· Unlike
the SSA posts and TSA essays, which do not have specific prompts for each one
other than the template for responding, the FDE does, especially the
sub-prompts for the Federalist papers.
· The
essay should have a brief introduction that identifies the founding documents
under review with historical background.
This should not be extensive.
· Construct
separate, coherent paragraphs with complete sentences that address each prompt
or, in the case of the Federalist papers, each one under review (i.e., craft a
paragraph for each Federalist paper addressing the sub-prompts).
· Include
a conclusion that wraps up the essay with a reflection upon the documents and
answers the 3rd part of the essay.
Your reflection can consist of several analytical approaches:
a) relevant angles of analysis deployed
in the SSA/discussion posts
b) considerations of relevant antifederalist
arguments (I will post a link with select anti-federalist summaries in the same
content area).
c) new perspectives or insightful questions
or criticisms
d) relation of an historical event the
textbook has covered or will cover – or a contemporary, present event – to the
founding documents under review in some way.
Explain how and/or why the event intersects with a founding document (or
portion of it).
· Length:
1200 words minimum
There’s no penalty for going over 1200,
though. Strive to be concise, but keep
in mind that concise does not necessarily mean short or brief. Use all the words you need but only the words
you need. Most students in past
semesters have gone beyond the word count in order to fully address the
prompts, which is fine.
· With each founding document and the
accompanying prompts, demonstrate that you read the documents in their entirety
by writing detailed responses (paraphrased). Students are tempted to find summaries online
or use AI for their summaries, especially for the Federalist Papers. Your essay should show that you grappled with
the document in its entirety and crafted summaries in your own words.
· Grammar/spelling/organization
· The prompts
and rubric are below.
After a brief introduction, in the first part of the essay:
The
Declaration of Independence is often seen as an idealistic proclamation about
principles while the Constitution is more of a pragmatic framework for how to
govern a nation. How well (fully,
partially, doesn’t, it’s complicated, etc.) does the Constitution embody,
reflect, and address the ideas and grievances of the Declaration of
Independence? Reference the particular
idea (equality, for instance) or grievance (the prohibition of a trial by jury,
for instance) in the Declaration of Independence and then pair it with a
specific provision in the Constitution – for instance, Article 1, Section 2
containing the infamous 3/5 clause or the 6th amendment, with
elaboration – on whether it fully, partially, or doesn’t fulfill or remedy the
particular idea or grievance mentioned in the Declaration. Provide several examples (three or
more) of these pairings: one pairing (an idea or grievance in the Declaration
paired with the specific provision in the Constitution) counts as one. Note: your references to the Constitution
should be to the original version of it and the first ten amendments. You do not have to be consistent. For
instance, you make think that the Constitution fulfills Idea X in the
Declaration (with elaboration) but qualify your second example with a
“partially fulfills” judgment (with elaboration).
In the 2nd part of the essay, you will identify the arguments and main points in favor of
the Constitution and it’s structure/powers by focusing on Federalist #33,
37, 47, 63, and 78. I have included some questions to help in
identifying the main emphases that should be reflected in your essay.
1) Federalist
#33: Concerning the General Power of Taxation by Hamilton
· Which
two clauses of the Constitution does Hamilton defend?
· How
does he describe the opposition to those clauses?
· How
does he then defend those clauses and the actions legitimized by them?
· What
particular taxes are individual states not allowed to authorize and collect
under the Constitution?
2) Federalist
# 37: Concerning the Difficulties of the Convention in Devising a Proper Form
of Government by Madison
· Who
does Madison say is the ideal audience he is addressing (or would like to
address) for considering the arguments put forward in this essay?
· What
values does Madison claim were difficult to balance in devising the
Constitution?
· Given
human imperfection in perception, what are the implications for devising and
deliberating on the Constitution?
· What
does Madison see as wonderous/providential about the convention that produced
the Constitution?
3) Federalist
#47: The Particular Structure of the New Government and the Distribution of
Power Among its Different Parts
How
does Madison utilize the following three examples to answer the charge that the
separation of the three federal branches set up by the Constitution is not
complete but blended?
· Montesquieu
· The
British Constitution
· The
state constitutions
· Which
example do you find the most effective and why?
4) Federalist #63: The Senate Continued by
Madison
· Why is the Senate necessary for
gaining the esteem of foreign nations?
· Which state does he single out
for criticism, and why is he critical?
· What is his opinion of the
people (as represented in the House of Representatives)? This is related to his justification for a
Senate.
· How does he justify the
six-year terms?
5) Federalist #78: The Judiciary
Department by Hamilton
· As he often does, what document
at the state level does he invoke to justify the judicial set-up in the
Constitution?
· How does he argue against
fears of an overly powerful judiciary?
· Why is lifetime tenure for
justices (during good behavior) important?
· Hamilton asserts the
danger of “ill humors” in posing a threat to government and minority interests,
but believes these ill humors will “speedily give place to better information,
and more deliberate reflection.” Do you
think he is right? Explain.
Remember, the arguments of
the Federalist papers, guided by these questions, should be the bulk of your
treatment for each one, not the anti-Federalist arguments derived from my post
on Blackboard. The latter should be
deployed as one form of analysis.
Finally, in your conclusion (the 3rd part), relate your
examples of how well the Constitution fulfills and embodies the Declaration
with any of the applicable arguments or answers to the prompts in the
Federalist papers. For instance, one of
the grievances in the Declaration is that the King had control over the
judgments of the judges by determining their salaries and the amount of time
allowed on the bench. Hamilton
recognized and asserted in Federalist #78 that Supreme Court justices needed
lifetime tenure (during good behavior) to maintain their independence of
judgment. Your conclusion should also be
laced with analytical approaches mentioned above. Students can also choose to sprinkle these
analytical approaches throughout the body of the essay instead, or in addition
to, deploying them at the end of the paper.
