Where did the founding fathers go wrong?

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If you are truly interested, don't get your history lessons from this board, where you are almost guaranteed to get the most extreme views of any issue yelling the loudest.

[/ QUOTE ]

understood, but I do feel that the explanations and claims by some on this board are some of the most well-backed and logical I have read.

[/ QUOTE ]

Often, yes, until you get around to the "Founding Fathers conspiracy theories." [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[goodsamaritan]

In the War of 1812 the British army burned Washington DC to the ground. Within 150 years America became the most powerful nation in the world. I think that has at least something to do with our system of government. All things considered, I think the founding fathers would be pretty pleased with their handiwork despite some of the flaws in our current government. Some of the melodrama in this forum about how our country is going to hell is a little ridiculous.

[HDPM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Some reasons why it has morphed, IMO:

1) 16th amendment (Establishing the federal income tax): as the federal purse becomes huge, Congress/Pres. can manipulate States, who partially rely on federal funding, to do whatever the Fed wants them to do (do this or we won't give you $).
2) Interpretation of the "dormant commerce clause" which is very restrictive on state power (and conversely broad regarding Congressional power) (Art. I, sect. 8)
3) Apathy of the general populous to do anything about it

[/ QUOTE ]

You failed to mention the biggest one, Amendment 17, which transfered the power to select Senators from the state governments to the people. This removed any ability of the states to protect their rights, and most of the powers given to the Senate were intended to be a check by the states on the power of federal government. Once the Senate became just another House, there was no more check on federal government and the Senate stopped selecting Supreme Court Justices who were interested in protecting the Constitution.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the ones I was going to throw out there. I agree and have occasionally posted about the direct election of senators. I can't say any one of these is necessarily the most important. But when you combine the income tax with direct election of senators and court rulings that the federal government can regulate just about anything, well, you get what we have now.

[goodsamaritan]

[ QUOTE ]
The Constitution did not go wrong. It was drafted by Hamilton to facilitate an all powerfully central state and empire. The anti-federalists predicted pretty much every feature of what has transpired when they argued against ratifying the Constitution, a document that the "Founding Fathers" (such a hallowed term) did not have authority to create. They were simply supposed to amend the Articles of Confederation, not throw them out and create a central state, especially after they had spilt so much blood getting rid of one.

[/ QUOTE ]

How did they not have the authority to create it? Did everyone sign a contract before the convention saying that they would only discuss amending the Articles and not forming a new government? Regardless, it's a moot point because every single state ratified it. If any state didn't think that there was proper authority, they could have decided not to ratify it and started their own coutry.

And you think all government is illegitimate, so I don't see how or why you are even discussing this. It's like an atheist arguing about which religion is more wrong.

[mmbt0ne]

[ QUOTE ]
I do feel that the explanations and claims by some on this board are some of the most well-backed and logical I have read.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I haven't spent nearly enough time studying the issue

[/ QUOTE ]

Start here:

http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/ (especially 10 and 47)
http://www.thisnation.com/library/an...ist/index.html
http://www.amazon.com/Founding-Broth.../dp/0375705244

[Zeno]

The US Constitution was the result of a committee. To suggest that one person drafted the entire document is somewhat misleading. In fact Madison and others had drafted various plans. Wikipeda . Gouverneur Morris along with Hamilton and Madison had large influence over the final language. Madison also drafted the Bill of Rights, later modified to final form by others. Jefferson (not at the convention he was in France at the time) was prominent in urging (through Madison) that the new constitution needed a Bill of Rights to curb the influence of governmental power.

-Zeno

[WordWhiz]

I think we should add FDR's court-packing scheme to the list of reasons our govt has grown out of control. For many years, the SC was striking down all of FDR's nifty ideas--as well as a bunch of regulatory state laws--based on vague due process-ish notions. Imagine! The most elevated justices in the land thinking that people had a right to decide for themselves how many hours to work, what wages to take, or what working conditions they would accept, rather than government deciding for them!

Unfortunately for FDR, none of the justices seemed ready to keel over any time soon, so he proposed adding extra justices. Voila! Next thing you know, down comes West Coast Hotel, the Lochner era ends, and the SC justices stay a 9, rather than a 15. At a trifling cost of holding that the government has the right to regulate damn near anything it wishes.

[John21]

Public apathy.

We have the means, resources and constitutional rights to control and direct every aspect of our government. That we as a populus don't, is no reflection on the system or the people who created it.

[caretaker1]

[ QUOTE ]
I. think we should add FDR's court-packing scheme to the list of reasons our govt has grown out of control. For many years, the SC was striking down all of FDR's nifty ideas--as well as a bunch of regulatory state laws--based on vague due process-ish notions. Imagine! The most elevated justices in the land thinking that people had a right to decide for themselves how many hours to work, what wages to take, or what working conditions they would accept, rather than government deciding for them!

Unfortunately for FDR, none of the justices seemed ready to keel over any time soon, so he proposed adding extra justices. Voila! Next thing you know, down comes West Coast Hotel, the Lochner era ends, and the SC justices stay a 9, rather than a 15. At a trifling cost of holding that the government has the right to regulate damn near anything it wishes

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhh, Lochner is considered to be one of the worst reasoned/decided cases in the history of the court, so much so that "Lochnerizing" is a pejorative term used to describe justices that overstep their authority. The most elevated justices at the time were very pro "big business" and were determined to preserve those views. The case itself was actually regarding whether a State (not the Fed) could step in and determine maximum hours. If anything, the Lochner decision stood for federal power over state power.

Also, if I remember right, those cases were in the 6-3 or 5-4 neighborhood, so it's not like all the justices agreed.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Constitution did not go wrong. It was drafted by Hamilton to facilitate an all powerfully central state and empire. The anti-federalists predicted pretty much every feature of what has transpired when they argued against ratifying the Constitution, a document that the "Founding Fathers" (such a hallowed term) did not have authority to create.

[/ QUOTE ]

So I guess you're claiming that every word James Madison ever said about the Constitution and its intentions was a lie? Or do you think the man who wrote it simply wasn't aware of this nefarious plan? :P

[/ QUOTE ]

It's funny you mention Madison. Afterward, he realized what he'd unleashed at the behest of Hamilton and switched from being a Hamiltonian to a Jeffersonian. Of course, the cat was out of the bag, so they pretty much had to invent the "strict constructionism" doctrine to contain the bleeding.

There is a ton of history on this stuff that you'll never learn in most public schools or Universities. Jefferson, after his incredibly un-Jeffersonian presidency retired to Monticello to brood on the horror that he had created. It haunted him the rest of his life.

By the way, Hamilton wins my Founding Douchebag award.

For more on this subject, see The Anti-Federalists Were Right, by Gary Galles.

[ QUOTE ]
Antifederalists opposed the Constitution on the grounds that its checks on federal power would be undermined by expansive interpretations of promoting the "general welfare" (which would be claimed for every law) and the "all laws necessary and proper" clause (which would be used to override limits on delegated federal powers), creating a federal government with unwarranted and undelegated powers that were bound to be abused.

[/ QUOTE ]