate as one. Instead, these government executive bodies should be separated to help promote practical and genuine approaches to liberating human rights. Therefore, it believes that the new Constitution will only manage to prohibit the application of the right structures to control the structure of the American government.
Comparison of the Two Papers
Similarities
Both articles present logical arguments for the necessity of the American Constitution to have three distinct branches: the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. The Federalists believe there is a need for separation of powers to help ensure the Constitution’s checks and balances and the liberty of different departments. Subsequently, the antifederalists acknowledged the need for diverse structures to address the various issues affecting society’s members. The authors call for a unified constitution that aims to promote the rights of every American.
Subsequently, the two argue that power is with the people. They call for the Constitution to uphold and preserve the rights and liberty of the people. The authors believe that different factions must collaborate to protect the rights of various groups.
In other words, these bodies should operate as separate entities and coexist for maximum results. Both papers agree that the primary reason Americans enjoy more freedom and rights is that these rights are outlined in the Constitution (Madison). Therefore, they may be regarded as perfect examples of the ideas that have championed the liberation of Americans.
Differences
Despite the above similarities, the two articles have divergent opinions regarding democracy. In his article, Madison accepts that democracy was the best system America has ever had. On the other hand, Madison disagrees with the idea of democracy, as it promotes the rule of a few elite members of society. In his opinion, he noted that democracy might lead to the majority overthrowing the government, resulting in anarchy. Even though they offer different perspectives on democracy, their approaches convince the audience of the need to refine the concept of democracy in the Constitution.
Convincing Arguments
Based on the papers, the most convincing arguments comprise maintaining the American structure of the government in three arms that operate as separate entities. The three arms should comprise the executive, legislature, and judiciary. All these organs should operate as separate bodies that check one another. The approach will ensure that every unit operates effectively and delivers the best results within its jurisdiction.
Secondly, I agree with the need to promote the value of democracy. As stated by the founding fathers, democracy provides power to the people. The approach will promote the rights within the Constitution and ensure that every American enjoys the rights and privileges.
Nevertheless, the American government needs to ensure that it operates within limits. That means they must ensure that every executive organ carries out its mandate without interfering with the rest. Subsequently, democracy must be upheld within the Constitution with the utmost respect to prevent the possible cause of anarchy in the nation. These approaches will ensure the success and protection of the founding fathers’ dreams.
Work Cited
Madison, James. “The structure of the government must furnish the proper checks and balances between the different departments.” The Federalist Papers 51 (1788). Web.