Slide 1OverviewAnarchy v. TyrannyAnarchy v. TyrannyRepresentationRepresentationRepresentationRepresentationRepresentationSeparation of PowersSeparation of PowersChecks and BalancesChecks and BalancesChecks and BalancesChecks and BalancesChecks and BalancesChecks and BalancesFederalism as a Check?Federalism as a Check?Checking TyrannyBill of Rights?Ratification: Debating National PowerRatification: Debating National PowerRatification: Debating National PowerDebating National PowerChanging the ConstitutionChanging the ConstitutionChanging the ConstitutionChanging the ConstitutionWrap-upWrap-upPOLS 206: American National GovernmentMegan K. Dyer September 16, 2014OverviewAvoiding tyranny1. Representation•Federalist 102. Separation of powers3. Checks and Balances•Federalist 514. Federalism as a check?RatificationConstitutional changeAnarchy v. TyrannyRecap: New national powersThreat of tyranny?Popular government can threaten liberty!•Aside: Democracy’s checkered past“Tyranny of the majority”Anarchy v. TyrannyConstitution designs institutions to prevent tyranny of the majority:1. Places much of gov’t beyond direct control of the majority2. Separates the powers of different institutions3. Constructs a system of checks & balances4. Divides authority b/t state & nationalRepresentation1. Placing much of gov’t beyond the direct control of the majorityA republic•guarantees participation by the people but in a limited mannerWhy representation?Madison’s Federalist 10:“the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose.”•Democracy or republic?RepresentationFederalist 10 is concerned with faction:•Majority factions  tyranny of the majorityRepresentation as a (partial) cure?•Representatives have to speak for many•This helps refine public views•Forces popular gov’t to look after the public goodIn a large, diverse republic…RepresentationRepresentationLimiting majority control, con’t:Direct v. indirect representation•House of Representative is directly elected•All others? (original Constitution)Length of an official’s term•Longer terms = more insulated from the publicHow democratic was the original Constitution?Liberty v. democracy•Aside: democratization of the ConstitutionRepresentation2. Separation of powers•Not an absolute division of powers!•Purpose to ensure that no single branch could control the others•Each branch independent of others•Fear of concentrated powerSeparation of PowersAssumed danger = domination of the legislature•So…Congress divided into 2 Houses with 2 methods of election•President bolstered (i.e. veto)•Consequences?Separation of PowersChecks and Balances3. Checks and BalancesFederalist 51:“A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government, but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.”•Why is government being popular not enough to control it?Checks and Balances3. Checks and Balances, con’t:Federalist 51:“you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”•Solution: Make each branch of gov’t contest the power of others•Designing rules & institutions•so that gov’t power does not grow too largeChecks and Balances •Each branch must have the consent of the others in certain actionsChecks and BalancesChecks and BalancesCongress:•authority to make the laws•2/3 override of Presidential veto•Declare war•Confirm appointments (Senate)•Approve treaties (Senate)Checks and BalancesThe President:•authority to execute (enforce) the laws•Veto•Commander in Chief•Appointments•Negotiate treatiesSupreme Court:•Highest court•Judicial review (power to declare a law unconstitutional)•Marbury v. Madison (1803) •An afterthought?Checks and Balances4. Constitution divides authority b/t state & national•Federalism divides power•The “double security” of a “compound republic”Federalist 51:“The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.”Federalism as a Check?Conflict b/t national & state gov’ts•Helps keep either of them from infringing on libertyShould the state governments be allowed to “check” the national gov’t?Federalism as a Check?Effects of Separation of Powers & Checks and balances•Conflict•Liberty and gridlock?Checking TyrannyWhere is it?“Auxiliary precautions” v. “parchment barriers”“Auxiliary precautions”:•Institutional design makes it harder for gov’t to become tyrannical•Power separated, divided, & checked“parchment barriers”:•i.e. bills of rights•How effective?Bill of Rights?Ratification: State conventionsFederalists & Anti-Federalists•Federalists: champions of the new Constitution•anti-Federalists: against ratification.Ratification: Debating National PowerFederalists (supporters)Generally:•Supported strong national gov’t & weaker state gov’t•Supported indirect election of officials & longer terms of office•Less concerned about threat of national powerThe Federalist PapersRatification: Debating National PowerAnti-federalists (opponents)Generally:•Thought Constitution gave the national gov’t too much power•Concerned that the Constitution was too elitist•Favored direct election and shorter terms •Wanted stronger protections for individual rightse.g. BrutusRatification: Debating National PowerFederalists worried about tyranny of the majorityAnti-Federalists worried about concentration of power by a political & economic eliteWhich is the greater threat?Debating National PowerConstitution = nation’s basic law•a framework for U.S. national gov’tHas been changed by both:1. Formal amendment2. Informal processesChanging the Constitution1. Formal amendment (Art. 5)•Gives roles to both national gov’t & the states•Two stages: Proposal and ratificationGenerally:•Have made Constitution more democratic & egalitarian•Examples?Changing the ConstitutionDifficulty of formal amendment!•e.g. Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) 1982 •e.g. Corwin Amendment (1861)Changing the Constitution2. Informal changes:•shaped by many unwritten traditions, practices, & processes.Sources:•Judicial interpretation•Changing political practice•Technological change•Increased demands for policyChanging the