Negotiating the Constitution
por
Joseph M. Lynch argues that the Constitution was a product of political struggles involving regional interests, economic concerns, and ideology. The framers, he maintains, settled on enigmatic wording of the Necessary and Proper Clause and of the General Welfare provision …
- ● 96% match for you
- ● history
the long version
Joseph M. Lynch argues that the Constitution was a product of political struggles involving regional interests, economic concerns, and ideology. The framers, he maintains, settled on enigmatic wording of the Necessary and Proper Clause and of the General Welfare provision in the Spending Clause as a compromise, leaving the extent of federal power to be determined by the political process. During ratification, however, attempts by dissident framers to undo the compromise were repelled in The Federalist: charges of overly broad congressional powers were met with protestations that in fact these powers were limited. This exchange set the stage for later battles between Federalists and Republicans. Examining debates in the first six Congresses, Lynch describes how early lawmakers applied the Constitution to such issues as executive power and privilege, the creation of a national bank, the deportation of aliens, and the prohibition of seditious speech. He follows the disputes over the interpretation of this document - focusing on James Madison's changing views - as the new government took shape and political parties were formed.
Margaret's verdict
"Joseph M. Lynch argues that the Constitution was a product of political struggles involving regional interests, economic concerns, and ideology. The framers, he maintains, settled on enigmatic wording of the …"
highlights
what readers held onto
No highlights yet. Be the first.
discussion
what readers said
No reviews yet. Finish it; tell us what you found.