“…to protect freedom and democracy around the world.”
But the United States is not a “True Democracy”, rather we are a democratically elected Republic, and the difference between that and democracy is significant.
Democracy vs a Republic
Democracy
Majority vote prevails. The majority of a vote on a given subject decides the course of law, generally without any predefined limits on what law can be, since the majority of the people decide what law is.
Republic
A system where members are chosen for the purpose of representing a larger body (in the US the People or the States), generally in part or in whole chosen directly by the people. That body or bodies are usually constrained by some sort of contract (Constitution) with the people normally directly voting for at least one part of the body.
Building a Republic
A true democracy is one of majority rule, whichever side gains the majority or even the most votes on a subject wins and decides what law is, but this is not how the United States operates, and in fact such a system was feared by the Founders. Rather at the Federal Level, majority or polarity vote of the people occurs in only three places in the Constitution and only one being to decide directly on a what law is.
The first two instances are in regards to the direct election of US Representatives (Article I section 2) and US Senators (17th Amendment). The third instance is found in Article V and has been used only once in the History of the Constitution, for the people to elect delegates to a State Convention as one of two means1 to ratify an amendment to the Constitution2. The only time this occurred is with the 21st Amendment3, repealing the 18th Amendment, all the other 26 Amendments were ratified by the State Legislatures.
The means listed above are the only instances provided in the United States Constitution where popular vote has a direct on government. In all other instances it is these members who are voted in (Representatives and Senators) who are provided with the real direct authority to determine the direction of government.
Through the drafting and approval of Continental Association in 1775, the Declaration of Independence in 1776, the Articles of Confederation in 1783 and eventually the United States Constitution in 1789, these have always been done through a representative form of government.
The reason why is simple, because a Representative forms of government can and is limited in what it can do, by a contract a Constitution. True Democracy is not bound by this limitation of a Constitution, since majority vote rules. The Founders of not just the Constitution, but the Nation and its states not only advocated a limited and representative government, but practiced it and established it in the State and National Constitutions leading up to the Constitution of 1787.
Between 1776-1787 11 of the 13 States, plus Vermont all had approved Representative Constitutions4, Connecticut and Rhode Island continued to operate off their colonial Charters into the 19th Century, however still where constituted on a republican form of government. The Articles of Confederation which began to be drafted in June 1776 and fully ratified in 1783 operated on a representative Government, chosen by the state legislatures not directly by the people of the states.
During the Convention of 1787 drafting the current Constitution, various forms of government were mentioned in the debates, including Democracy. Democracy was not viewed as a viable form of government and was in fact feared by many members of the Convention. In short order during the Convention the delegates quickly determined a Representative government was the best to ensure and protect the liberty of all. Various instances of Democracy being referred to in the convention occurred, the following is a sample.
May 31, 1787 (Edmund Randolph)
He observed, that the general object was to provide a cure for the evils under which the United States labored; that, in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.
June 4, 1787 (George Mason)
Notwithstanding the oppression and injustice experienced among us from democracy, the genius of the people is in favor of it, and the genius of the people must be consulted.
June 6, 1787 (James Madison)
This was the only defence against the inconveniences of democracy consistent with the democratic form of government. All civilized societies would be divided into different sects, factions, and interests, as they happened to consist of rich and poor, debtors and creditors, the landed, the manufacturing, the commercial interests, the inhabitants of this district or that district, the followers of this political leader or that political leader, the disciples of this religious sect or that religious sect. In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger.
June 18, 1787 (Alexander Hamilton)
The members most tenacious of republicanism, he observed, were as loud as any in declaiming against the vices of democracy.
September 17, 1787 ( Gerry)
In Massachusetts, particularly, he saw the danger of this calamitous event. In that state there are two parties, one devoted to democracy—the worst, he thought, of all political evils; the other as violent in the opposite extreme.
It was not that the delegates and states did not trust the people of the United States to have a stake in government, rather was the central belief in the protection of Liberty and Freedom being at the root of choosing a Republic over Democracy. In Federalist No. 55 (James Madison)
As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government (that of a Republic) presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form. Were the pictures which have been drawn by the political jealousy of some among us, faithful likenesses of the human character, the inference would be that there is not sufficient virtue among men for self government; and that nothing less than the chains of despotism can restrain them from destroying and devouring one another.
The Founders goal was to protect the Freedom and Liberty of all people, and recognized Democracy could not do this. In Democracy the rule of the majority could exploit the minority, "The tyranny of the Majority" if you will. In a Democracy people by nature would break into different sects of common interests, and as soon as one interest had enough power (votes) it could by law suppress the rights and liberties of those it opposes by simple votes without a check.
By designing a Republic, it would ensure the people can and should have a direct vested interest in the government, by choosing their Representatives (and later Senators) to become the law making portion of the Government (Congress). Also by choosing a representative for of government, it could be bound by a contract (Constitution) to limit what powers it has and what it can and cannot do. The Founders believed a Representative government was the best way to preserve Liberty, the Constitution itself requires all states to guarantee one for its citizens as well.
Article IV Section 4:
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.
This was not to say the Founders did not want the people to have a say in the Government at all, quiet the contrary.
On the first day of Debates May 29, 1787 the people electing at least one House of Congress was presented in the Virginia and Pinckney Plans
“15. Resolved, that the amendments which shall be offered to the Confederation by the Convention, ought, at a proper time or times, after the approbation of Congress, to be submitted to an assembly or assemblies of representatives, recommended by the several legislatures, to be expressly chosen by the people, to consider and decide thereon.”
Art. III.—The members of the House of Delegates shall be chosen every——year by the people of the several states;
Throughout the Debates the Convention routinely voted strongly in favor of the people have direct vote and powerful vested interest in the Government. (following excerpts are from James Madison's notes on the theConvention of 1787)
May 31, 1787 (George Mason)
argued strongly for an election of the larger branch by the people. It was to be the grand depository of the democratic principle of the government.
June 4, 1787 (Bedford)
The representatives of the people were the best judges of what was for their interest, and ought to be under no external control whatever.
June 5, 1787 (James Madison)
Constitution should be ratified in the most unexceptionable form, and by the supreme authority of the people themselves.
June 13, 1787 (Gerry)
The other branch was more immediately the representatives of the people, and it was a maxim, that the people ought to hold the purse-strings.
August 9, 1787 George Mason
When the originating of money bills shall be reconsidered, he thought it could be demonstrated that it was of essential importance to restrain the right to the House of Representatives,—the immediate choice of the people.
The concept of ALL freeperson (eventually ALL people after war and time) to be able to vote was not a universal sentiment in the Convention, but it was by far the prevailing one, to ensure the people had a direct and strong role in the new Government, and the ratification of the Constitution which was done by an election by the people for delegates to their states ratification convention.
Examples of US Democracy
Several States allow for voters to directly decide on Constitutional Amendments to their States Constitutionwith varying requirements of ratification. Some of these amendments cannot alter certain aspects of the existing Constitution, providing for a limited form of democracy with a check still in place to help temper the suppression of a minority group, others do not. The current ultimate check on all states Constitutions from becoming truly oppressive toward any group is the supremacy of the United States Constitution and it prohibiting any state from infringing or denying the privileges and immunities entitled to all citizens of the United States5. Without this check in place, it is unknowable if these checks would remain through the direction of popular vote.
Conclusion
A true or even partial Democracy in Government where the people can decide on law without bounds, allows for what ever group who can garner the most votes to be able to exploit and suppress those who cannot, by definition impose tyrannical rule. A republic that is accompanied by a Constitution, imposes hard and defined limits on what law can be and what government can do, to protect all peoples liberties and rights, both the majority and minority.
To allow a simple majority to decide what law is, is to give a direct avenue to tyranny to any and probably the first sect or group of people who can form a majority. This would empower them to oppress, suppress and plunder those who they do not agree with or resent. A democracy would ultimately result in a divided nation as groups coalesce into like minded or interested bodies in the pursuit of gaining power, most likely at the expense of those who do not have power. Democracy can only result in one final disposition, "the tyranny of the majority", just like 3 Wolves and 1 sheep deciding what will be for dinner.
Note 1: The other mean is for the legislature of the states to vote to ratify an Amendment to the Constitution.
Note 2: Article VII also called for States to have Conventions for the initial ratification of the Constitution. But since these took place prior to the States operating under the Constitution and can only occur once for each state, they are not being considered an active means of popular voting under the Constitution.
Note 3: Amendment XXI, Section 3: “This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.”
Note 4: Constitutions prior to Massachusetts in 1780 were drafted and approved by the State Legislative Bodies. Massachusetts' in 1780 was the first to be approved by the people of the state.
Note 5: 14th Amendment Section 1, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.".
No comments :
Post a Comment