A Federalist Government?

Federalist Papers

The authors of THE FEDERALIST had varying and sometimes clashing ideas about government, but they agreed strongly on certain fundamental ideas: republicanism, federalism, separation of powers, and free government.

–Republicanism. A republican government is one “in which the scheme of representation takes place” (No. 10). It is based on the consent of the governed because power is delegated to a small number of citizens who are elected by the rest.

–Federalism. In a federal republic, power is divided vertically between a general (federal) government and several state governments. Two levels of government, each supreme in its own sphere, can exercise powers separately and directly on the people. State governments can neither ignore nor contradict federal statutes that conform to the supreme law, the Constitution. This conception of federalism departed from traditional forms, known today as confederations, in which states retained full sovereignty over their internal affairs.

–Separation of Powers. “Publius” proclaims (No. 47): “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands…may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” So the Constitution separates powers of government among three branches according to function. But this horizontal separation of powers is not complete. Each branch has various constitutional means to participate in the affairs of the others to check and balance powers in government and prevent one branch of the government from dominating the others.

–Free Government. Republicanism, federalism, and separation of powers are characteristics of free government. According to THE FEDERALIST, free government is popular government limited by law to protect the security, liberty, and property of individuals. A free government is powerful enough to provide protection against external and internal threats and limited enough to prevent tyranny in any form. In particular, free government is designed to guard against the most insidious danger of government by the people–the tyranny of the many over the few. Of course, it was mainly the “propertied few” that “Publius” had in mind, but this principle applies equally to constitutional protection of religious, ethnic, racial or other minorities against oppression by the majority.

There were those that did not agree totally on the Federalist system, they were called the Anti-federalist, but they were quickly marginalized by the biggies within the movement.

Why do I mention this?  Just read the post and tell me if there is anything wrong with the concept as it is practiced today.