Summary Of How Democratic Is The American Constitution By Robert Dahl

The Summer of 1787 was written by David O. Stewart as a historical, non-fiction recount of the events leading to the Constitutions adoption hundreds of years ago. David O. Stewart is extremely qualified to put together such a book. Mr. Stewart is a prolific author in matters of politics and history. In addition, Mr. Stewart studied law at Yale, a highly praised institution. From his studies in modern law to reading all 500 pages of James Madison’s notes from the constitutional convention, Mr. Stewart has the motivation and intelligence to effectively narrate the time before the constitutions implementation.

Versteeg brings up great discussion points in this article. For example the constitutions old age, its rigidity, its brevity, and its catalog of rights. America has used the some constitution for 226 years as opposed to foreign constitutions that, according to Versteeg and others, last on average nineteen years. Next Versteeg addresses the inflexibility of the Constitution. “the U.S Constitution is one of the most inflexible in the world, surpassed only by the constitutions of Japan, Denmark, and Paraguay”(Versteeg, Paragraph 4).

Most Americans view the Constitution as a sacred document that created the world’s greatest democracy but, in actuality, the American Constitution has many highly undemocratic aspects that prove this judgement to be mistaken. This is brought to light in Dahl’s analysis of the American Constitution.

The checks and balances that the founders desired between the Senate and the House would be reflected in the competing political parties within the House. 2. Sanford Levinson argues that the Electoral College is a “dreadful system of presidential selection” that is beyond defending. Using Madison’s Notes and the Federalist Papers, explain the A) purposes of the Electoral College (why they chose this method over others) and B) whether or not Publius’s defense applies to current debates over maintaining or eliminating the Electoral

The late 17th century was a time of radical transformations and floods of independence. As the United States developed, a government that suited the needs of its citizens was imperative for the success and flourish of the new nation. The Constitution surfaced as a document to placate those dissatisfied by the distasteful Articles of Confederation. The numerous conciliations and adaptations composing the document have led to the term “bundle of compromises.” The ever-changing nature of the Constitution has resulted in it being considered a “living document” in the present day.

One reason that the framers of the constitution included the Electoral College is because they believed people will only vote for people in their own states and basically play favorites. However, in modern democracy it is evident that this system no longer benefits entirely the people of the states’. It must be modified because the restrictions that vary state to state through each election is now unnecessary in today’s society. In a presidential election an electoral vote should count the same as a popular vote no matter the circumstances. The states that remain mutual in a presidential candidacy election, where the populations are evenly divided causes an issue of winning the state

Federalist #10, written by James Madison, is a text that offers an alternative approach to America's democratic governmental institutions. Presenting the downfalls of American democracy, such as unequal representation, Madison advocates for a governmental structure that appeals to a wider variety of constituents. Conversely, Democracy in America by Alexis de Tocqueville praises American democracy in its current form. Although Tocqueville concedes that American democracy is fallible, it presents American government as an exemplary model for countries ruled by aristocracies. Madison and Tocqueville present contradicting opinions concerning the way in which democracy often allows majority interests to influence the everyday workings of government.

Gregg II believes the Electoral College has long been one of the least understood and most unappreciated aspects of the American constitutional order. Yet, it has endured and continued to serve American democracy, why?—because it works. He argues a few times that our presidential elections are open, free, and fair due to the Electoral College. “Our fights can be bitter, but when they are decided at the ballot box they end with legitimate presidents and governable regimes,” Gregg says. He gives the example that in a presidential election, candidates are a race to win more votes than the other guy—and each is based on every vote being counted as well as all votes counting equally.

Holton addressed were all valid reasons to support his argument that the unruly Americans led to the origins of the Constitution. The strongest argument made by Mr. Holton was the transgressions that the Founding Fathers laid at the feet of the thirteen state legislatures. He stated that the most glaringly representative had shown excessive indulgence to debtors and taxpayers, in which the state legislature had refused to force farmers to pay what they owed (page 92). These policies adopted by the state legislatures in the 1780s proved that ordinary Americans were not entirely capable of ruling themselves (page 96). “Honesty Is the Best Policy” (1786) “Curtis” written by an anonymous author that reads as if it was written by one of the Founding Fathers’.

Young in his essay “The Pressure of the People on the Framers of the Constitution,” have argued that the accommodations for the people to be involved in the government written in the Constitution were only established because the authors felt pressured by popular opinion, not because they felt that was the way the government should operate. Young argues that , “To last it[the Constitution] had to conform to the “genius” of the American people.” The assumption that the delegates who established the Constitution were “forced” to give common citizens a voice in the new government can be proven wrong when examining John Rakove’s quote. “Decisions on other provisions also worked to remove formal barriers against election to the legislature. Instead of requiring a congressman to be “resident” in his state for a fixed period of years, the convention agreed that he need only be an “inhabitant” of the state at the time of election.”

The Leonore Annenberg Institute for Civics video titled “Key Constitutional Concepts” explores the history of the creation of the United States Constitution in addition to key concepts crucial to the document. Two central themes explored in the video include the protection of personal rights and importance of checks and balances. The video strives to explain these concepts through Supreme Court cases Gideon v. Wainwright and Youngstown v. Sawyer. To begin, the video retraces the steps leading up to the Constitutional Convention in Virginia in 1787. It opens by explaining the conflict that led to the Revolutionary War and the fragility of the new nation.

The Constitution—the foundation of the American government—has been quintessential for the lives of the American people for over 200 years. Without this document America today would not have basic human rights, such as those stated in the Bill of Rights, which includes freedom of speech and religion. To some, the Constitution was an embodiment of the American Revolution, yet others believe that it was a betrayal of the Revolution. I personally believe that the Constitution did betray the Revolution because it did not live up to the ideals of the Revolution, and the views of the Anti-Federalists most closely embodied the “Spirit of ‘76.” During the midst of the American Revolution, authors and politicians of important documents, pamphlets, and slogans spread the basis for Revolutionary ideals and defined what is known as the “Spirit of ‘76”.

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

A living Constitution is one that progresses, transforms throughout stages, and acclimates to recent occurrences, short of being legally revised. It can be revised, but the revision method is somewhat challenging. The highly significant revisions were affixed to the Constitution nearly one hundred years or so ago, and in the time of the Civil War, and subsequently many of the revisions have dealt with fairly inconsequential topics. We have seen many changes take place over the years, changing economy, social adjustments, in directions that one couldn’t have predicted when the Constitution was written.

In the United States, people always talk about freedom and equality. Especially they want elections could be more democratic. In American Democracy in Peril, Hudson’s main argument regarding chapter five “Election Without the People’s Voice,” is if elections want to be democratic, they must meet three essential criteria, which are to provide equal representation of all citizens, to be mechanisms for deliberation about public policy issues, and to control what government does. Unfortunately, those points that Hudson mentions are what American elections do not have. American elections do not provide equal representation to everyone in the country.