The Theory and Practice of Republican Government - Essay Example

Assignment The Election System Election experts generally agree that the US election system is fundamentally flawed (Gerkin, 2009). The flawed election system is a result of underfunding, poor administration of the voting process and partisan input that typically involves changing the rules as they go along. The flawed system is evidenced by poorly functioning poll workers, machines that often malfunction, long lines and long waiting times and a general failure on the part of election officials to agree on what amounts to “a best practice” (Gerken, 2009, p. 1). Aside from procedural difficulties, the US election process is flawed from a practical and democratic perspective. Democracy typically requires that election systems result in proportional representation in that multi-party elections with a leader will typically mirror the concerns of the entire electorate (Smith, 2010). The US is split down the middle between two parties with precious few independent candidates interspersed at intervals. The US Presidential election itself often results in “winner takes all” outcome leaving those who did not elect the President feeling largely unrepresented (Smith, 2010, p. 135). This is the highest office in the US with both procedural and substantive defects. The procedural defects not only follow from the poorly administrative workings of the election process at the polls. The procedural defects also follow from the Electoral College. The Electoral College, informed by the popular vote, elects the President. However, by virtue of Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the US Constitution, the Electoral College is not constitutionally obligated to elect a president consistent with the popular vote (US Constitution, Article II, Section 1, Clause 1). Therefore there is always a risk that the College Electorate may go against the popular vote and even if they did, there is no way for the population to know. This may account for the relatively low voter turnout at US Presidential elections as compared to other major government elections in other Western democracies (Smith, 2010). Therefore the US Presidential election process is by far the most flawed in that it does not allow for direct election by the voting public and in essence denies total or full representation. Moreover, the Presidential election campaign system is a long and complex exercise in which candidates engage in campaigns that typically involve “many twists and turns and seem to hinge on trivial incident and personal foibles” that are essentially meaningless in terms of the candidates ability to serve in office (Smith, 2010, p. 135). Pursuant to the predictable campaign theory, the amount of money and time invested in the US Presidential campaigns is for the most part wasted expenditure. According to the predictable campaign theory, voters have generally decided on a candidate even before a campaign begins. Regardless of the messages conveyed and the money spent during campaigns, these voters will rarely if ever change their minds. Campaigns may have an impact on the undecided voter, but this group is decidedly small (Smith, 2010). While campaigns are necessary, according to the predictable campaign theory, US Presidential candidates could spend much of the money wasted on campaigns more productively since campaigns may only serve to influence swing voters. Campaigns focus too much attention on insignificant matters and ultimately may account for the low voter turnout. Arguably, voters who have decided on a candidate prior to the commencement of election campaigns, may be persuaded not to vote at all once the campaigns begin as they typically show both candidates in an unfavorable light with campaigns typically involving character assassinations. Assignment 2: Government Control. James Madison’s statement “you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself” has been interpreted to mean the allocation of natural and civil rights and the separation of powers (Mansfield, 1995). Although reference to controlling the governed appear to be arbitrary, it must be read in conjunction with the US Constitution which does not in any way intend to control the governed in an arbitrary way. Essentially, Madison’s statement takes a realistic approach to the fact that natural and civil rights cannot be left to individual’s discretion and consent. Thus some measure of control is needed (Mansfield, 1995). In this regard, the US Constitution sets out the natural and civil rights of man in what has been termed the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights are contained in the first 10 Amendments to the US Constitution and include restrictions on state power aimed at protecting natural and civil rights and private property. A number of personal liberties are contained in the first 10 Amendments which essentially limit the power of the government in terms of the judiciary and other administrative processes and retains state power and the power of the public. The Bill of Rights was presented to the US Congress by Madison and subsequently adopted (Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States, 1789). Essentially, Madison was establishing that government could not rule without consent of the governed and that the governed would not naturally consent to freedoms and protections. Thus government would be established to create liberties and restrictions on those liberties as well as restrictions on the power of the government. As reflected in the personal freedoms and restrictions on government and public power, these restrictions and freedoms are necessary for ensuring the pursuit of happiness, life and liberty (Mansfield, 1995). Similarly, Madison took the position that the separation of powers was necessary to hold the government in check by what is now known as a system of checks and balances (Kernell, 2003). The separation of powers is contained in the first three articles of the US Constitution. Article 1 vests legislative powers in the US Congress “which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives” (US Constitution, Article 1, Section 2). Article II vest executive powers in the President (US Constitution, Article 11, Section 1). Article III vests: judicial power in the United States Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (US Constitution, Article III, Section 1). The separation of powers has a number of objectives which are connected to Madison’s statement relative to the government and the governed. By separating powers within the government, government powers are not concentrated and tyranny is avoided. Each of the separate branches of the government has specific powers aimed at countering the excessive exercise of the powers of other branches of government. Thus the separation of powers is consistent with Madison’s observation that the government must be establishes so as to “oblige it to control itself” (The Federalist No. 51). James Madison also stated that “ambition must be made to counteract ambition” (The Federalist No. 51). Therefore when reading Madison’s statement relative to governing the governed and controlling the government, it is clear that Madison intended to construct a government that realised and responded to human passions both for freedom and the pursuit of happiness. Madison clearly realised that the governed and the government were all human beings and that the human passion for freedom and the pursuit of happiness could be excessively practiced if not contained and regulated. Assignment 3: Paring Down the Constitution Article VI, Clause 2 of the US Constitution establishes what is known as the supremacy clause. The Supremacy Clause reads as follows: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding (US Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2). The 10 Amendment establishes the extent to which states retain power and are free of interference from the Federal Government (Holder & Holder, 1997). The 10 Amendment reads as follows: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people (US Constitution, 10th Amendment). If I were permitted to choose, I would remove the 10th Amendment from the US Constitution and retain the Supremacy Clause. As Holder and Holder (1997) argue, the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution does not add to, nor take away from the powers of the Federal government. The 10th Amendment was only added to respond to concerns that the federal government would sometime in the future attempt to exercise authority not conferred upon it (Holder & Holder, 1997). Holder and Holder (1997) also argue that the 10th Amendment is wholly unnecessary because the powers and the limits of the powers conferred upon the federal government are expressly articulated within the text of the US Constitution. The 10th Amendment does not do anything more than acknowledge the existence of the powers of the federal government and does not detract from those powers. In this regard, the 10th Amendment is for the most part unnecessary. The Supremacy Clause however is entirely necessary as it establishes the extent to which the US Constitution binds the Federal government and each of the states to the proper exercise of power for the protection of individual freedoms and the proper functioning of the federal powers. It therefore guides the judiciary in terms of judicial review of administrative and judicial decisions (Vile, 2010). In addition, the Supremacy Clause serves a gap-filling purpose which ensures greater consistency and certainty in the protection and enforcement of citizen’s rights against all branches of government and their agents. As Vile (2010) explains, in the event of a conflict between state law and the constitution, the constitution prevails. In this regard, citizens throughout the US can be assured of the same level of protection and enforcement of their enumerated rights and government obligation to secure those rights. Likewise, if there is a conflict between the Constitution and an Act of Congress, the Constitution prevails. The Supremacy Clause also ensures that treaties to which the US is bound will also be the supreme law of the land as will Federal law (Vile, 2010). However, the main problem with the Supremacy Clause is that it does not state which source of law will prevail in the event there is a conflict between Federal law, treaties and the US Constitution, as all three have been designated the supreme law of the US. Even with this failing, the Supremacy Clause serves a far more useful purpose than the 10th Amendment. As previously noted, the 10 Amendment does not serve much of a practical purpose, whereas the Supremacy Clause does. Bibliography Gerken, H. K. The Democracy Index: Why Our Election System is Failing and How to Fix it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009. Holder, A. R. and Holder, J. T. R. The Meaning of the Constitution. Hauppauge, NY: Baron’s Educational Series, Inc., 1997. Journal of the House of Representatives of the United States, 1789-1793, (Friday August 21, 1789). http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/hlaw:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28hj001139%29%29: (Retrieved May 10, 2012). Kernell, S. James Madison: The Theory and Practice of Republican Government. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2003. Mansfield, H.C.”Tocqueville and the Future of the American Constitution.” In Sherlock, R.; Robson, K. E. and Johnson, C. W. (Eds). The Normative Constitution: Essays for the Third Century. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.; 1995, 50-58 Smith, R. A. The American Anomaly: US Politics and Government in Comparative Perspective. New York, NY: Hill and Wang, 2010. The Federalist No. 51. “The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments.” Independent Journal, Wednesday February 6, 1788, (James Madison). http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm (Retrieved May 10, 2012). US Constitution. Vile, J. R. A Companion to the United States Constitution and its Amendments. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2010. Read More