Federalist 70 and the Need for a Single Executive
Federalist 70 Overview
Title: Federalist 70
Author: Alexander Hamilton
Purpose: Justification for a single executive (president) in the context of American government and the ratification debates of the Constitution.
Context: Anti-Federalist concerns about executive power resembling monarchical rule.
Anti-Federalists advocated for a council of executives to prevent any individual from becoming a tyrant.
Main Arguments for a Single Executive
Hamilton's Position: Believes that having a single executive is crucial for effective governance .He argues that a strong, decisive leader can respond swiftly to crises, ensuring stability and coherence in policy-making. Hamilton emphasizes that accountability is harder to achieve in a council, where responsibility can be diffused and decisions may be bogged down by disagreements.
Definition of an Energetic Executive
Core Quality: Energy in the executive is essential for good government.
Quote from Hamilton: "Energy in the executive is a leading character in the definition of good government."
Impact of a Feeble Executive: A weak executive leads to poor execution of government functions.
Advantages of an Energetic Executive
Speed and Decisiveness: A single executive can act more swiftly compared to a legislative body which is slower due to its size and deliberative nature.
Legislative branch requires debate and compromise among multiple representatives that can lead to delays.
**Two Key Benefits: **
Unity
Unity promotes energy in governance.
Quote from Hamilton: "Decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch will generally characterize the proceedings of one man in a much more eminent degree than the proceedings of any greater number."
As the number of executives increases, the energy and efficacy of execution diminish.
Responsibility
Multiple executives make it difficult to assign blame in cases of failure or mismanagement.
Quote from Hamilton: “If power is abused by the executive branch and there are several executives, it may well be impossible to determine which of those executives is at fault.”
A single executive allows for clear accountability; citizens can identify who to blame or replace in elections.
Historical Evidence
Hamilton cites historical examples where reliance on multiple executives led to division and ineffectiveness in governance. This includes instances from ancient Rome and the Greek city-states, where shared power resulted in conflict and hindered decisive action, thereby supporting the necessity of a strong, singular executive.
Disunity during emergencies could frustrate critical governmental measures.
Potential for societal divisions where factions align with different executives, complicating governance.
Comparison of Legislative and Executive Branches
Legislative Branch:
Strength lies in the multitude of representatives leading to extensive deliberation.
However, this aspect counteracts the necessary qualities of vigor and expedition required in the executive function.
Executive Branch:
Needs focus, quick decision-making, and a clear sense of responsibility for effective leadership.
Conclusion of Federalist 70
Despite concerns regarding the centralization of power in a single executive, Hamilton argues that this structure best serves the needs of a republic, ensuring energetic governance.
Citizens have the ability to enact changes through the electoral process when faced with corruption or poor performance by the executive.