Omar Bennett
Federalist No. 70, titled The Executive Department Further Considered, is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton as part of The Federalist Papers. It was originally published on March 15, 1788, in The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius. In this essay, Hamilton argues for a unitary executive, asserting that a vigorous and energetic executive is essential for good government and the protection of the community. He claims that a single executive is far more safe and accountable than a plural executive, which can lead to a lack of accountability and dissension. Federalist No. 70 has been invoked in modern times to support the President's right to unilateral action and has played a role in the debate over the ratification of the United States Constitution.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Written by | Alexander Hamilton |
| Published | March 15, 1788 |
| Published in | The New York Packet |
| Pseudonym | Publius |
| Part of | The Federalist Papers |
| Subject | Hamilton's defense of a vigorous Executive |
| Purpose | To refute the argument that a unitary executive would be too similar to the British monarchy |
| Argument | A unitary executive is consistent with a republican form of government |
| Argument | A unitary executive promotes accountability in government |
| Argument | A unitary executive is best-suited to protecting the community against foreign attacks |
| Argument | A unitary executive is essential to the steady administration of the laws |
| Argument | A unitary executive is necessary for the protection of property |
| Argument | A unitary executive is vital for justice and the security of liberty |
| Argument | The Constitution ensures that only distinguished and qualified men become senators and presidents |
Explore related products
$17.99 $17.99
What You'll Learn
Alexander Hamilton's defence of a unitary executive
Federalist No. 70, titled "The Executive Department Further Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton, arguing for a unitary executive. It was originally published on March 15, 1788, in The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius as part of The Federalist Papers. This essay was the fourth in a series of eleven essays discussing executive power.
Hamilton's main argument in Federalist No. 70 is that a unitary executive is consistent with a republican form of government and is essential for good governance. He refutes the notion that a unitary executive would resemble the British monarchy, asserting that a single leader is far more accountable than a group. Hamilton cites the example of the Roman Empire, claiming that misconduct and disagreements among members of the council contributed to its decline. He warns that a plural executive leads to a lack of accountability and that a unitary executive is better equipped to promote accountability in government.
Hamilton also emphasizes the importance of energy in the executive branch, stating that it is "a leading character in the definition of good government." He argues that a unitary executive is more decisive, vigilant, and capable of acting with greater speed and energy than a group. Hamilton further mentions that a single executive is safer because, with multiple people, there is a ""danger of difference of opinion" and "bitter dissensions are apt to spring."
In addition to his written arguments, Hamilton, along with others, opposed the idea of having three leaders instead of one during the Constitutional Convention. Hamilton and his supporters advocated for a strong, unitary executive, claiming it would be more decisive and accountable. This proposal for a single executive was approved by a vote of 7 to 3.
Hamilton's defence of a unitary executive has had a significant influence, with several politicians and legal scholars referring to his ideas. For instance, John Yoo, the Bush Administration's Deputy Assistant Attorney General, cited Federalist No. 70 in support of the President's right to act unilaterally against terrorists. Additionally, Judge Laurence Silberman and Solicitor General Charles Fried have also relied on Hamilton's arguments in their legal opinions.
Federalists and Anti-Federalists: The Great Compromise
You may want to see also
The Anti-Federalist Papers' resistance to a supreme executive magistracy
Federalist No. 70, titled "The Executive Department Further Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton. It was originally published on March 15, 1788, in The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius as part of The Federalist Papers. It was the fourth in Hamilton's series of eleven essays discussing executive power.
Federalist No. 70 has become associated with Unitary Executive Theory, which asserts that the president should have primary responsibility over the entire executive branch. Hamilton, in Federalist No. 70, argues for a strong executive leader, as provided for by the Constitution, as opposed to the weak executive under the Articles of Confederation. He asserts that "energy in the executive is the leading character in the definition of good government". Hamilton also defended a single executive as "far more safe" because "wherever two or more persons are engaged in any common...pursuit, there is always danger of difference of opinion...bitter dissensions are apt to spring".
Resistance to a "supreme executive magistracy" began well before the emergence of the Anti-Federalist Papers. Most state constitutions, in reaction to colonial rule, were primarily concerned with a declaration of rights and weakening executive power. During the Constitutional Convention, some delegates proposed three leaders instead of one. Edmund Randolph, who presented the Virginia Plan to the Convention in May 1787, was the most outspoken opponent of the unitary executive, arguing that it would be unpopular with the people and could easily become monarchical.
The Anti-Federalist Papers directly contested Hamilton's position in Federalist No. 70 for unity in the executive branch. In response to the exclusion of an executive council in the Constitution, Mason published his "Objections to the Constitution" on November 22, 1787, in the Virginia Journal. In this manuscript, Mason warned that the lack of a council would make for an unadvised president, who would act within the interests of friends, rather than the people at large. Thomas Paine, who was in England during the publication of the Anti-Federalist Papers, also opposed the unitary executive. Paine argued for a plural executive on the grounds that a unitary executive would become the head of a party and that a republic should not debase itself by obeying an individual.
Anti-Federalists' Impact on the US Constitution
You may want to see also
The role of the President
Federalist No. 70, titled "The Executive Department Further Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton. It was originally published on March 15, 1788, in The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius as part of The Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were a series of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison between October 1787 and May 1788. They were written and published to urge New Yorkers to ratify the proposed United States Constitution.
Federalist No. 70 specifically addresses the role of the executive branch and the President within the Constitution. Hamilton argues for a strong executive leader, as provided for by the Constitution, in contrast to the weak executive under the Articles of Confederation. He asserts that "energy in the executive is the leading character in the definition of good government". Hamilton believed that a unitary executive was consistent with a republican form of government and necessary for the protection of the community, the administration of laws, the protection of property, and the security of liberty.
Hamilton also defended the idea of a single executive, stating that a plural executive leads to a lack of accountability and could result in bitter dissensions. He claimed that a single executive would be watched "more narrowly" and vigilantly by the people. Hamilton's view was that the President, as the unitary executive, should be vested with centralization of authority, ensuring unity in purpose and the ability to act with speed and energy.
The Constitution, as outlined in Federalist No. 70, manifests particular attention to the selection of the President. It emphasizes that the select assemblies and state legislatures choosing the President will be composed of enlightened and respectable citizens. The Constitution also sets age requirements, excluding men under thirty-five from the presidency and those under thirty from the second office, ensuring that electors have had time to form informed judgments.
In conclusion, Federalist No. 70's relevance to the Constitution lies in its defence of a unitary executive, arguing for the necessity of a strong executive leader in the form of the President. Hamilton's essay shaped the understanding of the executive branch and the President's role, emphasizing the need for energy and unity in the execution of governmental powers.
Anti-Federalists' Constitution: What Went Wrong?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$18.89 $34.95
$17.89 $22.99
The power of making treaties
Federalist No. 70, titled "The Executive Department Further Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton. It was originally published on March 15, 1788, in The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius as part of The Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were written and published to urge New Yorkers to ratify the proposed United States Constitution, which was drafted in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787.
Federalist No. 70 argues for a strong executive leader, as provided for by the Constitution, as opposed to the weak executive under the Articles of Confederation. Hamilton asserts that "energy in the executive is the leading character in the definition of good government". He further adds that it is essential to the protection of the community against foreign attacks, the steady administration of the laws, the protection of property, and the security of liberty. Hamilton also defended a single executive as "far more safe" because "wherever two or more persons are engaged in any common… pursuit, there is always danger of a difference of opinion… bitter dissensions are apt to spring".
Hamilton's arguments in Federalist No. 70 are particularly relevant to the power of making treaties, as outlined in the Constitution. The power of making treaties is vested in the President, who acts "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur". This provision ensures that the power to make treaties, which is crucial in matters of war, peace, and commerce, is exercised by qualified individuals in a manner that serves the public good.
The Constitution also sets age requirements for electors, mandating that they be at least thirty-five years old for the first office and thirty years old for the second. This ensures that the people have had sufficient time to form a judgment about the electors and reduces the likelihood of being deceived by transient appearances of genius and patriotism. The Constitution thus promotes wise and able leadership in the treaty-making process, contributing to the overall energy and effectiveness of the executive branch.
In conclusion, Federalist No. 70's defence of a unitary executive and its emphasis on energy in the executive branch directly relate to the Constitution's provisions for the power of making treaties. Hamilton's arguments for a strong and unified executive led by capable individuals informed the design of the treaty-making process, ensuring the protection of the community and the effective administration of laws.
Understanding the Constitution Through Federalist Papers
You may want to see also
The role of the Senate
Federalist No. 70, titled "The Executive Department Further Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton. It was originally published on March 15, 1788, in The New York Packet under the pseudonym Publius as part of The Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers were written and published to urge New Yorkers to ratify the proposed United States Constitution.
In Federalist No. 70, Hamilton argues for a strong executive leader, as provided for by the Constitution, as opposed to the weak executive under the Articles of Confederation. He asserts that "energy in the executive is the leading character in the definition of good government". Hamilton also defended a single executive as "far more safe" because "wherever two or more persons are engaged in any common… pursuit, there is always danger of a difference of opinion… bitter dissensions are apt to spring".
Hamilton's arguments in Federalist No. 70 are relevant to the role of the Senate in several ways. Firstly, the Senate is responsible for appointing senators, who are intended to be "the most enlightened and respectable citizens". The Constitution sets age requirements for these positions, mandating that senators be at least thirty years old, to ensure that the people have had time to form a judgment of their character and abilities.
Secondly, the Senate has the power to make treaties, particularly as it relates to war, peace, and commerce. This power is intended to be exercised with the highest level of security and in the manner most conducive to the public good. The Senate's role in treaty-making involves the participation of the executive branch, with the President having the power to make treaties "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided two-thirds of the senators present concur".
Additionally, the Senate has the power to appoint officials to offices and serve as a court for the trial of impeachments, although the executive will be the principal agent in appointments. The Senate's role in appointments and impeachments further underscores the importance of selecting qualified and virtuous individuals as senators.
Overall, Federalist No. 70 highlights Hamilton's belief in the importance of a strong and unified executive branch, which includes the role of the Senate as outlined in the United States Constitution.
Anti-Federalists' View of the Constitution: A Critical Perspective
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Federalist No. 70, titled "The Executive Department Further Considered", is an essay written by Alexander Hamilton, arguing for a unitary executive.
Hamilton argued that a unitary executive was consistent with a republican form of government and that it promoted accountability in government. He also refuted the idea that it would be too similar to the British monarchy.
Federalist 70 is part of a series of essays known as The Federalist Papers, written to encourage the ratification of the United States Constitution. Hamilton's defence of a unitary executive branch and his arguments for a strong executive leader relate directly to Article II of the Constitution, which vests executive power in a single president.
Opponents of Hamilton's view, including Edmund Randolph, argued that a unitary executive could easily become monarchical and resemble the British government. They also believed that a single executive could lead to a lack of advice and information for the president, who would then act in the interests of a few, rather than the people.
John Yoo, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, cited Federalist 70 in support of the President's right to conduct operations against terrorists without congressional consent. President George W. Bush also invoked Federalist 70 when declaring he could act outside the law when it conflicted with his prerogatives as the head of the "unitary executive branch".
