The Founding and the Constitution (Video Lecture Notes)
The Founding and the Constitution – Study Notes
The First Founding: Interests and Conflicts
Five sectors of society with important interests in the colonies:
New England merchants
Southern planters
Royalists (holders of royal lands, offices, and patents)
The “middling stratum” (shopkeepers, artisans, and laborers)
Small farmers
The First Founding: British Taxes Hurt Colonial Interests
Britain’s rule over the colonies shifted in the mid-1700s after incurring debt from the French and Indian War and continuing to spend to protect the colonies.
Great Britain sought to extract revenue from the colonists by imposing taxes on commerce:
The Sugar Act of 1764 taxed sugar, molasses, and other commodities.
The Stamp Act of 1765 required printed materials to bear a stamp.
The First Founding: British Taxes Hurt Colonial Interests (Part 2-3)
The new taxes largely affected two groups: New England merchants and southern planters.
Merchants, planters, shopkeepers, laborers, artisans, and small farmers joined in boycott of British goods.
They ultimately forced the British Crown to rescind most of the new taxes.
Despite unrest abating for some, others continued to agitate for change.
The Boston Tea Party
Disagreements over taxation continued; in 1773 the Tea Act granted the East India Company a monopoly on imported tea, cutting out colonial businesses.
Colonists, led by Samuel Adams, protested; disguised as Mohawk Indians, they boarded three British ships and dumped tea into Boston Harbor.
In response, Britain blockaded Boston.
The Declaration of Independence
In 1776, the Second Continental Congress appointed a draft committee:
Thomas Jefferson (Virginia)
Benjamin Franklin (Pennsylvania)
Roger Sherman (Connecticut)
John Adams (Massachusetts)
Robert Livingston (New York)
The Declaration is both a philosophical document and a political one:
It states certain rights are unalienable (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness).
It explains why the colonies rebelled and sought self-government.
It focuses on grievances, goals, and principles to unify colonists with different interests.
The Articles of Confederation: America’s First Government
The Articles of Confederation (1777–1789) were the first written constitution of the United States.
Ratified by all states in 1781.
Primarily concerned with limiting the powers of the central government; states retained sovereignty, freedom, and independence.
The Articles of Confederation’s Characteristics
Confederation: states retain sovereign authority, with only expressly delegated national powers.
Weak central government; no president, only a legislature.
Members of Congress chosen and paid by states.
Each state had one vote regardless of population size.
Amendments required the consent of all 13 states (unanimity).
Additional weaknesses:
No national army or navy (militia only).
No national taxing authority.
National government could not stop states from competing with each other in foreign commerce.
The Failure of the Articles of Confederation
Concerns focused on foreign affairs: the central government could not enforce treaties.
A new treaty with Britain was needed for disputes from the war; Britain insisted on negotiating with all 13 states separately.
Annapolis Convention Led to a New National Convention
The Virginia legislature called for a conference to revise the government (Annapolis, Maryland) in 1786.
Delegates from five states attended; decision to meet in Philadelphia one year later (1787).
This conference was the first step in what is known as the second founding.
Shays’s Rebellion
A notable crisis that highlighted weaknesses of the Articles and spurred calls for a stronger national government.
The Second Founding: The Constitutional Convention
Congress under the Articles had been unable to act decisively in crisis; this led to the Constitutional Convention of 1787.
Economic interests: delegates sought to create a government that promoted commerce and protected property.
Political principles: the new Constitution embodied theories on limited government, separation of powers, and individual liberty.
The Constitutional Convention: The Virginia and New Jersey Plans
Virginia Plan (Edmund Randolph): representation based on state population and/or contribution to national government; biased in favor of large states.
New Jersey Plan (William Paterson): each state would have equal representation.
The Second Founding: The Great Compromise
The Connecticut (Great) Compromise bridged the Virginia Plan and New Jersey Plan.
Created a bicameral legislature:
The House of Representatives: representation apportioned by state population.
The Senate: equal representation for all states (two senators per state).
The Question of Slavery: The Three-Fifths Compromise
To determine representation in the House, northern and southern states compromised on counting enslaved people:
Five enslaved people would count as three free persons for representation purposes.
This is represented as counting enslaved people at the ratio of
each enslaved person counts as rac{3}{5} of a person for purposes of apportionment (and taxation).
The per-state allocation of seats in the House used this ratio.
The Constitution: Bold Powers and Sharp Limits
Goals of the framers:
A central government strong enough to promote commerce and protect property.
Prevention of “excessive democracy.”
Emphasis on ideas that would generate public support.
Restraint of federal government from infringing liberties.
The Constitution: The Legislative Branch
Article I established a Congress with two chambers: the House and the Senate.
Different term lengths: House (two years), Senate (six years).
The Senate guards against excessive democracy; ratifies treaties and approves presidential appointments; the House originates revenue bills.
The Constitution: The Legislative Branch, Part 2
Section 8 of Article I lists Congressional powers:
ext{collect taxes}
ext{borrow money}
ext{regulate commerce}
ext{declare war}
ext{maintain an army and navy}
Types of powers:
Expressed powers: specific powers granted to Congress and the president.
Implied powers: derived from the Necessary and Proper (Elastic) Clause: ext{to make all laws necessary and proper to carry out expressed powers}
The Constitution: The Executive Branch
Article II establishes the presidency.
The president can:
Negotiate treaties (with Senate approval)
Receive ambassadors from other countries
Grant reprieves and pardons
Appoint major departmental personnel
Veto congressional enactments
The Constitution: The Judicial Branch
Article III establishes the federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court.
Federal judges have lifetime appointments.
The Supreme Court assumed the power of judicial review (the power to declare laws unconstitutional).
The Separation of Powers
The Constitution creates checks and balances to prevent concentration of power:
Legislative, Executive, and Judicial branches interact with each other to constrain power.
Figure (conceptual): separation of duties and checks among branches.
The Constitution: National Unity and Power
Article IV establishes comity (reciprocity) among the states; states cannot discriminate against citizens of other states.
The Constitution restricts state powers to ensure a free-flowing national economy.
The Supremacy Clause makes the U.S. Constitution and national law supreme over state laws.
The Constitution: Limits on the National Government’s Powers
Safeguards against government misuse include:
Separation of powers and checks and balances
Federalism (division of power between national and state governments)
The Bill of Rights (first amendments) to place limits on government action
The Fight for Ratification
Ratification required the approval of 9 of the 13 states.
The struggle occurred in 13 separate state campaigns.
The Federalists:
Favored a stronger national government
United in support for the Constitution
The Antifederalists:
Favored strong state government and a weak, more decentralized national government
Divided over possible alternatives to the Constitution
The Federalists argued their case through the Federalist Papers (essays by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay).
The Fight for Ratification: Federalists versus Antifederalists
Three fundamental issues:
Representation: Should representatives mirror those they represent, or be chosen for wisdom and experience?
Tyranny: Is tyranny more likely from the aristocratic minority or the unsophisticated majority?
Government power: Should the national government have strict limits or broad powers?
Representation
Antifederalists wanted representatives who reflected the people and their circumstances.
Federalists believed representatives need not perfectly mirror constituents; voters may choose capable individuals to represent them.
Federalists vs Antifederalists (Table 2.2)
Federalists: Property owners, creditors, merchants; favored elites governing; believed in a strong national government and filtration to keep power among elites; leaders included Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, George Washington.
Antifederalists: Small farmers, frontiersmen, debtors, shopkeepers; favored power retained by state governments and protection of individual rights; leaders included Patrick Henry, George Mason, Elbridge Gerry, George Clinton.
The Fight for Ratification: Tyranny
Antifederalists feared aristocratic minority control; Federalists feared the tyranny of a mass electorate against minority rights.
Debates over Government Power
Contemporary debates about government power and surveillance (illustrative slide) reflect ongoing tensions about civil liberties and security.
The Fight for Ratification: Limiting Government Power
Limited government means powers are defined and constrained by a constitution:
Antifederalists argued for a weak central government with enumerated powers and a Bill of Rights.
Federalists argued for a strong central government with divided powers to prevent tyranny of the majority.
Contributions of the Federalists and Antifederalists
The Federalist vision ultimately prevailed: a stronger national government.
Yet, Antifederalist skepticism about centralized power remains relevant today.
Amending the Constitution
Figure 2.3 – Four Ways Amendments Can Be Proposed and Ratified:
Method 1 (National level): Proposal in the House and Senate by two-thirds vote; ratification by three-fourths of the states (38 states) via state legislatures or conventions.
Method 2 (National level): Proposal by a national convention called by Congress in response to petitions; ratification by three-fourths of the states (never used).
Method 3 (State level): Proposal by two-thirds of state legislatures; ratification by three-fourths of the states via conventions (never used).
Method 4 (State level): Proposal by two-thirds of state legislatures; ratification by three-fourths of the states via state ratifying conventions (never used).
Who Participates? – Who Gained the Right to Vote through Amendments?
The right to vote has expanded through amendments:
The Founding: White men of property, age 21+ (1789)
15th Amendment (1869): All men, age 21+ (non-discrimination by race)
19th Amendment (1920): All men and women, age 21+ (women’s suffrage)
26th Amendment (1971): All men and women, age 18+ (lowered voting age)
The accompanying data show the proportion of the adult population eligible to vote in national elections and the composition of the electorate over time.
Examples:
1789: 27.9% of adults eligible to vote
1869: 31.7%
1920: 92.6%
1971: 99.9%
2018: electorate composition by amendment (e.g., by race, gender, and age groups)
The slide also lists counts for the adult population and totals for turnout (e.g., 118,537,867 total turnout in a given year).
Amendments Table 2.3 – Amendments to the Constitution (selected highlights)
I: Religion, speech, press, assembly, petition (religion establishment and free exercise)
II–IV: Right to keep and bear arms; quartering of soldiers; search and seizure with warrants
V, VI, VII, VIII: Grand jury; double jeopardy; self-incrimination; due process; speedy public trial; confrontation of witnesses; assistance of counsel; excessive bail or punishment; just compensation for takings
IX, X: Non-enumerated rights retained by the people; states retain powers not delegated to federal government
XI: Limits on federal jurisdiction over suits against states
XII: Separate electoral ballots for president and vice president
XIII: Abolished slavery
XIV: National citizenship; equal protection and due process; applicability of rights to all citizens
XV: Voting rights to all races
XVII: Direct election of senators
XIX: Women’s suffrage
XX: End of lame-duck sessions; terms of office
XXII: Term limits for the president
XXIII: Voting rights for District of Columbia residents
XXIV: Abolition of poll taxes
XXV: Presidential succession in case of disability
Public Opinion Polls and Questions
Q1: Was the Constitution driven more by noble principles or political self-interest? (a) noble principles, (b) political self-interest, (c) mix)
Q2: What most influences elected officials’ policy choices? (a) reelection, (b) wealth/economic class, (c) personal opinions)
Q3: If officials had the same economic background as constituents, would laws differ? (a) Yes, (b) No)
Q4: Do small or large states have too much influence, or is there proper balance? (a) small, (b) large, (c) proper balance)
Q5: Is the amendment process too difficult, about right, or too easy? (a) too difficult, (b) about right, (c) too easy)
Additional Information
The final slides compare Democratic systems around the world:
Parliamentary systems: executive (prime minister) and legislature are fused; efficient when majority exists.
Presidential systems (e.g., U.S.): separate executive and legislature; can lead to gridlock.
Semi-presidential systems combine a president with a separate prime minister; varying powers.
Discussion prompts:
Does one system seem more common than another? Why might a country choose parliamentary vs presidential?
What are the advantages of executive and legislative authority being vested in the same person? What about a system like the U.S. with separated powers?
Are the advantages of the American system different today than at the founding?
TABLES AND FIGURES (References to the Text)
Table 2.1: Comparing the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution
Executive branch: None vs President
Judiciary: State courts only vs Federal judiciary with U.S. Supreme Court
Legislature: Unicameral vs Bicameral (Senate + House)
Fiscal and economic powers: States collect taxes; federal government can levy taxes, coin money, regulate commerce
Military: State militias vs National army and navy
Legal supremacy: State law vs National Constitution and law supreme
Constitutional amendments: Unanimous consent vs Two-thirds to propose and Three-fourths to ratify
Table 2.2: Federalists versus Antifederalists (summary of groups, beliefs, leaders)
Table 2.3: Amendments to the Constitution (highlights I–XXV)
Figure 2.1: The Separation of Powers – visual representation of Legislative, Executive, and Judicial responsibilities and checks
Figure 2.2: Checks and Balances – overview of how branches constrain each other
Figure 2.3: Four Ways Amendments Can Be Proposed and Ratified – Methods 1–4 with notes on usage
Note on language and symbols:
All numerical references are expressed in standard form or with LaTeX where helpful:
Ratification threshold: 9/13 states
Great Compromise structure: bicameral legislature (House by population, Senate equal representation)
Three-Fifths Compromise: ext{5 enslaved persons}= ext{3 free persons}
ightarrow ext{weight}= rac{3}{5} per enslaved person for representationAmendment process: two-thirds in Congress or a national convention; ratification by three-fourths of the states (38 states)
Years often appear as ranges: 1777 ext{–}1789, 1781, 1787, etc.
Practical implications and relevance:
The Founding era debates establish the balance between national power and state sovereignty, a central tension in American constitutional development.
The compromises (Great Compromise, Three-Fifths) reveal how diverse interests were negotiated to form a functional framework for governance.
The amendment process and the evolution of voting rights demonstrate the Constitution’s capacity to adapt to social change while protecting foundational principles.