Malcolm Rivera
The Constitution of 1787 was drafted to strike a balance between maintaining public order and security, and protecting personal liberty. However, it has been criticised for restraining democracy and protecting minority rights from majorities in state legislatures. The delegates who drafted the Constitution, known as the Founding Fathers, were merchants, creditors, and bondholders, and they pushed the Constitution at the expense of farmers and debtors. They did not trust the people to make wise choices, such as in the election of the president, and so they crafted a document in which neither the President nor Senators were elected by the people, only members of the House of Representatives.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Restrain excesses of democracy | To prevent the "excesses of democracy" and protect minority rights from overbearing majorities in state legislatures |
| Checks on democracy | The new government was to check democracy |
| Preventing direct election of the President | The President would be elected by a group of "electors" chosen by the state legislatures or the people of their individual states |
| Preventing direct election of Senators | Senators were not to be elected by the people |
| Support for slavery | Delegates enshrined the institution of slavery within the Constitution |
| Limited commitment to equality | Most delegates supported the imposition of property qualifications for voters |
| Preventing radical economic policies | The central government was not empowered to carry out radical economic policies that would damage elite interests |
| Preventing overbearing central power | Power was divided between the states and the nation to allay fears of an overbearing central power |
| Protecting minority rights | The majority should govern the minority but the rights of the minority must be protected |
Explore related products
$30.54 $45.99
What You'll Learn
- The Constitution of 1787 was crafted to curb democracy
- It aimed to protect minority rights from overbearing majorities
- The President and Senators were not elected by the people
- The founding fathers were not fond of democracy
- The Constitution enshrined the institution of slavery and compromised on equality
The Constitution of 1787 was crafted to curb democracy
Secondly, the Constitution was designed to restrain the "excesses of democracy" and protect minority rights from overbearing majorities in state legislatures. This was a response to the aggressive experiments in democracy in some state governments, where governors and legislators were directly elected, leading to a high responsiveness to the immediate mood of the people. The results were considered dangerous by some, with too much paper money being printed and legislative practices like logrolling, horse-trading, and pork-barrelling becoming commonplace.
Thirdly, the Constitution did not provide for the direct election of the President or Senators, only for members of the House of Representatives. The Framers' difficulty in deciding how to elect the President reflected their fear that the people could not be trusted to make a wise choice. James Madison, for example, referred to "the multiplicity, mutability, and injustice of state legislation," indicating a desire to curb the power of the majority.
Finally, the Constitution enshrined the institution of slavery, indicating a limited commitment to the principles of equality articulated in the Declaration of Independence. The delegates' quest for compromise between free and slaveholding states ultimately exacerbated the contradiction between the nation's core values of liberty and equality.
Overall, the Constitution of 1787 was crafted to restrain democracy by establishing a strong central government that protected elite interests, curbing the power of state legislatures, limiting direct elections, and entrenching inequalities.
Albany Plan: A Constitution Forerunner
You may want to see also
It aimed to protect minority rights from overbearing majorities
The Constitution of 1787 aimed to protect minority rights from overbearing majorities. The founding fathers, meeting in Philadelphia in 1787, believed that the trend toward democracy needed to be curbed. They crafted a document in which neither the President nor Senators were elected by the people, only members of the House of Representatives.
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were committed to principles of equality, but only for free white adult males. Most of the delegates supported property qualifications for voters in their individual states. They also enshrined the institution of slavery within the new Constitution, despite the fact that slavery contradicted the core values of liberty and equality on which America had declared its independence.
The Constitution of 1787 was designed to restrain the excesses of democracy and protect minority rights in state legislatures. The founding fathers believed that state legislatures had become too responsive to the immediate mood of the people, resulting in the dangerous printing of too much paper money and the common occurrence of logrolling, horse-trading, and pork-barrelling.
The Constitution established a strong national government that operated directly on individuals, granting Congress the authority to raise revenue, regulate trade, pay off debts, and deal effectively in international affairs. This powerful and distant national government was virtually inconceivable a decade earlier. James Madison, the putative father of the Constitution, saw the document of 1787 as a solution to the 'excesses of democracy' of state legislation.
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were concerned about protecting minority rights from overbearing majorities. They understood that in all cases where a majority is united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger. They sought to create a government of limited powers that would protect public order and security while nurturing and protecting personal liberty.
The Necessary and Proper Clause: Expanding Constitutional Power
You may want to see also
The President and Senators were not elected by the people
The Constitution of 1787 was drafted in the Assembly Room of the Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia. The thirteen "united states" were facing significant disunity, and the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were tasked with creating a government that divided power between the states and the nation.
The Constitution of 1787 restrained democracy in several ways. Firstly, it was designed to correct the deficiencies of the Articles of Confederation and restrain the excesses of democracy, protecting minority rights from overbearing majorities in state legislatures. The founding fathers wanted to curb the aggressive experiments in democracy that were taking place in some state governments, where governors and legislators were elected directly by the people, leading to a high responsiveness to the immediate mood of the people. This had resulted in the excessive printing of paper money and the common occurrence of logrolling, horse-trading, and pork-barrelling.
The Constitution of 1787 reflected the founders' limited commitment to the principles of equality, as evidenced by their support for property qualifications for voters and their compromise on the issue of slavery. The delegates' quest for compromise led them to enshrine the institution of slavery within the Constitution, contradicting the core values of liberty and equality upon which America had declared its independence.
Furthermore, the Constitution of 1787 did not provide for the direct election of the President or Senators by the people. James Wilson, a prominent member of the Constitutional Convention, was the only delegate who advocated for the direct election of the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. However, his proposal gained little support, and the delegates ultimately agreed to a compromise in which the President would be elected by "electors" chosen by state legislatures or the people of their individual states.
The Senate, on the other hand, was chosen by state legislatures until the adoption of the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution in 1913, which allowed for the direct election of senators by the people. This amendment modified Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution, addressing the issue of senators not being elected by the people.
The Constitution's Ink: A Historical Mystery Unveiled
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$19.99 $32.5
The founding fathers were not fond of democracy
The founding fathers of the United States were not fond of democracy. They were wealthy elites who expected to continue guiding the young nation and believed that the vote ought to be reserved for people of wealth and education. They did not want to restrict other forms of political participation, but they were concerned about populism and what they saw as "mob rule".
The founding fathers were against direct democracy, where the electorate determines policy themselves, instead of having presumably wiser and better-informed representatives do it for them. They did not trust the masses to make decisions that would steer the state. They believed that the will of the majority should prevail, but only when the majority was made up of propertied, educated men.
The Constitution of 1787 was designed to restrain the excesses of democracy and protect minority rights from overbearing majorities in the state legislatures. The founding fathers were reacting to what they saw as the dangers of democracy in action, with governors and legislators elected directly by the people, unicameral legislatures, and yearly elections. They believed this had led to the printing of too much paper money and the common practices of logrolling, horse-trading, and pork-barrelling.
The founding fathers were also concerned about the power of state legislatures, which they believed had gone too far in giving voting rights to women and African Americans, and were beholden to the interests of the common man. They wanted to pull back some of the actions taken by these legislatures and create a strong national government that operated directly on individuals.
Virginia Constitution: Does It Have a "To Arms" Clause?
You may want to see also
The Constitution enshrined the institution of slavery and compromised on equality
The Constitution of 1787 was a compromise between the founding fathers' desire for a strong central government and the principles of equality and liberty outlined in the Declaration of Independence. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention agreed to shift power to a central government, but they also wanted to restrain the "excesses of democracy" and protect minority rights from overbearing majorities in state legislatures.
Nowhere were these limitations more apparent than during the debates relating to slavery. In 1787, slavery in America was in decline, but it remained a significant part of the social and economic fabric in five of the states represented in the Convention. The delegates' commitment to principles of equality was limited, as most supported the imposition of property qualifications for voters in their individual states. In their quest for compromise, the delegates exacerbated the existing contradiction in their nation regarding the core values of liberty and equality. They enshrined the institution of slavery within their new Constitution, compromising on equality.
The Constitution gave state legislatures the power to choose their preferred method of selecting members for the Electoral College that would, in turn, select the president. This allowed slave-owning states to give additional representation to white slave owners, further entrenching slavery in the country's political system. The three-fifths compromise, which allowed each slave to be counted as three-fifths of a person for the purposes of representation in Congress, also gave slave-owning states more power in the national legislature.
The delegates to the Constitutional Convention were overwhelmingly merchants, people with money on loan, and public bondholders. They wanted a central government strong enough to protect their economic interests but not one empowered by popular majority to carry out radical economic policies that would damage their elite interests. They viewed democracy as part of the problem rather than the solution and wanted the new government to check its excesses. This sentiment is reflected in the final document, where neither the President nor Senators were elected by the people, only members of the House of Representatives.
The Constitution of 1787, therefore, restrained democracy in several ways. It established a strong national government that operated directly on individuals, granting Congress the authority to raise revenue, regulate trade, pay off debts, and deal effectively in international affairs. It also compromised on equality by enshrining the institution of slavery within the document and giving additional representation to slave-owning states. Finally, it limited the power of the popular majority by creating a system of checks and balances designed to protect the economic interests of the elite.
Discovery Corps: Constitution and Reality
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Federal Constitution of 1787 was designed to restrain the excesses of democracy and protect minority rights from overbearing majorities in state legislatures.
The founding fathers indicated that they wanted the new government to check democracy. They believed that the excesses of democracy were responsible for the "multiplicity", "mutability", and "injustice" of state legislation.
The delegates supported the imposition of property qualifications for voters in their individual states. They also enshrined the institution of slavery within the new Constitution, exacerbating the existing contradiction regarding the core values of liberty and equality.
The delegates did not support the idea of a popular election of the President. James Wilson, a prominent member of the convention, proposed a compromise where the President would be elected by "electors" chosen by state legislatures or the people of their individual states.
Some delegates believed that the majority should govern the minority. James Wilson wrote, "the majority of the people wherever found ought in all questions to govern the minority." Thomas Jefferson also wrote, "It is my principle that the will of the majority should always prevail."
