Motivation of the Framers

1
Motivation of the Framers

• Two Theories

2
MOTIVATION OF THE FRAMERSTwo Theories

• Charles Beard The economic elitist view
• The framers of the Constitution represented the
  solid, conservative, commercial and financial
  interests of the country.
• They were distrustful of the majority rule and
  sought to structure the government to prevent
  democratic excess and protect the interests of
  the propertied class.
• Many framers were trained in politics, law,
  finance and administration and were landowners,
  merchants creditors (the economic elite)

3

• Charles Beard The economic elitist view
• Objected to direct popular government thought
  the representative form would check the
  democratic excesses of the people and the
  aristocratic body (Senate) of men of property
  would hold down the turbulence of democracy
• Supports for his arguments
• Many of the delegates were the economic elite
• Checks balances were built in the doctrine that
  one popular branch of government cannot be
  allowed to sway or enact laws touching on
  property
• There was exclusion of direct vote for President
  and Senate
• There was an independent judiciary

4
Supports for Beards argument (cont)

• There would have been property qualifications for
  voting in the Constitution but they couldnt
  agree on the nature amount
• Finally, ratification was not by popular vote but
  through the state legislatures where a more elite
  economic view prevailed.

5
John Roche A democratic reform view

• The framing of the Constitution was a democratic
  reform process
• They were professional politicians who hammered
  out a series of pragmatic compromises which would
  strengthen the national interest but also be
  acceptable to the people.
• Framers were a political elite that were not just
  dedicated to establishing an effective controlled
  national government that would overcome the
  weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation.

6
John Roche A democratic reform view

• The framers risked their political fortunes by
  opposing the established doctrines of state
  sovereignty because they were convinced that the
  existing system was leading to national impotence
  and probably foreign domination.
• The Constitution was not a triumph of
  architectonic genius, it was a patchwork sewn
  together under the pressure of both time and
  events by a group of extremely talented
  democratic politicians.
• Translation the document was a
  conglomeration of compromises put together to
  make the Constitution saleable to the general
  population.