Constitution Deep Dive pt. 3 - The Father of the Constitution
September 21, 2022 by Jakob Fay
“If men were angels, no government would be necessary,” James
Madison famously posited in Federalist No. 51. “If angels were to
govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government
would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be adminis-
tered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must
first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next
place oblige it to control itself.”
In these three sentences, the Father of the Constitution encap-
sulated the fundamental tension at the heart of any government and
also why, to him and his fellow founders, a Constitutional Republic
seemed to be the preferable form of government.
By the time James Madison participated in the 1787 Constitutional
Convention, the 36-year-old delegate from Virginia already had many
years of political experience, having helped draft Virginia's state
constitution in 1776 and served as the youngest member of the Conti-
nental Congress during the Revolutionary War and a leader in the Vir-
ginia Assembly where he often championed religious liberty.
His frustrating years in the Assembly in particular taught Madison
to be deeply distrustful of government–but for a different reason than
his friend Thomas Jefferson distrusted government. Jefferson feared,
rightfully, that the government might become unrepresentative of the
people. Madison, on the other hand, feared the government would be too
representative of the people.
He knew the madness of mobs, the irrationality of a passionate
majority, and sought to protect ideological minorities from being
trampled by a government that became too reflective of populist poli-
tics. “In Republics,” he warned, “the great danger is that the major-
ity may not sufficiently respect the rights of the Minority.” In the
Constitution, he hoped to prop up safeguards against this.
Madison supported a relatively strong federal government. His
Virginia Plan, presented to the Constitutional Convention by Edmund
Randolph, proposed giving the federal government a national veto over
state laws, an idea that (thankfully) did not make it into the final
document. As already explained, Madison had helped draft the hugely
influential Virginia Constitution, and many of the ideas contained in
that document, however, found their way into the U.S. Constitution.
Despite favoring a strong national government, the future presi-
dent, as Federalist 51 would indicate, understood the importance of
compelling government to “control itself.” His now-famous “ambition
must be made to counteract ambition” quote clarified that the unheal-
thy human drive for power should be used against itself; basically, if
politicians in different branches were all vying for power, they
would, theoretically, cancel each other out (ie. checks and balances).
Although Madison’s Virginia Plan was not accepted in its entirety
by the Convention, he embraced the new constitution and became an im-
portant voice urging the states to ratify the document, contributing
29 essays to the pro-constitution Federalist Papers.
Additionally, although initially opposed to a bill of rights
(believing it would be unnecessary), he drafted and proposed the
amendments that would become the Bill of Rights.
Interestingly, this was not the only thing the Father of the
Constitution seemingly changed his mind about.
The Madison of the 1790s was far warier of national power than
the Madison who had called for a sweeping federal government during
the Constitutional Convention. He had always been less of a national-
ist than his Federalist co-author Alexander Hamilton was, but even
Hamilton was shocked and confused when Madison vehemently opposed his
economic proposals for building a strong central government.
The Virginian gradually developed into an outspoken states’
rights advocate who co-founded the Jeffersonian-Republican Party,
which was characterized by its opposition to Hamilton’s “loose inter-
pretation of the Constitution.” He even supported the right of states
to stand against unconstitutional federal actions, a far cry from his
call for a national veto over state laws.
It may seem like James Madison radically shifted his political
views in a relatively short span of time, and in many ways, this is
true. But it’s better to view his evolution in light of a fierce loy-
alty to the Constitution. Our governing document gave the national
government an enumerated handful of powers… and nothing more. To do
anything beyond what the federal government expressly had permission
to do, was, in Madison’s mind, a deep betrayal of the Constitution.
If Madison was frustrated by Hamilton’s disregard for the Con-
stitution, we can only imagine what he would think of our government
today. We have expanded so far beyond the original intent of the Con-
stitution, that to say we are governed by it would almost be an insult
to the man who fathered that blessed document.
Nonetheless, we can thank James Madison for his extraordinary
contributions to American history and profound political insight. Per-
haps ambition failed to counteract ambition as he thought it would,
but thanks to Article V of the Constitution, we don’t have to wait
for the federal government to control itself.
To join the Article V movement and take action to save the Con-
stitution, sign the petition on the Constitution of States site.
*Jakob Fay*
For those of you that are not familiar with Article V, I would
suggest you read it and explore the power it gives back to the people.
Simple things like term limits are reachable by expanding the
use of Article V.
Maybe it is time for us ALL to wake up and take back our nation
that God blessed us with.
Conservatively,
John
Conservativelyjohn.com 