Federalist No. 68

Alexander Hamilton, author of Federalist No. 68

Federalist No. 68 (Federalist Number 68), the sixty-eighth essay of The Federalist Papers, was probably written by Alexander Hamilton and published on March 12, 1788 under the pseudonym Publius—the name under which all The Federalist Papers were published. Since all were written under this one pseudonym, we can never be certain of the authorships. Entitled "The Mode of Electing the President," it describes Hamilton's view of the process for selecting the Chief Executive of the United States of America. Hamilton sought to convince the people of New York of the merits of the proposed Constitution. Federalist Number 68 is the second in a series of eleven essays discussing the powers and limitations of the Executive branch but the only one to describe the method of selecting a president.

Background

Constitutional debates

Throughout its proceedings, the Constitutional Convention debated the method for selecting the president, trying to find a way that would be agreeable to the bodies represented at the convention. Different plans were proposed, including:

Interests of slaveholding states

The interests of slaveholding states may have influenced the choice of the Electoral College as the mode of electing the president. James Wilson proposed a direct election by the people, but gained no support and it was decided the president was to be elected by congress. When the entire draft of the constitution was considered, Gouverneur Morris brought the debate back up and decided he too wanted the people to choose the president. James Madison agreed that election of the people at large was the best way to go about electing the president, but he knew that the less populous slave states would not be influential under such a system, and he backed the Electoral College.[1]

Federalist 68 outlined

Hamilton's understanding of the Electoral College

Federalist No. 68 is the continuation of Hamilton's analysis of the presidency, in this case concerned with the mode of selecting the United States President. He argues for our modern conception of the Electoral College, though in the case of an Electoral tie, the power would be given to the House of Representatives to vote on the election of the president.

In justifying the use of the Electoral College, Hamilton focuses on a few arguments dealing with the use of the Electoral College instead of direct election. First, in explaining the role of the general populace in the election of the president, Hamilton argues that the, "sense of the people", through the election of the electors to the Electoral College, should be a part of the process. The final say, however, lies with the electors, who Hamilton notes are,

"Men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice."

Therefore, the direct election of the president is left up to those who have been selected by the voters to become the electors. This indirect election is justified by Hamilton because while a republic is still served, the system allows for only a certain type of person to be elected president, preventing individuals who are unfit for a variety of reasons to be in the position of chief executive of the country.

This is reflected in his later fears about the types of people who could potentially become president. He worries that corrupted individuals could, particularly those who are either more directly associated with a foreign state, or individuals who do not have the capacity to run the country. The former is covered by Article II, Section 1, v of the United States Constitution, while the latter is covered by Hamilton in Federalist 68, where he notes that the person who will become president will have to be a person who possesses the faculties necessary to be a president, stating that,

"Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States"

Hamilton, while discussing the safeguards, is not concerned with the possibility of an unfit individual becoming president, instead he says,

It will not be too strong to say, that there will be a constant probability of seeing the station filled by characters pre-eminent for ability and virtue.

Rules on the electors

Hamilton lists specific rules for the electors, which include:

Selection of the vice-president

Hamilton notes that the selection of the vice president should follow the same form as that of the president, through selection by the Electoral College, though the Senate is to deal with the voting in the case of an Electoral tie. Hamilton also answers criticism that the Senate should have been given the power to select the vice president instead of the Electoral College. Hamilton notes that there are two major arguments against that point: first, that the vice president's power as President of the Senate would mean that the tiebreaker of the Senate would be beholden to the Senate for his power, and therefore would be unable to make the necessary decisions as a tiebreaker without fear of removal or reprisal -- second, that the possibility of the vice president becoming president means that this individual should be elected by the people and the Electoral College, because all of the powers vested in the president could fall into the hands of the vice president.

Works referenced in Federalist 68

Reactions to Federalist No. 68

The Anti-Federalist Papers

In Anti Federalist Papers 72, the anonymous Republicus argues that the issues with the Electoral College deal with the ability of electors, rather than the people, to elect the president. In his eyes, it removes the ability of the people to select their leader and instead delegates that right to a smaller amount of individuals.

Republicus further speculates if is it not probable, at least possible, that the president who is to be vested with all this demiomnipotence — who is not chosen by the community; and who consequently, as to them, is irresponsible and independent-that he, I say, by a few artful and dependent emissaries in Congress, may not only perpetuate his own personal administration, but also make it hereditary? Republicus's fears are of a hypothetical stronger executive whom he compared to Britain's George III.

Anti federalist paper No.4

Madison also defends against the claims made in Cato no. 4, which claimed that the “The establishment of a vice-president is as unnecessary as it is dangerous [for them to preside in the senate]”. Madison gave two reasons for the vice president to be the presiding officer of the senate. First, since he only has one vote, he is equal to his substituents. Also, should the president die, he will know the concerns of the congress and president and as such be more prepared than anyone else to take the position.[2]

Modern Positive reaction

The electing process for electing the president and vice president, initially introduced in the Constitution of the United States, after all the years in between then and now, has been seen as a decently designed system to which to operate the elections in the United States. Even with the many flaws, like the election tie of 1800, that the system for electing the president brought upon ever since its addition to the government of the United States, a modern positive reaction towards the system’s history of trial and error, meaning finding a flaw with the system and then fixing, can be found to be had by many scholars; Nicholas Miller a scholar who stated that the system for electing the president “is truly a gift that keeps on giving”, is an example to the positive modern reaction towards this system.[3] The pool of reactions towards this system can vary from negative to, not positive, Hamilton’s statement towards the system that “if it not be perfect, it is at least excellent”.[4]

Modern Negative reaction

Just as there are positive reactions towards the election process of the president and vice president for the United states, negative reactions towards the system exist. Throughout the history of the election process for the United States, from the constitution, the flaws that it had and were found were not taken by the public or the government as Hamilton would put it “if it not be perfect, it is at least excellent”.[4] The failures that the system had, starting with the election of 1800 that resulted in a tie, all the way to the recent problems that have been noticed by the public throughout the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, 2000 and 2016 in which they all resulted in the winner losing the popular vote. The system is seen as a trial and error, and because the Electoral College process is established in the U.S. Constitution, it could be changed only by amendment.[5]

Present implications

Because of the imperfections of the presidential election process introduced in the constitution and defended by Hamilton in Federalist 68—imperfections which led to the controversial election of 1800—the presidential election process was revised in 1804 by the ratification of the 12th amendment, which was a direct response to the 1800 election and proposed that “each elector would cast separate and designated votes for President and Vice President”.[3] As a result, Federalist 68 no longer describes the constitutional system for the presidential elections.

Consequence of the Electoral College

The Electoral system of the United States was designed by Hamilton to “weed out” those that are not fit to become the commander in chief of the United States. The election phase has the popular vote and the newly proposed “Electoral College”. The Electoral College is a body of people that is voted in by the public to elect the president of the United States. Even though the election has a popular vote, the Electoral College is the one that officially elects the new president. But, the electors usually vote for the candidate that has the popular vote in their respective states. Those candidate later on would earn the votes of the electors, and the numbers vary within states because it is population based. That “the candidate who receives an absolute majority of Electoral votes, currently 270, wins the presidency”.[6] Though the system may sound acceptable to most people, it does not come without the consequence that the “Electoral College allows for the possibility that the winner of the national popular vote does not actually win the presidency”[6]

Notes

  1. ^ Madison. June 13, 1787. p. 115 in Ohio U. Press edition
  2. ^ Madison. June 9, 1787. p. 93
  3. ^ Madison. June 18, 1787. p. 136
  4. ^ The following works referenced came from Charles Kesler's notes in Rossiter, Clinton ed. The Federalist Papers. Signet Classic. 2003. p. 622-623.
  5. ^ Storing (2.8.29)
  6. ^ from Anti-Federalist 72

References

  1. ↑ Finkelman, Paul (2001). "Proslavery origins of the Electoral College". Cardozo L. Rev. 23.
  2. ↑ Kurland, Philip. "Article 2, Section 1, Clause 1". The Founder's Constitution. 3.
  3. 1 2 Miller, Nicholas (2012). "Why the Electoral College is good for political science (and public choice)". Public Choice. 150.
  4. 1 2 Hamilton, Alexander (2008). The Federalist Papers. Oxford University Press. pp. 334–336.
  5. ↑ "National Archives and Records Administration". www.archives.gov.
  6. 1 2 Kocis, Andrew (2 February 2015). "The US Electoral system is flawed". The Eastern Echo.

External links

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/29/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.