My AP Gov class defined democracy as a system of government where people vote in fair, frequent elections that result in a deliberative rule of law. One of the most important aspects of this definition is the role of the people. When the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, they wanted to be as specific as possible without restricting future generations. I do think the goal of the Constitution was to facilitate democratic access to the government, but it was geared more toward wealthy, white landowners rather than the average citizen. Because of this, the Constitution ended up hindering democratic access to government.
An example of the importance of fair, frequent elections is shown in the House of Representatives. Article I, Section II states that, “The Number of Representative shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative”. Representatives are chosen every two years to give a more accurate representation of the population. The other part of Congress, the Senate, is comprised of two senators from each state. When the Constitution was written, the Senators were chosen by the state legislatures (Article I, Section III). Unlike the House of Representatives, Senators serve a six year term. I think it’s important to notice an important distinction between the House of Representatives and the Senate; equal representation lasts longer than representation based on population. At this time, however, the Senate included older (because a person must be thirty to be a senator), career politicians. This means that men from a very specific demographic (i.e older and wealthier) are in Congress much longer. Because of this, I think the original plan for the senate stymied democratic access to government. Senators were the people that were allowed to serve the longest term, yet they were never elected.
The Constitution also stresses the difference between the powers of the state and the federal government. Article IV, Section II includes the clause that states how “citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states”. This clause gets rid discrimination between states and makes sure fundamental rights are universal. The separation between state and federal government was another way to avoid tyranny, and although states have the ability to deal with, “public acts, records, and judicial proceedings” (Article IV, Section I), federal law trumps state law (Supremacy Clause). It is much more difficult to make an impact on the federal level, so because federal law overrides state law, it is much more difficult for the people to gain meaningful access to their government.
Another important facet in the balance of power is the balance and check to power on the Executive Branch. By limiting the power of the President, the Founding Fathers were trying to avoid a monarchy or dictatorship. For example, the term of the President lies in between that of a Representative and a Senator. A four year term also emphasizes the frequency in the definition of democracy. Also, the ability for Congress to override a veto with a ⅔ majority shows how the voices of the people have the power to trump the voice of one person. However, the Electoral college system does not follow the definition of democracy; the definition states that it’s the people that should vote. With the Elector system, the President is not elected by popular vote and is instead elected by districts. The fact that a person could win the popular vote and still lose the election seems counterintuitive to the Founding Father’s vision of democracy.
From the first two amendments, I can see that something the United States values is regulated freedom. This means that citizens of the United States should be able to express their grievances (Amendment I) as well as the idea that a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state (Amendment II). Both of these amendments, as well as the third and fourth amendment, highlight the idea of the right to be control of our belongings; these can be property, weapons, etc.
Both the ninth and tenth amendment state that both the citizens and State have rights that are not stated in the Constitution. The vagueness of both of the Amendments is another way the Founding Fathers allowed for change and ambiguity. Though federal law is supreme (Article VI, Section 2), the ninth amendment shows how the constitution is an evolving document and is subject to constant reinterpretation.
When the constitution was written, the people writing it were white males, so the Constitution is bound to promote the people that fit that demographic. Both women and slaves were excluded from both the ability to vote and the ability to take part in the rights granted by the Constitution. Slaves could not own guns, slaves could not assemble, slaves did not have freedom of religion, and slaves were not given the right to a speedy trial. Though these rights existed, they did not extend to everyone. When the Constitution was written, it had to be ratified by nine out of the thirteen states. In order to appeal to the colonies, they had to limit the rights of blacks because they people voting wanted to their slaves. Another example comes from the three-fifths compromise (Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3) which made each slave only three-fifths of a person. In this case, the Constitution does impede democratic access to government for people of a certain demographic.
Allowing the people to access the government is an important characteristic of democracy. The rest of the people were not able to participate in the rights and freedoms granted by the Constitution because of their race or sex. The overall structure of the government, at the time, also restricted the voices of the people because of institutions such as the electoral college and the terms of senators. Though the Founding Fathers had good intentions, they limited the access and power in government to those who already had some degree of power.
Works Cited:
Peter Woll, editor, “The United States Constitution” in American Government Readings and Cases, (Glenview: Pearson Education, Inc., 2008), 407-425.
An example of the importance of fair, frequent elections is shown in the House of Representatives. Article I, Section II states that, “The Number of Representative shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative”. Representatives are chosen every two years to give a more accurate representation of the population. The other part of Congress, the Senate, is comprised of two senators from each state. When the Constitution was written, the Senators were chosen by the state legislatures (Article I, Section III). Unlike the House of Representatives, Senators serve a six year term. I think it’s important to notice an important distinction between the House of Representatives and the Senate; equal representation lasts longer than representation based on population. At this time, however, the Senate included older (because a person must be thirty to be a senator), career politicians. This means that men from a very specific demographic (i.e older and wealthier) are in Congress much longer. Because of this, I think the original plan for the senate stymied democratic access to government. Senators were the people that were allowed to serve the longest term, yet they were never elected.
The Constitution also stresses the difference between the powers of the state and the federal government. Article IV, Section II includes the clause that states how “citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens of the several states”. This clause gets rid discrimination between states and makes sure fundamental rights are universal. The separation between state and federal government was another way to avoid tyranny, and although states have the ability to deal with, “public acts, records, and judicial proceedings” (Article IV, Section I), federal law trumps state law (Supremacy Clause). It is much more difficult to make an impact on the federal level, so because federal law overrides state law, it is much more difficult for the people to gain meaningful access to their government.
Another important facet in the balance of power is the balance and check to power on the Executive Branch. By limiting the power of the President, the Founding Fathers were trying to avoid a monarchy or dictatorship. For example, the term of the President lies in between that of a Representative and a Senator. A four year term also emphasizes the frequency in the definition of democracy. Also, the ability for Congress to override a veto with a ⅔ majority shows how the voices of the people have the power to trump the voice of one person. However, the Electoral college system does not follow the definition of democracy; the definition states that it’s the people that should vote. With the Elector system, the President is not elected by popular vote and is instead elected by districts. The fact that a person could win the popular vote and still lose the election seems counterintuitive to the Founding Father’s vision of democracy.
From the first two amendments, I can see that something the United States values is regulated freedom. This means that citizens of the United States should be able to express their grievances (Amendment I) as well as the idea that a well regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state (Amendment II). Both of these amendments, as well as the third and fourth amendment, highlight the idea of the right to be control of our belongings; these can be property, weapons, etc.
Both the ninth and tenth amendment state that both the citizens and State have rights that are not stated in the Constitution. The vagueness of both of the Amendments is another way the Founding Fathers allowed for change and ambiguity. Though federal law is supreme (Article VI, Section 2), the ninth amendment shows how the constitution is an evolving document and is subject to constant reinterpretation.
When the constitution was written, the people writing it were white males, so the Constitution is bound to promote the people that fit that demographic. Both women and slaves were excluded from both the ability to vote and the ability to take part in the rights granted by the Constitution. Slaves could not own guns, slaves could not assemble, slaves did not have freedom of religion, and slaves were not given the right to a speedy trial. Though these rights existed, they did not extend to everyone. When the Constitution was written, it had to be ratified by nine out of the thirteen states. In order to appeal to the colonies, they had to limit the rights of blacks because they people voting wanted to their slaves. Another example comes from the three-fifths compromise (Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3) which made each slave only three-fifths of a person. In this case, the Constitution does impede democratic access to government for people of a certain demographic.
Allowing the people to access the government is an important characteristic of democracy. The rest of the people were not able to participate in the rights and freedoms granted by the Constitution because of their race or sex. The overall structure of the government, at the time, also restricted the voices of the people because of institutions such as the electoral college and the terms of senators. Though the Founding Fathers had good intentions, they limited the access and power in government to those who already had some degree of power.
Works Cited:
Peter Woll, editor, “The United States Constitution” in American Government Readings and Cases, (Glenview: Pearson Education, Inc., 2008), 407-425.