Federalsist Paper #85

     In Hamilton's final paper he made one last appeal for the ratification of the Constitution pointing out that he had tried to stay rational and reasonable in his arguments avoiding emotional responses and typical political rhetoric. (Modern politicians could sure learn a lesson from that!) He reiterates that the Constitution was not perfect, but it was good and probably the best that could be done under the circumstances of the times (perhaps any time). Because it was not perfect, the allowance for amendments had been made, and adding them in the future would be more easily accomplished. Making those changes before ratification would actually make it a new document that would have to be approved by each state. Whereas after ratification, amendments could be added with the approval of just nine states. Also, the original Constitution had many specific details and provisions making it difficult to accommodate everyone. It had to be written in a way that all parties would agree. Future amendments would be dealing with a single proposal - political maneuvering and compromise would not be necessary.  Glenn Beck reminds us that through this amendment process we have been able to fix some of the original problems (i.e. slavery, women's suffrage, not to mention the Bill of Rights).
     Hamilton's final point is that a nation must have a national government. Writing the Constitution during a time of peace with the time to develop it properly, rather than during a time of turmoil when decisions are made in haste, and with the voluntary consent of the people is a miracle. (And just one more reason why it is what it is and so important that we follow and restore the proper balance of power that was spelled out in it).
   

Federalist Paper #11

     At the time these papers were written, the existing power nations were a little nervous of America's adventurous commercial character realizing what it was capable of, especially if it formed a decent Navy. Those nations would be rooting for America's division in order to stay on top in the commercial world. A Federal Navy would benefit the country, not only for protection, but also in influencing commercial relations with other nations. A strong navy would not be possible without remaining united. As a strong, united nation our friendship, or at least neutrality, would be greatly desired, influencing our abilities to trade in a favorable manner with other nations. Without that power we would be taken advantage of commercially, being forced to accept others' prices and tariffs, most likely losing profits. We would no doubt lose our adventurous spirit, be disgraced, and end in poverty.
     The ideas in this paper are as relevant today as they were at the time. By borrowing money we are losing our control having to bow down to others (China). Without keeping our military strong we can be easily taken advantage of, both politically and commercially.
   
 

Continued Ruminations: Glenn Beck's intro

Can man govern himself, intelligently choosing his own form of government without force? This was (and perhaps still is) the question going on at the time of the proposed Constitution. Like today, there were two very opposing sides, the "Federalists" and the "Anti-Federalists." The latter were skeptical that the republic would fail and the larger states would have more power, or even the presidency could turn into another monarchy. However, the Articles of Confederation did not give the federal government enough power, leaving the prospect of a crumbling government ripe for a take over, possibly by something much worse than the British king. Alexander Hamilton realized this and even though he personally supported a stronger government than the new Constitution allowed he also understood it was about as good as it was going to get. He enlisted James Madison and John Jay to help him write a series of letters to help convince those opposing the Constitution to change their minds. These letters became known as the "Federalist Papers."

Today these papers help us to understand the main principles of why the founding fathers included what they did in our Constitution:

• Why smaller government is better
• The differences between state and federal powers
• The best organization and operation of government and how to prevent another monarchy

Many of the arguments are only relevant to that time period, but many of the truths included apply to today just as much as it did then. These letters were public and available to everyone, so it can be assumed that the delegates voting to ratify the Constitution agreed with these truths. Even the Anti-Federalists were convinced that this was the best way to go.