The Differing Opinions of James Madison and Robert Dahl on the Democratic System of Government Presented in the American Constitution

As one of the Framers of the US Constitution, James Madison had feelings of reservation toward a democratic system of government. Conversely, Robert Dahl, a contemporary analyst of the Constitution, holds that the Constitution was-and continues to be--inadequately democratic. Madison supports the construct of checks and balances, while Dahl is a proponent of the standard of majority rule; but in the end, it is Dahl whose ideals hold the most truth in the Context of today's democratic America. One standard promoted by Madison is the idea of checks and balances. Madison felt strongly that the federal government needed "ambition... to counteract ambition" (Federalist Paper No. 51). He called for each branch of government to have a check on each other branch's power, thus establishing a balance of powers so one branch could not overrule the other. Specifically, he suggested that the legislature be divided into separate branches that would interact "as litle... with each other as the nature of their common functions.. will admit."

Madison holds that these checks and balances are necessary due to the nature of men; he claimns that men are not angels, and they are self-interested and prone to abuse of power. Thus, any established government must have the power to "control the govermed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." Dahl would disagree with Madison's perceived necessity for checks and balances within the federal system. Dahl places a certain amount of trust in the majority; he points out that our nation was founded on ideals of equality and rule by the people. He holds that the people's popular vote, not the vote of the Electoral College or the ratification of a select few individuals, should count. Given these ideals, Dahl would likely disagree witha need for checks and balances in the federal system; he would hold that the people's voice should be trusted, therefore the branches of government should not be in a place of decision-making power that would require such strict checks on one another.

Given Dahl's apparent trust in the voice of the majority, it comes as no surprise that he advocates for the standard of majority rule. He outlines the issues he sees with the current electoral system, pointing out the discrepancies between the popular vote of the people and the outcome of the Electoral College. He outlines some figures, and he notes that the senators from the 17 smallest states represent 7.28% of the US population, yet they make up 34% of the seats in the Senate (Dahl, 161). This means that the remaining 66 seats represent the other 93% of the nation. In a system set up in this way, it's clear that what the majority of the citizens want may not come to pass because it is not what the majority of the electorate wants; a bill needs 67 votes from the Senate to pass, meaning that it's possible for 34 senators representing 7% of the population to prevent something from happening, even if the other 93% of the nation wants it to happen.

Order custom essay The Differing Opinions of James Madison and Robert Dahl on the Democratic System of Government Presented in the American Constitution with free plagiarism report

450+ experts on 30 subjects Starting from 3 hours delivery

Get Essay Help

Madison would not necessarily see those discrepancies as a problem. He, and the rest of the Framers, seemed to feel that it could be dangerous for new governmental policies to be easy to enact. He also felt that men ot a certain social caliber -men of intellect and status-were the ones qualified to elect the President. The Framers created a system of representative rather than direct democracy. They advocated for the idea of government "by the people," although they did not give full trust to the ordinary citizen. Madison would disagree with Dahl's advocating for a true majority vote; he would contend that the Electoral College is representative of the population and that it allows for more control thana pure democratic system. While Madison's ideals were revolutionary for his time, Dahl's stances are more contemporary and appropriate for today's America. Over the past two and a half centuries, the United States has developed stronger democratic ideals.

Equality movements have won suffrage for women and African Americans; ideally, this hard-won right to vote would be applied directly to the most prominent election the presidential election. It would make sense for all citizens to be able to vote directly for their leader rather than voting indirectly for the President by electing representatives to vote for them. It would make sense for all citizens to have an equal voice in the election. While the members of the Electoral College are theoretically representative of the general population, Dahl points out that gerrymandering-designing district boundaries to favor certain candidates Over otherS -remains an issue today as much as it was when the term was coined in 1811 (Dahl, 171). If districts are drawn specifically to favor the election of certain Senators and Representatives, it is possible that the resulting Electoral College would be more polarized than the opinions of the general public would suggest.

In the case of a presidential election, this means that a candidate will be elected regardless of whom the general populace Wants. Contemporary American ideals revolve around opportunity and equality for all, particularly within the political sphere. Madison supported the Declaration of Independence, which declared that all men have the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, though he did not advocate for the political equality that Americans value so highly today. Surely it is Dahl's stance -democratic processes in which the citizens' voices are equally heard -that better encompasses the American idealism that is cherished by citizens of the United States today.

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Run a free check or have your essay done for you

Check my essay Hire Writer