We Are A “Government Of The People, By The People, [And]

It is generally understood that the United States is built upon the principles of democracy, in which the majority consensus of the citizens helps to define the shape of issues or elections. However, in assuming that the Constitution - the document upon which such practices are founded – is inherently democratic is only partially accurate. Indeed, it has been frequently argued that the U. S. Constitution is representative of the rule of law from a federation as opposed to a pure democracy; in a federation, elections occur among the majority of the citizenry but this process results in elected officials who then determine the direction of the country. In short, a federation

The United States Constitution begins with the simple phrase “We the People”. Yet, with three simple words, the ideology it stands for has shaped the entire country (O’Connor et al., 2011). The short phrase signifies that the document, and thus, the government, is based upon the people themselves. The Constitution reflects the culture and ideologies of its citizens. Similarly, state constitutions reflect the people, albeit in a more specific locality. The key differences between the United States Constitution and that of local states are due to the distinctions between the scope and characteristics of the people they govern.

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America...and to the republic for which it stands...one nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.” (“Is the United States a Democracy?”) The United States’ pledge is taught to children of all ages, plays an active role in the patriotism of the people, and it symbolizes the citizen’s promise to never violate the Republic of the United States of America. The founding fathers built the foundation of America on their ideological belief that the country should be a republic and that all mankind are created equally. However, over the years, America has gained the title as a democratic nation and the status quo of America being considered “the majority rule.” The present state of affairs of the American government proves to be incorrect because the United States is not a democracy. The United States has limited citizens to participate equally on various occasions, due to the emphasis the government has placed on non-democratic practices, inconsistencies, and discrimination regarding race, gender, and ethnicity.

This book emphasizes the alternative interpretations offered by Americans on the origins of the Constitution. Holton’s purpose with this book was to show that the framers interests involved making America more attractive to investors. In order to do so, they purposefully made the government less democratic with the writing of the Constitution. However, with the addition of the Bill of Rights, one could argue the Framers had at least a slight concern for the American people and their civil liberties.

Throughout more than two centuries of the grand experiment in democracy known as the American union, a time marked by the rise and fall of empires, the technological transition from plough horse to combustion engine, and even mankind's first steps into the frontier of outer space, a single document has stood as the defining feature of our nation's ideals and purpose. The Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights which grants every citizen certain unassailable liberties, and the subsequent amendments made to reflect society's slow progression, is undoubtedly one of history's most significant and substantive texts. Just as it did during the uncertain years following our forefather's successful revolution, today the Constitution establishes societal boundaries and provides structure to the uniquely uninhibited way that American lives are led. Epitomizing the values of a true charter of supreme law, the U.S. Constitution has since become the model for other emerging democracies, as countries such as Mexico and the Philippines have adopted similar measures within their own national charters. Indeed, during the 1987 bicentennial celebration of the Constitution's first signing, TIME Magazine reported that "of the 170 countries that exist today, more than 160 have written charters modeled directly or indirectly on the U.S. version" (Liptak, 2012), illustrating the extensive influence this essential document has exerted on global affairs.

​The United States Constitution was carefully crafted by a group of deliberate and thoughtful individuals; each having their own unique and particular ideas about government, and the people it may govern. As this supreme foundation for government was molded, each founding father put forth their learned beliefs and philosophies to be integrated into this modern document. All of the crafting members were both well-read and thoroughly educated, allowing for deep and extended discussions on past governments, their efficiencies, and their deficiencies. Through their readings and philosophical discussions, it became apparent that two previously governing bodies stood, in their opinions, above the rest: The Greek and Roman empires. Their governmental practices and virtues were key in the development of the Constitution, as they were dissected, and eventually, emulated by this country’s founding members.

In 1787, the Constitution of the United States was just written on September 17th. During this time, the common man was still under the power of the Articles of Confederation, a weak document that loosely connected the 13 former colonies. Although the Articles didn’t give the United States of America the strong centralized power that it needed, opposers to the new Constitution would argue that the Constitution took away the rights of the common man and gave that power, that the individual once had, to the federal government. Although this statement is correct, the federal government’s newly given power was used to protect the fundamental rights and liberties of its citizens and create a powerful government in the hopes that it would benefit

A Constitution, to contain an accurate detail of all the subdivisions of which its great powers will admit, and of all the means by which they may be carried into execution, would partake of the prolixity of a legal code, and could scarcely be embraced by the human mind. It would probably never be understood by the public. Its nature, therefore, requires that only its great outlines should be marked, its important objects designated, and the minor ingredients which compose those objects be deduced from the nature of the objects themselves. (McCulloch V. Maryland)

Central to this discussion are the twin dynamics - the yin and yang - of fundamental constitutional revision and the accumulation of piecemeal changes. Attempts at constitutional revision usually occur during extraordinary times, when the nature of the existing political system is thrown into doubt. Despite the tumult that inspires their work during such times, constitutional designers never completely rewrite the constitution with which they start. Fundamental and piecemeal changes as well as carry-over from previous constitutions are clearly evident in the seven constitutions under which Texas has been governed.

The Constitution of the United States of America is apparently one of the best documents ever to be written. For quite a long time, individuals have dependably thought the Constitution has been honored and adored, however this is not the situation. Prior to the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation managed the settlements, yet was immediately abolished in light of the fact that they were excessively powerless. On September 17, 1787, the constitution was made for the representatives, who at last got an understanding and endorsed the documents over which they had toiled since May. The constitution created another structure for American improvement.

Two hundred twenty-five years ago, on September 19th, 1789, the Constitution of the United States of America took on the responsibility of becoming the supreme law of the newly founded United States. As one of the most unique documents ever penned by man, it established a government “Of the people, by the people and for the people,” with “equal justice for all.” 1 The document makes no hesitation to establish power, as the first three words state “We The People,”2 thus placing the supreme power of government not in the hands of those elected, but in the peoples’ hands.

Upon the opening words of the Constitution, "We the People…do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," one must ask, who are these people? While the American Constitution provided its citizens with individual rights, many members were excluded. Elite framers manipulated the idea of a constitution in order to protect their economic interests and the interests of their fellow ‘white land and slave owning men' by restricting the voices of women, slaves, indentured servants and others. Therefore, the Constitution cannot truly be considered a "democratic document." However, because it is a live document, malleable and controllably changeable according to the interest of congress, it has enabled us to make

Certain interests do not change over time in our society. Over 200 years ago, the prominent concern that led to the framing of the Constitution regarded the establishment of a government that was “for the people and by the people.” The framers of the Constitution, with concern of an over powering central government in mind, provided a basis for the structure of the federal government of the United States. The powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government are laid out strategically in a way that no one branch can have more power than the other. The national concern of maintaining a legitimate government has not shifted since the initial days of the framers. Although the capacity of the government has grown over time, the system of checks and balances that was adapted in the framing of the Constitution allows for the structure and powers of the federal government to remain in order today. Other than providing a structural map for how the government will operate, however, the additional aspects of the Constitution fail to administer practical framework for addressing 21st century interests. This document was written over 200 years ago and it has not been altered substantially since then (Lazare). While certain Amendments have been added to assist the Constitution in staying relevant, such as the abolishment of slavery and the addition of women’s right to vote, there has been practically nothing added to help in applying the framers’ intentions

Is the United States Constitution a sacred and absolute document? Dahl (2001) argued that the Constitution is not perfect or permanent in his book, How Democratic is the American Constitution. He stresses that his main aim is not to propose that the Constitution must be amended, but to facilitate readers in changing how they think about the Constitution. In order to help people rethink the Constitution, Dahl (2001) explained the limitations of its Framers and the Constitution’s not widely known undemocratic aspects. The strengths of the book are its ethos or reputation of the author that establishes his credibility, informal writing style that can appeal to more people, its consideration of a number of undemocratic aspects of the

The phrase, “We the people”, holds a lot of meaning to American citizens. As the first three words of the United States Constitution, it signifies a core value intended to act as a unifying factor in America’s democratic society: popular sovereignty. This is the idea of a majority rules, or to put more simply, the one with the most votes wins. The U.S. system of government relies upon the fact that the American people are capable of coming together to make informed decisions about matters that will ultimately better the lives of everyone. Despite this, however, there are certain instances in which a minority group will impose on or have more influence than the majority group. This phenomenon occurs all the time in politics, as politicians tend to regard the predilections of small groups of citizens as opposed to the general populace.