Civics Alive! Foundations and Functions- SE - Units 1-2

Foundations and Functions Civics Alive

Foundations of

Lesson

The Origins and Purposes of Government

unit 2

Unit Opener Inquiry Project 28

Lesson 2

Comparing Forms of Government 30

How should political power be distributed in a society?

Objectives and Vocabulary 30 Reading 34 End-of-Course Prep Guide 54

Lesson 3

The Roots of American Government 58

What ideas influenced the creation of the world’s first modern democratic nation?

Objectives and Vocabulary 58 Reading 60 End-of-Course Prep Guide 72

Lesson 4

Moving Toward Independence 76

What events led to the colonies declaring independence?

Objectives and Vocabulary 76 Reading 80 End-of-Course Prep Guide 94

Lesson 5

Creating the Constitution 98

What challenges did the United States overcome to create and ratify the Constitution?

Objectives and Vocabulary 98 Reading 100 End-of-Course Prep Guide 112

The Organization and Functions of U.S. Government

unit 3

Unit Opener

Inquiry Project 116

Lesson 6

The United States Constitution 118

How and why did the framers distribute power in the Constitution?

Objectives and Vocabulary 118 Reading 122 End-of-Course Prep Guide 142

Lesson 7

Federalism: Local, State, and National Governments 146

How does power flow through the federal system of government?

Objectives and Vocabulary 146 Reading 148 End-of-Course Prep Guide 164

Lesson 8

The Legislative Branch 168

What makes an effective legislator?

Objectives and Vocabulary 168 Reading 170 End-of-Course Prep Guide 190

Lesson 9

The Executive Branch 194

What qualities do modern presidents need to fulfill their many roles?

Objectives and Vocabulary 194 Reading 196 End-of-Course Prep Guide 214

Lesson 10

The Judicial Branch 216

What is the structure and function of the U.S. judicial system?

Objectives and Vocabulary 216 Reading 218 End-of-Course Prep Guide

The Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens

unit 4

Unit Opener Inquiry Project 240

Lesson 11

The Bill of Rights and Civil Liberties 242

How are your rights defined and protected under the Constitution?

Objectives and Vocabulary 242 Reading 244 End-of-Course Prep Guide 260

Lesson 12

Law, Liberty, and Interpreting the U.S. Constitution 266

How do Supreme Court decisions affect the United States?

Objectives and Vocabulary 266 Reading 268 End-of-Course Prep Guide 286

Lesson 13

Citizen Participation 290

How can you make a difference in a democracy?

Objectives and Vocabulary 290 Reading 292 End-of-Course Prep Guide 310

Political Processes

unit 5

Unit Opener

Inquiry Project 316

Lesson 14

Parties, Interest Groups, and Public Policy 318

How do political parties and interest groups influence our political decisions?

Objectives and Vocabulary 318 Reading 320 End-of-Course Prep Guide 338

Lesson 15

Political Campaigns and Elections 342 Why should elections and voting matter to you?

Objectives and Vocabulary 342 Reading 344 End-of-Course Prep Guide 364

Lesson 16

Public Opinion and the Media 368

To what extent does the media influence your political views?

Objectives and Vocabulary 368 Reading 370 End-of-Course Prep Guide 386

Contemporary Issues in World Affairs

unit 6

Unit Opener Inquiry Project 390

Lesson 17

Creating American Foreign Policy 392

How should the United States conduct foreign policy?

Objectives and Vocabulary 392 Reading 396 End-of-Course Prep Guide 416

Lesson 18

Global Issues and the United States 420

What role does the United States play in addressing global issues?

Objectives and Vocabulary 420 Reading 422 End-of-Course Prep Guide 436

Geography & Economics

unit 7

Unit Opener

Inquiry Project 444

Lesson 19

The Geography of North America 446

How can geographers and maps help us understand our world better?

Objectives and Vocabulary 446 Reading 450 End-of-Course Prep Guide 478

Lesson 20

Understanding Economics 482

How do nations exchange goods and services with one another?

Objectives and Vocabulary 482 Reading 486 End-of-Course Prep Guide 508

Resources 512

Foundations of Government

INQUIRY PROJECT

The process of citizenship can look different depending on the country. In the United States, this process often differs depending on each individual case. However, those wanting to become a U.S. citizen are expected to meet certain requirements.

In this unit, you will learn about U.S. citizenship and what it means to be a citizen of the United States. Then explore a compelling question of your choosing. Gather evidence throughout the activities, reading, and additional research to write an argument that answers the question by the end of the unit.

LESSONS

1 Citizenship and the Rule of Law

Find out why the rule of law is such an important concept for society and government in the United States. Then explore what it means to be a U.S. citizen and the obligations and responsibilities of U.S. citizenship.

Benchmarks: CG.1.11, CG.2.1, CG.2.2

Exploring Your Own Compelling Question

Compelling Question: What do you want to learn more about?

Inquiry Introduction

As you explore the processes and obligations tied to U.S. citizenship, think of what topics you want to keep learning about. You will inves tigate a compelling question of your choosing, based on the topics that interest you in this unit.

Inquiry Process

Follow the steps below to develop a compelling question and find appropriate sources to develop an argument. Then use what you have learned to take informed action in your community.

Develop Questions

New U.S. citizens take the Oath of Allegiance to the United States as a promise to fulfill their citizenship duties.

Preview the unit. Scan the title, essential question, and images. Brainstorm questions that you have about the topics in this unit. As you complete the readings and activities in the unit, narrow down and revise your list of questions until you have reached one compelling question for the unit. Consider choosing a topic that allows you to investigate political issues—historical or current.

As you write your compelling question, ask yourself:

• Does it express a problem or question that interests you?

• Is it open-ended? Is it complex enough that it’s worth digging into?

• Can you propose an argument that attempts to answer the question?

Use Disciplinary Sources to Build an Argument

Once you’ve decided on your compelling question, brainstorm two to three supporting questions that will help you explore your question. Use these supporting questions to identify sources that might provide evidence to answer your compelling question. Choose different types of sources from a variety of perspectives.

Remember to consider the reliability of each source. Is it a quality source? Is it from a government or educational website or a respected newspaper, magazine, or journal? What is the perspective of the source? How might the source be biased?

Record information from the sources that you can use as evidence to support your argument.

Communicate Your Conclusion with Evidence

Using the information you discovered from the previous steps, you will construct an argument that addresses your compelling question. When presenting your argument, be sure to follow these guidelines:

• Begin with a strong claim, and then support it with at least three pieces of evidence from your research.

• Use reasoning to connect your examples and evidence to your claim.

• Acknowledge strengths and weaknesses of your argument.

Take Informed Action

To show your understanding, brainstorm ways that the information you learned connects to your school, community, or state. For example, think about the challenges people faced and actions they took to address issues at different times and places during the unit. What did you learn that inspires you to help others?

Use this newfound inspiration to create ways in which you could use the information you learned to improve your school, community, or state. You might want to pursue ways to make this information more available by recording a podcast, making a video, or creating a digital presentation. You could also begin discussions with your classmates and family to gain insight on different views of the topic. Or you might want to continue refining your argument by joining social media groups or researching opposing views.

Brainstorm ways that you could get engaged. How can you be a leader to enact change? Some options:

• Volunteer your time

• Donate money

• Organize a fundraiser

• Start a charity

• Help others follow a current law

• Advocate to adjust a law or policy

• Organize a rally

• Speak at a school or community event

• Contact local, state, or national legislators

ONLINE UNIT ACTIVITY

People often volunteer their time to help fellow citizens register to vote. Students from Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, set up a booth on their campus to help their peers through the registration process.

Inquiry Project Go online to complete the activities, readings, and tasks. Fill out the corresponding prompts for each step in your print or online notebook.

AND THE RULE OF LAW

Lesson Objectives

• Define the rule of law and recognize its influence on the development of legal, political and governmental systems in the United States. (CG.1.11)

• Define the term “citizen,” and explain the constitutional means of becoming a U.S. citizen. (CG.2.1)

• Differentiate between obligations and responsibilities of U.S. citizenship, and evaluate their impact on society. (CG.2.2)

Student Learning Targets

Below are your goals for this lesson. Review them before you start and again at the end of the lesson.

I can compare and contrast the characteristics of a society that operates under the rule of law and one that does not. (CG.1.11)

I can assess the importance of the rule of law in protecting citizens from arbitrary and abusive uses of government power. (CG.1.11)

I can analyze the meaning and importance of due process in the U.S. legal system. (CG.1.11)

I can evaluate the impact of the rule of law on governmental officials and institutions (e.g., accountability to the law, consistent application and enforcement of the law, decisions based on the law, fair procedures, transparency of institutions). (CG.1.11)

I can define citizenship as stated in the Fourteenth Amendment. (CG.2.1)

I can explain the process of becoming a naturalized citizen. (CG.2.1)

I can define permanent residency and explain its role in obtaining citizenship. (CG.2.1)

I can examine the impact of the naturalization process on society, government, and the political process. (CG.2.1)

I can distinguish between an obligation, or duty, and a responsibility as it relates to citizenship. Responsibilities may include, but are not limited to, voting, attending civic meetings, petitioning government, and running for office. (CG.2.2)

I can recognize the concept of the common good as a reason for fulfilling the obligations and responsibilities of citizenship. (CG.2.2)

I can evaluate the obligations and responsibilities of citizens as they relate to active participation in society and government. (CG.2.2)

I can use scenarios to assess specific obligations of citizens. (CG.2.2)

I can identify the consequences or predict the outcome on society if citizens do not fulfill their obligations and responsibilities. (CG.2.2)

LAW

Lesson Vocabulary

• alien - a noncitizen resident

• citizen - a person with the legal status and rights connected with being a full member of a nation

• citizenship - legal membership to a state or country; gives members, known as citizens, certain rights and duties

• due process - the principle that no person can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without fair legal procedures and safeguards

• immigrant - a person who moves to a country to live there permanently

• lawful permanent resident - an immigrant who is legally authorized to live and work in the United States permanently, but who is not a U.S. citizen; also known as a resident alien

• naturalization - a legal process through which a person can become a citizen of a country. A naturalized citizen enjoys most or all of the rights of native-born citizens.

• naturalized citizen - a person who has satisfied the legal requirements of becoming a citizen of a country

• resident - a person who lives in a place

• rule of law - the principle that those who govern are bound by the laws, meaning that no one is above the law

• Selective Service System - the U.S. government agency that maintains information about those eligible to serve in the armed forces. Although the military is voluntary, young men must register with this agency shortly after they turn 18 in case they are needed for military service.

Academic Vocabulary

• common good - something that is beneficial to all or most members of a community

• duty - something a person is required to do; an obligation

• green card - an identification card issued to immigrants who are lawful permanent residents of the United States

• law of blood - the rule that a person's citizenship is determined by their parents' citizenship

• law of soil - the rule that a person's citizenship is determined by their place of birth

• obligation - something a person is required to do; a duty

• responsibility - something for which one is responsible or answerable

• undocumented immigrant - a person who lives and works in a country without legal permission or the required legal papers

Lesson 1

Citizenship and the Rule of Law

Introduction

The score is 13–17, the weather is cloudy, and the suspense is high. The Jacksonville Jaguars and the Cleveland Browns jog off the field in Jacksonville, Florida. It is halftime, and the Jaguars fans get ready for the usual halftime activities. But on this day in November 2020, fans will watch halftime activities seen in no other NFL stadium. They will witness and cheer as 51 people from 24 countries become U.S. citizens.

We probably imagine that naturalization ceremonies, led by U.S. judges, occur in courthouses. While this is often the case, ceremonies for becoming a citizen can also occur in locations such as hospitals and community centers. In 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, a parking garage at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services was used. Judges held more ceremonies each day but with fewer people.

Judges have been more than willing to make such changes. They point out that at such events everyone is happy. This is not usually the case in court. One judge noted that it takes a lot of work for new citizens to get to this point. In addition to an intense review of their paperwork, applicants to become U.S. citizens must pass a U.S. history test, show their knowledge of English, and complete an interview. The process may take five years—and longer in some cases.

Schools are another place that is popular with judges and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Students are encouraged to take part in these ceremonies as part of a service-learning project. They do so by, for example, staffing tables with information about voting, serving on juries, and volunteering in other ways.

Understanding this process and the meaning of citizenship is essential for studying civics. Civics is the study of the rights and duties of citizens in society. It involves examining the work of government at different levels, including how people interact with the government.

People take the Oath of Allegiance to become U.S. citizens.

Social Studies Vocabulary alien citizen citizenship due process immigrant lawful permanent resident naturalization naturalized citizen resident rule of law

Selective Service System

What are the obligations, rights, and responsibilities of a U.S. citizen?

alien a noncitizen resident

citizen a person with the legal status and rights connected with being a full member of a nation

citizenship legal membership to a state or country; gives members, known as citizens, certain rights and duties

naturalized citizen a person who has satisfied the legal requirements of becoming a citizen of a country

resident a person who lives in a place

1. Citizenship

Everyone at the Jacksonville football stadium that day had one thing in common. They were all present in a country that defines their legal status in terms of citizenship and immigration.

Among the fans, most were probably U.S. residents, meaning they live in the United States. Many were likely American citizens, with the legal status and rights connected with being a full member of a nation. The people who took part in the halftime ceremony became naturalized citizens. Other attendees were likely resident aliens, noncitizens who live in the United States. These legal statuses are a key part of civics, the study of citizens’ rights, responsibilities, and obligations or duties.

Who Is a U.S. Citizen? In identifying who is a citizen of the United States, the U.S. Constitution describes two ways to obtain citizenship. Specifically, the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution states as follows:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Naturalized citizens are immigrants who complete the process to become a citizen. People who are born in the United States are citizens because of the law of soil. Under the law of soil, a person is granted citizenship according to their place of birth.

Children born to U.S. citizens outside the United States are also U.S. citizens. The law of blood means that a person’s citizenship is determined by their parents’ citizenship. A child receives U.S. citizen ship at birth if either or both of their parents are American.

The laws of soil and blood are legal principles that have been made part of U.S. law. Other countries use these principles as well to determine citizenship.

Many prominent Americans are naturalized citizens, including television host Tan France, singer Gloria Estefan, Saturday Night Live creator and producer Lorne Michaels, Olympian and U.S. Army specialist Paul Chelimo, actress Sandra Oh, and Nobel Prize winners Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee.

2. Becoming a U.S. Citizen

In 2021, around 46.2 million Americans, or about 14.2 percent of the U.S. population, were foreign born. Every year, hundreds of thousands of immigrants become U.S. citizens. They usually receive their citizenship at a large ceremony, like the one at the football game in Jacksonville. To become citizens, immigrants must complete a legal process over several years. The naturalization and immigration system is run by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a govern ment agency.

immigrant a person who moves to a country to live there permanently

The Naturalization Process

Naturalization is a multistep legal process to gain citizenship. When it is complete, the applicant has almost all the same rights and responsibilities as a native-born citizen. In 2020, more than 625,000 people became U.S. citizens through naturalization. The largest group of new citizens came from Mexico, but tens of thousands also came from India, the Philippines, China, Cuba, and other countries.

Immigrants must meet several requirements to be eligible for naturalization. They must be at least 18 years old and be lawful perma nent residents of the United States. In most cases, such immigrants, also known as resident aliens, must have lived in the United States for at least five years.

The next step is to apply for naturalization. If the application is approved, the applicant has an interview with an immigration official. As part of the interview, applicants take a civics test about American history and government. They are also tested on their ability to read, write, and speak English. However, people who are 50 years or older and who have lived in the United States for many years do not have to demonstrate their English skills. They may take the civics test in the language of their choice.

Steps to Citizenship: The Naturalization Process

lawful permanent resident an immigrant who is legally authorized to live and work in the United States permanently, but who is not a U.S. citizen; also known as a resident alien naturalization a legal process through which a person can become a citizen of a country. A naturalized citizen enjoys most or all of the rights of native-born citizens.

Immigrants must complete multiple steps to become naturalized U.S. citizens. Once most immigrants have submitted their application, the naturalization process can take six months to a year.

Professional basketball player Tristan Thompson became a U.S. citizen in November 2020. Here, he takes the Oath of Allegiance during his citizenship ceremony.

The final step is the citizenship ceremony. Here, applicants answer a few more questions. Then they take the Oath of Allegiance to the United States and receive a certificate of naturalization.

Naturalization gives new citizens most of the same rights as Americans who have been citizens since birth. For example, they can pass their U.S. citizenship to their children under the age of 18 who are not U.S. citizens by birth. These children will have the same rights and duties as other naturalized citizens. Naturalized citizens can also vote and run for public office, except for the presidency and vice presidency. The Constitution says that only native-born citizens can hold these offices.

The Status of Lawful Permanent Residents

Immigrants do not need to become citizens to stay in the United States legally. They may remain here as lawful permanent residents. However, some argue that the law should require lawful permanent residents to become citizens after a certain number of years.

Immigrants seeking permanent resident status also go through an application process with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Preference is given to immigrants who have job skills needed by U.S. businesses or who are related by birth or marriage to a U.S. citizen. Those who successfully complete the application process receive an identification card known as a green card. In 2020, more than 700,000 people were granted green cards.

A green card provides proof that its holder has a legal right to live and work in the United States. Green card holders have many of the same rights and obligations as full citizens. For example, they enjoy the constitutional right to the freedoms of speech and religion. However, if they are convicted of a crime, resident aliens can lose their permanent resident status and be deported, or removed, from the United States.

3. Immigration, Naturalization, and the Political Process

The United States is often called “a nation of immigrants.” However, naturalized citizens and immigrants can face challenges and limitations that those who are U.S. citizens from birth may not face. In some instances, the country adapts to address these hurdles. Other issues remain the subject of debate.

The Political Rights of Naturalized Citizens Naturalization gives new citizens most of the same rights, obligations, and responsi bilities as people who have been U.S. citizens since birth. For example, citizens can be called for jury duty, which they are required to attend. They also gain the right to vote and run for most public offices. However, there are some restrictions on running for public office. The Constitution bans naturalized citizens from being president or vice president. It also sets requirements for members of Congress. U.S. senators are required to have been citizens for at least nine years. The requirement is seven years for members of the House of Representatives. Many state and local governments have similar rules for candidates for public office. For example, in Maine, legislators must have been citizens for five years. Many states, including Florida, have no rules about length of citizenship.

Some dispute the need for these qualifications. In particular, the ban on naturalized citizens serving as president or vice president is controversial. Critics argue that this rule is no longer necessary or fair because it excludes qualified foreign-born citizens. Others highlight that the clause prevents foreign influence in government.

Naturalized citizens, particularly those who speak little or no English, have also faced hurdles in trying to vote. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 bans discrimination of language minorities—that is, people who do not speak English. However, it was not until 1975 that the government passed a law to provide ballots in different languages.

Today, if at least 5 percent of people in a county speak a language, the county must offer ballots in that language. For example, 13 counties in Florida must provide ballots in Spanish because of the size of their Spanish-speaking populations. In some counties, ballots in Haitian Creole are also available.

Several members of Congress are naturalized citizens. Among them are Representative Stephanie Murphy, a Democrat who represents Florida’s 7th congressional district, and Carlos Gimenez, a Republican who represents Florida’s 26th congressional district.

In 1975, a new federal law required ballots to be made available in different languages. This sign directs voters to a polling station in ten languages, including Spanish, Vietnamese, Khmer, and Filipino.

Cuban Americans have organized and worked to raise awareness about human rights abuses in Cuba. Here, activists and their supporters attend a 2021 rally to demand the U.S. government support human rights and help end communism in Cuba. The protesters marched from the White House to the Cuban Embassy in Washington, D.C.

The language requirements have made it easier for naturalized citizens to vote. As a result, more naturalized citizens have voted. These changes have also led candidates to communicate with the public in languages other than English. They make commercials, websites, and posters in multiple languages to reach different groups. Spanish, in particular, has become increasingly important as the Latino population in the United States has grown.

The Political Influence of Naturalized Citizens As more immigrants naturalize, they become involved in the political process and can thus influence policy. In addition to voting and running for office, they become active in political parties and organizations. Through these activities, they can share their views with other Americans, including political leaders and candidates for office.

One area in which many naturalized citizens have voiced their opinion is immigration policy. In recent years, Latino groups have been particularly involved in movements for immigration reform. Immigration can be a controversial issue. People disagree over who should be allowed to immigrate to the United States and who should become a citizen. There are also debates about the process required to immigrate and naturalize. Political parties and candidates have positions on these issues. They address them in campaigns to attract voters who agree with their views.

Americans sometimes organize groups with people of the same ethnic or national origin to support their policy interests. For example, since the 1950s, Cubans have largely supported the Republican Party because of its anticommunist policies. (Cuba is a communist country.) However, this has changed somewhat with the younger generation.

Despite common bonds among people with similar backgrounds, differences do exist. Irish Americans, for instance, are often divided over nationality. Some support the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland becoming one country. In contrast, others want Northern Ireland to remain part of the United Kingdom. Regardless of U.S. citizens’ origins, they are individuals with their own ideas and opin ions about the U.S. government and its policies.

4. The Rule of Law

In the United States, regardless of a person’s citizenship or immi gration status, everyone is subject to the rule of law. The rule of a law is a principle that is fundamental to the U.S. Constitution. It requires all people and the government to abide by—to accept and uphold—a system of laws. It also limits the ability of leaders to abuse power. This means that no one is above the law. Everyone—private individuals and public officials—is accountable to the law and faces consequences for violating it.

The U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law According to Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land in the United States.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; . . . shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Laws passed by Congress and state lawmakers must not conflict with the Constitution. When questions arise about laws in court, judges’ decisions must abide by the Constitution. Decisions and actions taken by the president and governors must also be consistent with the Constitution.

Additionally, all government officers—including state and federal judges, state and federal lawmakers, and governors and the president—take an oath to uphold the Constitution when they take office. By pledging to uphold the Constitution, government officers affirm that the rule of law is supreme. No one—including leaders and government bodies—is above the law. It is not legal for them to use their power as they choose. They must act within the law.

The Rule of Law and Due Process

A key legal protection that upholds the rule of law is due process. The principle of due process is a constitutional right. It protects people against being deprived of life, liberty, or property without fair legal procedures and safeguards.

rule of law the principle that those who govern are bound by the laws, meaning that no one is above the law

due process the principle that no person can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without fair legal procedures and safeguards

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Salmon P. Chase administered the oath of office to Abraham Lincoln during his second inauguration on March 4, 1865. The oath taken by the presidentelect is in Article II, Section I of the Constitution.

In the 1970s, U.S. president Richard Nixon claimed to be as powerful as Louis XIV, a 17th-century French king who was above the law. He argued that, as president, he was not subject to court rulings other than impeachment. The Supreme Court rejected this and said that the U.S. president was not above the law. In this cartoon, Nixon is drawn to look like Louis XIV.

Due process helps ensure that people are treated equally before the law. The government must consistently apply and enforce the law. Moreover, it must follow fair and impartial procedures. For example, this means that individuals must be notified of charges against them. They must also have an opportunity to have their case heard and a decision made by a neutral party—that is, a judge. The government must follow set procedures in all government proceedings, including court cases, that can deprive a person of life, liberty, or property.

Additionally, due process requires laws to be clear enough for the average person to understand them. The average person should be able to read a law and identify to whom the law applies, the conduct it bans, and the punishment for breaking the law. Laws must be explicit about what they regulate, and unclear terms must be defined. Such laws are enforceable.

These six principles help support the rule of law.

Principles of the Rule of Law

Accountability to the law

Fair procedures

Societies Without the Rule of Law

The rule of law is funda mental to the U.S. government and legal system. Furthermore, it is considered an essential feature of democratic government. Countries that follow other forms of government do not necessarily apply the rule of law. In these countries, some people may be above the law.

When all people are not equal before the law, laws may be applied differently to different groups within society. Laws may not be consistently applied and enforced. Some laws may even target certain groups, such as those who oppose the government. During the 20th century, this happened in the Soviet Union and the countries that it controlled and influenced.

Additionally, governments may not be transparent about the law. They may not make the public aware of a law or what happens when someone breaks that law. The government may also enact retroactive laws. Such laws apply to past behavior that was legal at the time.

Many people who immigrate to the United States come from countries where there is little or no rule of law. They may seek legal rights that they have been denied in their native country. The stability and consistency provided by the rule of law draws people to the United States.

All people, including government officials, and the government have a duty to follow the law and are bound by the law.

Legal procedures, such as searches, investigations, and trials, are performed fairly and according to the law.

Legal decisions based on the law Judges make decisions based on the law, not on outside influences and pressures.

Consistent application of the law Laws are applied to everyone in the same manner.

Enforceability of the law

Laws are reasonable and can be enforced.

Transparency of institutions Government actions and laws are made known to the public.

5. Obligations and Responsibilities

People who live in the United States have obligations and responsi bilities. Obligations are duties that are required by law. Responsibilities are voluntary, but they are considered necessary for democratic societies to flourish. Obligations and responsibilities exist for both citizens and noncitizens, but they differ slightly for each group.

Selective Service System

Legal Obligations

All people in the United States also have certain legal obligations. For example, they are required to obey laws. They are also required to pay taxes. Taxes help fund government services and programs, such as schools, police and fire departments, and the military. When people do not abide by the rules, they can face criminal charges and punishments such as prison or fines.

Another obligation is Selective Service System registration. Although service in the U.S. military is voluntary, all men must register with the Selective Service System when they turn 18. This is true for all citizens and all immigrants, including undocumented immigrants. The Selective Service System is the U.S. government agency that maintains information about those eligible to serve in the armed forces. This helps ensure military readiness in case of war or national emergency.

By applying and enforcing these rules, the government takes responsibility for protecting people and their rights. For instance, citizens are required to serve on a jury when they are called to court. All people in the United States have a constitutional right to a trial by jury. Jury duty supports and protects this right. Consistent with the rule of law, legal obligations help support equality before the law.

the U.S. government agency that maintains information about those eligible to serve in the armed forces. Although the military is voluntary, young men must register with this agency shortly after they turn 18 in case they are needed for military service.

During the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 1970s, men in the United States were drafted to serve in the military. These men fulfilled their legal obligation by registering with the Selective Service System. When their assigned number was called, they had to report for duty. Here, drafted soldiers arrive at Fort Jackson in South Carolina.

Voting is a civic responsibility that gives U.S. citizens a voice in government.

Obeying the law—regardless of whether the law bans parking by a fire hydrant or murder—is a civil obligation. In return for obeying the law, the government is responsible for assuring that people’s rights are observed and protected. In a democracy, unless we all live under the same rules and protect one another’s rights, the rules and rights have little meaning. This is the importance of the rule of law. However, sometimes the law is unfair and does not treat people equally. Recognizing unfairness along these lines is a civic responsibility, as is the bravery to call it out.

Civic Responsibilities

In the ideal model of democracy, individuals have civic responsibilities. These are voluntary actions people regularly take that help maintain democracy. One such action is staying informed. People have a responsi bility to be informed about the issues that affect their community, the nation, and the world. Being well informed helps citizens vote. It also helps all people recognize the steps they can take to support their communities.

Another responsibility is voting, which is a right and privilege of citizenship. Citizens have a responsibility to vote in elections. This enables most adult U.S. citizens to have a voice in government at the local, state, and federal levels. Running for office is another responsibility. To function, the government needs people to volunteer to serve. Running for office and voting, however, are not the only ways to have a voice in government.

Both citizens and noncitizens can participate by expressing themselves at community meetings, in print and online media, and through discussions with neighbors. This is true regardless of age. If young people feel strongly about an issue or problem, they too have the right to gather petitions, post on social media, and organize protests. They can also join groups that focus on issues of concern, such as the environment or homelessness.

Being politically active and involved is a choice. Citizens must choose to uphold and preserve democracy. Democracies function best when citizens choose good leaders and pay attention to what those elected leaders do. As the French political philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville observed almost 200 years ago, “The greatness of America lies not in being more enlightened than any other nation, but rather in her ability to repair her faults.” It is up to all citizens to make sure such repairs are made when needed.

6. Being Responsible by Supporting the Common Good

Sometimes, the obligations and responsibilities of citizenship require people to act for the common good rather than according to their wishes. For example, someone might have to miss work to attend jury duty. Or someone may choose to wait many hours to vote even though they would prefer spending time with friends. There are many ways to serve the common good, and this can often be done through volunteering.

When people join the army or coach basketball for a community program, they are contributing to the common good. When people work to get signatures on a petition or attend a school board meeting, they are likewise supporting the common good. These acts contribute to the health, safety, and happiness of local communities and the nation. Moreover, anyone can volunteer, regardless of citizenship or age. So how can students join these efforts?

We read one example about student participation in citizenship ceremonies at school. Students can do more to support new citizens than sit in the audience. They can welcome the new citizens, guide them to material that explains jury duty or voter registration, or get involved in the ceremony.

As we look at more examples of volunteering, consider what interests you. Also consider the change you would like to see in your community. If you were in charge, how would you help or solve problems?

Where to Begin When we look at the world around us, it can be difficult to decide where to spend our time and what to do. However, sometimes the answer is right in front of us. Our actions can help improve our own communities and even our own lives.

There are various volunteer opportunities in most communities. For example, people can volunteer to pick up garbage from local parks. Or they can distribute food at a food bank.

Some organizations operate across the United States and even in other countries. One such organization is Habitat for Humanity, which builds, reconstructs, and preserves homes for people in need. Here, two volunteers build the roof of a house in California.

For example, students at a high school near San Francisco found a solution when they had a conflict with the neighboring community. The community had complained about noise, litter, and graffiti. As a result, students lost the freedom to leave the school campus for lunch. In response, the students and school officials worked with the community to improve relations. Students made videos urging others to respect the community’s concerns. They also held a community night, which locals attended. Through their efforts, students were able to improve relations with the community—and regain their lunch privileges.

What Matters to You Working on an issue that you care about is likely to lead to a positive volunteer experience. If you love art, explore opportunities at local museums. One recent volunteer at the Science Museum of Virginia is a science lover who needs a wheelchair to guide her tours. By doing volunteer work, she is exploring her interests. However, she is also using it as an opportunity to raise awareness and increase respect for people with disabilities.

The Science Museum volunteer not only pursued her interests, but her personal experience also guided her. You can do the same with your experience, skills, and talent. If you know a language in addition to English or love spending time with animals, you can use this to help others. There may be people in your community whose English skills are not strong. If you share another language, you can help them with everyday activities that require English.

Although there are dog-walking ser vices, not everyone can afford them. Find out whether your love of dogs can help a neighbor better manage their responsibili ties to their pet.

How to Find Volunteer

Opportunities Research volunteer opportunities in your area. You are certain to find organizations doing work that interests you. Some groups may focus on issues such as education or health care. Others may involve doing work that more directly helps people in need, such as delivering meals or building homes. Some groups, such as Florida’s Hands On Orlando, specialize in linking people to projects that interest them.

Virtual opportunities exist as well. The COVID-19 pandemic has emphasized how much young people can contribute with their online skills. Today, social media is used to create awareness and support for a variety of issues.

At the community level, older people may be unfamiliar with using the internet. Therefore, they may not know about the services available to them, such as grocery delivery. They also may be unsure of how to use the internet to stay in touch with family and friends. Is there someone in your community who doesn’t know how to use a device or app that will make their life easier? Get in touch and show them how it’s done. Then stay in touch, so you can continue to learn from one another.

Most volunteers insist that when they volunteer, they gain more than they give.

LESSON SUMMARY

Volunteer opportunities may even exist among family and friends. Many older people are unfamiliar with computers and using the internet. They will benefit from learning how to use new technology, but you will benefit from the experience.

Everyone in the United States has rights, responsibilities, and obligations. Some of these vary depend ing on citizenship and immigration status, but everyone has them. For example, everyone—including government officials and the government itself—is obligated to follow the rule of law.

Citizenship Everyone in the United States has a legal status based on their citizenship or immigration status. Citizens are people who were born in the United States or born to a parent with U.S. citizenship. Immigrants can become naturalized citizens.

Becoming a U.S. Citizen Immigrants become citizens through the naturalization process. Naturalization is a multistep legal process that can take several years to complete.

Immigration, Naturalization, and the Political Process Naturalized citizens have almost all the same rights as U.S. citizens since birth, including the right to vote. However, they face some additional require ments when running for public office. Also, they cannot serve as president or vice president.

The Rule of Law The rule of law is a principle that is fundamental to the U.S. Constitution. It requires everyone and the government to abide by the system of laws. All government officers take an oath to uphold the Constitution and act within the law. No one is above the law.

Obligations and Responsibilities All people in the United States have legal obligations. These are actions that are legally required, such as obeying the law and paying taxes. People also have civic responsibilities. These are voluntary actions, such as voting or participating in government.

Being Responsible by Supporting the Common Good Acting for the common good—or the benefit of the community—is sometimes part of the obligations and responsibilities of citizenship. There are many ways for people, no matter their age or citizenship, to contribute to their community.

OF LAW

End-of-Course Prep Guide

Return to the Student Learning Targets at the beginning of this lesson and review the “I can” statements. Use the checklist to decide which key ideas to focus on in this review guide. You can also learn more about these topics online using Reading and Notes, Lesson Games, Slideshows, and Video Activities.

The Rule of Law and Its Influence on the United States

Define the rule of law and recognize its influence on the development of legal, political and governmental systems in the United States. (CG.1.11)

Definition of Rule of Law – The law must be followed by everyone equally, including government officials. No one is above the law.

In a society that operates under the rule of law:

All people, including leaders, obey the same laws.

All people, including leaders, suffer the same consequences if they break the laws.

Leaders cannot use their power to do things that break the law.

There are procedures and actions people can take if they think a leader is doing something wrong or a law is unconstitutional.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, so no state or Congress can pass laws that go against it. The president and governors can’t make decisions that go against it.

When a question comes up about a law’s constitutionality, judges must use the Constitution as the final authority.

Impact

This creates a society that is open and honest. People trust that the law will be followed and enforced and that court decisions will be fair. They are not afraid of their leaders. They know what is going on in government.

In a society that doesn’t operate under the rule of law:

Leaders can break laws.

Leaders are either not held responsible if they are caught breaking the law or their consequences are lighter than everyone else’s.

Leaders abuse power in many ways, such as embezzling money or having people they don’t like arrested.

People don’t take action when leaders do something wrong because they know it won’t do any good or because they might be afraid of repercussions.

Laws can be passed that contradict previous laws if there isn’t a guiding document or documents for the nation.

Judges can use their own personal opinion to decide cases rather than referring to a guiding document.

Impact

This creates a society in which people do not know from one case to the next whether the law will be enforced, and they do not trust that a decision in court will be fair. They may be afraid of or may not trust their leaders to do the right thing. They often have little idea of what is really going on in government.

Due Process

Meaning

Due process is an important part of the rule of law that applies when someone has been accused of a crime. The Fifth Amendment says that no one can have their life, liberty, or property taken away unless government officials follow the correct legal procedures (due process). This means many things, such as that a person can’t be jailed without knowing what they were charged with, or held in jail for long periods of time for no reason. If charged, they must be given a trial with an impartial judge.

Importance

Due process protects the rights of accused people. It keeps the government from imprisoning or persecuting people for arbitrary reasons, such as not liking the person or their political views. It keeps law enforcement and the govern ment from abusing power. It promotes public trust in the government. It creates a society without fear.

AND THE RULE OF LAW

Citizens and the Path to Becoming a U.S. Citizen

Define the term “citizen,” and explain the constitutional means of becoming a U.S. citizen. (CG.2.1)

Three Ways to Be a U.S. Citizen

born on U.S. soil (Fourteenth Amendment) become a naturalized citizen (Fourteenth Amendment)

born to a U.S. citizen, even if not on U.S. soil (federal law)

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside . . . Fourteenth Amendment

Path to Becoming a Naturalized U.S. Citizen

Potential immigrant . . . lives in another country and receives a visa to come to the United States.

Immigrant . . .

Lawful permanent resident for five years . . .

applies to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to become a lawful permanent resident, also known as a resident alien. Receives green card if successful.

applies to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to become a naturalized citizen. Participates in an interview. Passes English test and civics test. Takes Oath of Allegiance to the United States in a formal ceremony.

Naturalized citizen . . .

now has all the rights and protections that anyone born in the United States has. Can vote and run for office (except for president or vice president).

Impact of Naturalized Citizens

• They create a more diverse society, bringing new cultural elements.

• They made up 10 percent of eligible voters in 2020, so they are a large group that political candidates are interested in reaching.

• They are becoming more involved in issues, speaking out more, and generally having more of an influence. Many run for office themselves.

Obligations and Responsibilities of U.S. Citizenship

between obligations

citizenship,

evaluate their impact

Obligations Responsibilities

or duties are things that a citizen has to do. There

legal consequences

citizen

things that a citizen should do in order to

responsible person, but they are not required by law.

what’s

Impact on Society

If citizens fulfill their obligations and responsibilities:

The country is safe because people obey the law, and there is money to provide services because people pay their taxes. Other citizens know that they can receive a fair trial.

People will work for the common good. This means that society as a whole will be better off: happier, healthier, safer, better educated, cleaner, having more opportunities, receiving help for problems, etc. Working for the common good can sometimes mean placing it above your own interests.

If citizens don’t fulfill their obligations and responsibilities: Society as a whole suffers. There would be crime, innocent victims, and fear in communities if large numbers of people stopped obeying the law. Many people wouldn’t receive important services if people stopped paying taxes. Communi ties would become dirty and run-down. People may not get help for problems or have opportunities to enrich their lives. The government wouldn’t know what everyone wants and needs if people didn’t speak up. Ineffective or otherwise bad leaders would stay in office if people didn’t vote.

in to access a Video Activity

explains

main ideas of the text

meaningful

The Origins and Purposes of Government

INQUIRY PROJECT

The vast majority of nation-states identify as some form of democracy, a type of government that is widely associated with political freedom. However, a 2022 report from Freedom House researchers shows that global freedom is declining.

In this unit, you will explore the different forms of government as well as the many influences the past has had on the U.S. Government. Then you will act as employees of the U.S. Department of State to create a report on the state of democracy around the world.

LESSONS

2 Comparing Forms of Government

Learn about different forms of government and how their organizational structures compare to each other. Then evaluate the advantages of the United States’ constitutional republic and free market economic system.

Benchmarks: CG.3.1, CG.3.2, CG.3.15, HE.1.1

3 The Roots of American Government

Discover the influences of ancient Greece and Rome on the U.S. government and examine how Judeo-Christianity and the Enlightenment period shaped colonial ideas about government.

Benchmarks: CG.1.1, CG.1.2, CG.1.4

4 Moving Toward Independence

Explore the impact that documents like the Magna Carta and the Mayflower Compact had on colonial views of government. Then learn how British decisions that affected the colonies led to the creation of the Declaration of Independence.

Benchmarks: CG.1.3, CG.1.5, CG.1.6

5 Creating the Constitution

Find out about the challenges the United States experienced that led to the writing of the Constitution. Learn about the different viewpoints of Federalists and AntiFederalists that influenced the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Benchmarks: CG.1.7, CG.1.10

Assessing Freedom Around the World

Compelling Question: How free are democracies around the world?

Inquiry Introduction

In this unit, you will explore our government’s foundations and how the past has influenced the founding of a representative democracy in the United States. Then you will apply what you learn to this Unit Inquiry Project. You will investigate the compelling question to take a closer look at different democracies and consider how much freedom they actually have.

Storyline

Protesters in Barcelona, Spain, march in support for a free, independent Catalan democracy separate from the Spanish government. Citizens’ ability to freely protest is an important indicator of freedom in democracies.

Suppose you work for the U.S. Department of State, a government agency responsible for international affairs and foreign policy. The State Department received a report showing that although a great majority of countries identify as democracies, less than 50 percent of them are con sidered “free.” You have been assigned to a task force that will investigate what factors, or indicators, contribute to freedom in countries around the world.

You and your colleagues will write reports on the freedoms and limitations of different democracies and provide a recommendation for foreign policy. Then you will review all of the reports and determine how the State Department will use its budget for foreign aid.

Background

There are many different forms of government. There are also many different types of governments that call themselves “democracies.” Government-funded organizations such as Freedom House analyze the status of, and challenges to, freedom in different countries around the world. These organizations do a great deal of research on an ongoing basis in order to measure the state of global freedom.

While many countries may call themselves democracies, some of those countries are democracies in name only. For example, even though Russia calls itself a presidential democracy, Freedom House considers it “not free.” This is because the Russian government regularly influences elections by suppressing voters, jailing political opponents, and arresting protestors. Certain indicators may point to whether a democracy can be considered free, partly free, or not free. These indicators of democracy include freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to vote.

Inquiry Process

As you consider the compelling ques tion, you may wonder what indicators affect varying levels of freedom in nationstates that identify as democracies. One way to assess this is to conduct an inquiry.

You will be assigned one country to research. You can follow these steps and record your findings about this country in your Interactive Student Notebook:

• Develop supporting questions to help you answer the compelling question. You may want to ask questions about the indicators of freedom that differ ent groups use to rate the democracies around the world.

• Research answers to the questions you came up with and record your sources. Always evaluate your sources to make sure that they are reliable.

• Record the information you gathered in a report that includes the country’s government structure, the top three indicators of freedom you have chosen to research, and your recommendation for aid. Your report should also include your assessment of the country’s level of freedom.

• Use your report findings to create a poster that serves as a visual rep resentation of the information.

• Display your poster in a gallery, along with those of your colleagues. Take notes from other posters in the gallery on the levels of freedoms in other countries. What patterns do you observe?

• Come up with an answer to the question: How free are democracies around the world? Build an argument to support your claim. Use evi dence from your research and reasoning to support your answer.

By following these steps, you will become more informed about political issues in your democracy. You will better understand the role of government in determining the actual freedom of a democracy. When you are ready, begin investigating the compelling question.

ONLINE UNIT ACTIVITY

In this activity, you will act as members of a State Department task force investigating the level of freedom in different democracies.

Inquiry Project Go online to complete the activities, readings, and tasks. Fill out the corresponding prompts for each step in your print or online notebook.

Lesson Objectives

• Analyze the advantages of the United States’ constitutional republic over other forms of government in safeguarding liberty, freedom and a representative government. (CG.3.1)

• Explain the advantages of a federal system of government over other systems in balancing local sovereignty with national unity and protecting against authoritarianism. (CG.3.2)

• Analyze the advantages of capitalism and the free market in the United States over government-controlled economic systems (e.g., socialism and communism) in regard to economic freedom and raising the standard of living for citizens. (CG.3.15)

• Examine the Holocaust as the planned and systematic state-sponsored persecution and murder of European Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945. (HE.1.1)

Student Learning Targets

Below are your goals for this lesson. Review them before you start and again at the end of the lesson.

I can apply an understanding of various forms of government (e.g., republic, democracy, monarchy, oligarchy, theocracy, autocracy). (CG.3.1)

I can identify different forms of government based on their political philosophy or organiza tional structure. (CG.3.1)

I can analyze scenarios describing various forms of government. (CG.3.1)

I can explain how the application of checks and balances, consent of the governed, democ racy, due process of law, federalism, individual rights, limited government, representative government, republicanism, rule of law, and separation of powers distinguishes the United States’ constitutional republic from authoritarian and totalitarian nations. (CG.3.1)

I can apply an understanding of federal, confederal, and unitary systems of government. (CG.3.2)

I can compare the organizational structures of systems of government. (CG.3.2)

I can recognize examples of these systems of government. (CG.3.2)

I can analyze scenarios describing various systems of government. (CG.3.2)

I can evaluate various economic systems (e.g., capitalism, communism, socialism). (CG.3.15)

I can compare the economic prosperity and opportunity of current nations. (CG.3.15)

I can analyze how antisemitism led to and contributed to the Holocaust. (HE.1.1)

Lesson Vocabulary

• capitalism - an economic system in which individual investors, or capitalists, privately own the means of production; also known as a free enterprise system

• democracy - a system of government in which citizens exercise supreme power, acting either directly on their own or through elected representatives

• government-controlled economy - an economic system that relies mainly on the central government to determine what goods and services to produce and how to produce them; also called a command economy

• market economy - an economic system that relies mainly on markets to determine what goods and services to produce and how to produce them

• monarchy - a system of government in which a single ruler exercises supreme power based on heredity or divine right. In a monarchy, the right to rule passes from one genera tion of the ruling family to the next.

• parliament - a legislative assembly in which elected representatives debate and vote on proposed laws

• republic - a system of government in which supreme power rests with the citizens and is exercised by their elected representatives

• socialism - a political and economic system in which the government owns the primary means of production

Academic Vocabulary

• absolute monarchy - a government led by a hereditary ruler who claims unlimited powers

• antisemitism - policies, views, and actions that discriminate against Jewish people

• authoritarian regime - a system of government in which the state exercises broad control over the lives of its citizens

• autocracy - a system of government in which the leader rules with unlimited power

• city-state - a sovereign state consisting of a city and its surrounding territory

• command economy - an economic system that relies mainly on the central government to determine what goods and services to produce and how to produce them; also called a government-controlled economy

• communism - a system of government in which a single political party controls both the government and the economy; also, the theories developed by Karl Marx regarding the development of an ideal, classless society

• constitution - a set of rules that guides how a country, state, or organization works and how government powers and duties are distributed

• constitutional democracy - a democratic government based on a written constitution

• constitutional monarchy - a system of government in which the powers of a monarch are limited by a constitution, either written or unwritten

• despot - a tyrant or ruler with absolute powers

• dictatorship - a system of government in which a single person or group exercises supreme power by controlling the military and police

• direct democracy - a democratic form of government in which citizens make public decisions directly, either in a popular assembly or through a popular vote

• economic system - a way of organizing the production and consumption of goods and services

• fascism - a totalitarian system in which businesses remain in private hands but under government control

• feudalism - an economic and political system of the European Middle Ages in which landowners granted land to tenants in return for military assistance and other services

• genocide - the systematic killing of a racial, political, or cultural group

• gross domestic product (GDP) - the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country during a given period of time

• Holocaust - the systematic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of Jews by the Nazis

• initiative process - a form of direct democracy in which citizens propose laws and submit them directly to the voters for approval

• ministry - an executive branch department, often in a parliamentary system

• mixed economy - an economic system that combines market forces with elements of a government-controlled economy

• Nazism - a form of totalitarianism and type of fascism, based in part on the myth of racial superiority; developed in Germany before World War II

• oligarchy - a government in which the ruling power is in the hands of a few people

• parliamentary democracy - a political system in which voters elect lawmakers to represent them in the nation’s parliament; the elected lawmakers choose a prime minister to head the executive branch

• presidential democracy - a political system in which voters choose a president to lead the government as head of the executive branch

• prime minister - the chief executive in a parliamentary democracy

• recall election - an electoral process through which citizens can vote an elected official out of office

• referendum process - a form of direct democracy in which citizens vote to approve or reject laws passed by a legislature

• representative democracy - a democratic form of government in which elected repre sentatives make public decisions on behalf of the citizens

• single-party state - a nation-state in which only one political party is allowed to rule under the constitution

• standard of living - the level of wealth and comfort enjoyed by the average person in a country

• theocracy - a government headed by religious leaders

• totalitarianism - an extreme form of authoritarian rule in which the state seeks to control every aspect of its citizens’ lives

Lesson 2 Comparing Forms of Government

Introduction

In September 2018, delegates representing the 193 members of the United Nations (UN) met in New York City for the 73rd session of the UN General Assembly. The majority of these nations’ governments are categorized as democracies. The governments of a few nations are monarchies. Fewer yet are dictatorships

Among the members of the UN are countries with vastly different populations, forms of government, and economic systems. Consider, for example, the differences between two of the members—South Africa and Switzerland—and their paths to joining and belonging to the UN.

South Africa was one of the founding members of the UN in 1945. However, its membership was suspended in 1974 because of its policy of apartheid, which the UN and countries around the world condemned. Apartheid was the practice of racial segregation and discrimination that had been in effect in South Africa since 1948. The UN suspension continued until apartheid ended in the early 1990s and South Africa held its first democratic elections in April 1994. South Africa was readmitted to the UN soon after in June 1994. Switzerland first joined the UN in 2002. Switzerland existed as an independent nation in Central Europe for more than 350 years before joining the UN. It also has a policy of military neutrality. However, the country held a vote in which its citizens weighed in on the decision to join the UN. Around 55 percent of Swiss voters favored joining, whereas 45 percent voted against becoming a UN member.

These two nations show the very different paths to joining and participating in the UN. However, both have equal standing, regard less of whether they were charter members or newer additions.

Social Studies Vocabulary capitalism democracy government-controlled economy market economy monarchy parliament republic socialism

How should political power be distributed in a society?

Hammurabi, one of the kings of the Babylonian Empire, conquered neighboring kingdoms to bring most of Mesopotamia under Babylonian rule. He is most known for his code of laws called Hammurabi’s Code (shown here), which he claimed to have received from one of the gods.

1. The Origins and Evolution of Government

All societies, large and small, develop some form of government. During prehistoric times, when small bands of hunter-gatherers wandered Earth in search of food, government might have been just a few elders making decisions for the group. The invention of farming was the beginning of more formal systems of governments. Once people learned how to raise crops, they settled into permanent vil lages. This new way of life created many new problems. Governments emerged and then had to grow and change to meet the needs of the more complicated societies they ruled.

The Ancient World: From City-States to Empires Over time, some farming villages grew into cities and city-states. A city-state is an independent state consisting of a city and its surrounding territory.

Around 3000 b.c.e., the first city-states began in Sumer, an area located in what is today southern Iraq. There, between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, the Sumerians grew crops of barley, wheat, dates, apples, and plums.

Then, as now, the land between the Tigris and Euphrates was largely desert. Farming in this region depended on irrigation, or sup plying water to an area that is dry. Governments arose to resolve issues about the fair distribution of water. They also provided protection by building walls around their cities and organizing armies to fight off invasions by nomadic tribes. A similar evolution occurred in ancient Egypt, India, and China.

Gradually, power in many city-states became concentrated in the hands of a single ruler. The strongest of these rulers conquered neighboring citystates to create the world’s first empires. Sargon of Akkad was one of Sumer’s early conquerors. Sargon, whose name is thought to mean “the true king,” engaged in more than 30 battles against the Sumerian city-states to consolidate his empire.

Empire-builders like Sargon often legitimized their power by declaring that the gods had given them the right to rule. Some rulers even claimed to be gods themselves. As power passed from father to son in these early empires, monarchy became the most common form of govern ment in the ancient world.

Greece and Rome: Early Forms of People Power In the 5th century b.c.e., the Greek city-state of Athens, fearing the spread of tyranny, began to make democratic reforms. Over time, the Athenians reorganized their city-state as a direct democracy. In a direct democ racy, public decisions are made directly by citizens meeting together in an assembly or voting by ballot. The Athenian leader Pericles explained the new form of government this way:

Our constitution is called a democracy because power is in the hands not of a minority but of the whole people. When it is a question of settling private disputes, everyone is equal before the law; when it is a question of putting one person before another in positions of public responsibility, what counts is not membership of a particular class, but the actual ability which the man possesses.

Pericles, “Funeral Oration,” 431 b.c.e.

When Pericles spoke of government being in the hands of “the whole people,” he meant in the hands of male citizens of Athens only. Others, including women, slaves, and foreign-born people living in Athens, were not allowed to participate in the government. For those citizens who did qualify, however, they participated on a scale that was different in the ancient world. Never before had so many people dedicated so much of their time to the business of governing themselves.

Elsewhere, the Italian city-state of Rome was developing a different form of people power. In 509 b.c.e., the Roman people overthrew their monarchy. Over time, the Romans set up a new system of government called a repub lic, which was governed as a representative democracy. In a representative democracy, public decisions are made by leaders who are elected by the citizens to represent their interests.

The Roman Republic lasted nearly 500 years. During the centuries of the Roman Republic, officials elected by Rome’s citizens headed the government. Then, in 31 b.c.e., after 20 years of civil war, the Roman Empire was established. Under the government of the empire, there were no elected leaders. Instead, emperors held total power for life.

republic a system of government in which supreme power rests with the citizens and is exercised by their elected representatives

Some women rulers gained power by being co-rulers or regents, rulers for a child too young to rule. Zenobia of Palmyra (ca. 240−274) launched an invasion of the Roman Empire that gave her power until her capture in 272. Her court was a center of learning and culture.

The Middle Ages: From Feudalism to Nation-States

For a time, Rome’s emperors ruled an empire that included most of Europe, as well as North Africa and western Asia. In 476 c.e., Rome fell to invading tribes from the east. In parts of Europe once ruled by Rome, the empire broke into tiny areas called districts. After the empire was divided, each district was ruled by a duke, lord, king, or other noble.

With no central government to provide security, each district had to look out for itself. It often made sense for weak nobles to look to a nearby, more powerful neighbor for protection. However, this protec tion came with a price. The more powerful lord or local king usually took his payment from weaker nobles in the form of land. In this way, some lords gained control of very large areas.

parliament a legislative assembly in which elected representatives debate and vote on proposed laws

By the 700s, many lords had acquired more land than they could manage. They began granting parcels of land, called fiefs, to tenants. In return, the tenant became the lord’s vassal. A vassal took an oath of loyalty to the lord and promised to provide him with military service in times of war. This system of exchanging the use of land for military and other services became known as feudalism.

In addition to serving as war riors, the vassals also had political obligations. For example, they all sat together at the lord’s court to help settle disputes. The lord was also expected to seek the advice and approval of his vassals before making new laws. Europe’s parliaments developed from meetings of vassals summoned by a lord or king. In time, they would become a much more representative form of government with members directly elected by the people.

During the 1200s, the feudal system of lords and vassals entered a period of decline. The 1300s saw the rise of absolute monarchies, or governments headed by rulers who claimed unlim ited powers. These powerful monarchs brought together the feudal districts in their kingdoms into the world’s first nation-states.

By the 1700s, several European coun tries had become nation-states headed by absolute monarchs. These all-powerful rulers based their legitimacy on the divine right of kings theory, the idea that they received their authority from God. These absolute monarchies functioned like autocracies—governments led by one person with absolute power. An autocrat rules with unlimited authority and with no systems in place for the people to challenge or restrain their power. King Louis XIV of France spoke of such power when he reportedly said of himself, “L’état c’est moi ” (“I am the state”).

Louis XIV was a major proponent of the divine right of kings, and under his reign, France became one of the leading powers of Europe.

2. The Age of Revolutions

Some monarchs ruled with the best interests of their people in mind. Others, however, ruled as despots, or tyrants, and used their power selfishly. The actions of despots led to dissatisfaction with this form of government and triggered a series of revolutions, first in Europe and then in the American colonies.

Democracies and Dictatorships The first of these revolu tions against tyranny occurred in England in 1688. The Glorious Revolution, also known as the Bloodless Revolution, led to the establishment of Europe’s first constitutional monarchy—a system of government in which the powers of the monarch are limited by a constitution, either written or unwritten.

The second of these revolutions began in 1775, when American colonists rebelled against what they saw as excessive British control. The American Revolution led to the creation of the first modern constitutional democracy—a democratic government based on a written constitution. Abraham Lincoln would later describe this form of democracy as “government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

A third revolution happened in 1789 in France. At first, the French Revolution seemed likely to produce a constitutional democracy. Instead, it collapsed into chaos. In time, Napoleon Bonaparte took control and established an authoritarian regime—a system of government in which the state exercises control over the lives of its citizens. For example, Napoleon used secret police forces to spy on French citizens and mounted his own propaganda campaigns while censoring the press.

Some historians argue that Napoleon’s approach to governing set the stage for the rise of totalitarianism in the 20th century. A totalitarian government is an extreme form of an authoritarian regime that seeks to control almost every part of its citizens’ lives.

Twentieth-century totalitarianism dates back to the Russian Revolution of 1917. That revolution overthrew the Russian monarchy. In its place, the Soviet Union was established, which became the world’s first state based on communism.

Communism is a political theory developed by German philoso phers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 1800s. Marx’s goal was a society that provides equality and economic security for all. To accomplish this, he called for shared ownership of land, factories, and other resources. Many see communism as an outgrowth of socialism, a political and economic system in which the government owns the means of production. This meant that the wealth of a society would belong to the workers who made the goods responsible for that wealth.

The theory of communism appealed to many people in the 1900s. In practice, however, it led to the creation of totalitarian states—first in the Soviet Union and later in other countries, such as China, Vietnam, and Cuba. In these states, dictators (another form of autocrats) such as Joseph Stalin used spies, secret police, and the government to stop all opposition.

Following the French Revolution, Napoleon Bonaparte established a short-lived dictatorship. His regime may have helped pave the way for the rise of Vladimir Lenin and his reign over the newly established Soviet Union after the Russian Revolution in 1917.

socialism a political and economic system in which the government owns the primary means of production

A form of totalitarianism known as fascism first appeared in Italy in the 1920s. A fascist state is like a communist state in terms of its control of citizens’ lives. However, fascism allows businesses to be privately owned but under government control. Benito Mussolini, Italy’s fascist dictator, used his power to make his country a police state.

A third type of totalitarianism, Nazism, began in 20th-century Germany. Nazism is a variety of fascism built in part on the myth of racial superiority, particularly antisemitism. Antisemitism has existed in Europe for as long as Jewish people have lived there. Jews arrived in Europe around 300 b.c.e. and in Germany around 300 c.e. The level of antisemitism around the world has varied throughout history. After World War I, it increased in Germany. Many Germans blamed Jews for Germany’s defeat in the war.

Three Forms of Totalitarianism

Communism Fascism

Key Characteristics

Joseph Stalin ruled the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1953. Historians hold him responsible for the deaths of millions of Soviet citizens. The hammer in this communist symbol represents industrial workers, while the sickle represents agricultural workers.

Benito Mussolini was dictator of Italy from 1922 to 1943. He used his power to control every aspect of the government and the press. This symbol of fascism suggests that while a single stick may be easily broken, a bundle of sticks bound together is too strong to break.

Nazism

While ruling Germany from 1933 to 1945, Adolf Hitler tried to rid Europe of Jews, Roma, and others he deemed “undesirable” through systematic mass murder. The swastika is an ancient Hindu symbol of well-being. The Nazis adopted it as a symbol of the German master race.

• Supreme power held by the Communist Party

Belief that the state should control the economy

Brutal suppression of opposition

Hostility to religion and human rights

Key Characteristics

Supreme power held by the dictator

Belief that everyone should serve the state

Extreme nationalism

Glorification of the military

Use of censorship and terror to suppress opposition

Key Characteristics

Supreme power held by the Nazi Party

Belief in racial superiority

Aggressive territorial expansion

Elimination of “inferior” minorities

Rejection of democracy and civil liberties

Antisemitism was a key part of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler’s political views. Hitler also blamed Jewish people for Germany’s failing economy in the 1930s. This attracted many supporters. Through elections and negotiations, Hitler eventually became the head of the German government in 1933. He used this position to pass laws to curb constitutional rights and gather power.

Once in power, Adolf Hitler began arresting and killing those he deemed “undesirable.” In addition to Jewish people, Hitler targeted political opponents, people who were ethnically Polish, disabled people, and Roma. (Roma are an ethnic minority group whose members traditionally did not settle in one place.) Under Hitler’s rule, the Nazis planned and systematically murdered about one-quarter of the European Roma population and two-thirds of European Jews. The murder of both groups is considered genocide. The systematic killing of European Jews during World War II is known as the Holocaust

George Washington was elected the first president of the United States after the U.S. Constitution was ratified. He was instrumental in organizing the Continental Convention, where the U.S. Constitution was written.

Rulers and Constitutions

A ruler’s powers often depend upon what is granted by their nation’s constitution. A constitution is a set of rules that guides how a country, state, or organization works. It establishes the rule of law. A constitution usually begins with a preamble. A preamble is a short statement that summarizes the basic principles for which the country hopes to stand.

A constitution may then identify the branches of government and each branch’s powers and functions. It may also outline the rights of citizens. Many countries have constitutions. The U.S. Constitution is the oldest constitution still in use. It separates powers among the three branches of government: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. It also describes each branch’s duties and powers. No single person or branch holds all the power.

The U.S. Constitution replaced an earlier document called the Articles of Confederation, which allowed for a very loose organization of states. The majority of the power resided with state governments rather than with the central government. Many felt that the Articles should be replaced with a document that provided for a stronger central government. The Constitutional Convention first met in 1787 to discuss this idea, and from it, the U.S. Constitution emerged. Part of the new constitution’s purpose was to provide a system of checks and balances so that one branch of government could not abuse its power. It also sets up a balance between the authority of the federal government and state governments.

In addition, the U.S. Constitution provides a system in which lawmakers can amend, or change, the document. This allows the government to modify the Constitution with new ideas and laws. Over the years, the U.S. government has made 27 amendments to the Constitution, from creating a bill of rights for its citizens to ending slavery and extending the right to vote to women. The system of amendments allows for changes to the Constitution that reflect changes its citizens and lawmakers think are right for the country.

Mohammad bin Salman, known as MBS, is the son of King Salman bin Abdulaziz of Saudi Arabia and the heir to the throne. As of 2022, he is the country’s deputy prime minister and minister of defense. He became the heir in 2017 after his cousin was removed from the position.

3. Forms of Government in Today’s World

Except for Antarctica, Earth’s landmasses are divided into nationstates. Some of these countries, such as Switzerland, have existed for hundreds of years. Others, such as South Sudan, are new. Almost all have some form of functioning government. As Aristotle observed more than 2,000 years ago, governments fall into three broad groups: rule by the one (monarchies and dictatorships), rule by the few (theocracies, oli garchies, and single-party states), and rule by the many (parliamentary and presidential democracies). The United States is in the third group.

Some nations’ governments are divided further into separate state governments. The United States, Mexico, and Australia all have a federal government for the nation and separate state governments.

Monarchy: Rule by the One Hereditary Ruler Monarchies are one of the oldest forms of government, and they still exist. Today’s monarchs go by many names, including king, queen, sultan, emperor, and emir. Most have inherited their power and expect to rule for life. Depending on the country, monarchs have varying roles and degrees of power in government. But the modern monarch’s power is rarely absolute like Louis XIV’s.

Historically, ruling monarchs were able to have their decisions carried out on their word alone. As a result, new policies could be enacted without a lot of discussion.

Most monarchs today face strong legal restrictions on their power, often by a constitution. The British monarch, for example, has the formal authority to call elections and appoint a new prime minister. These functions, however, are strictly ceremonial. Real power rests with the United Kingdom’s democratically elected leaders.

In contrast, Saudi Arabia’s king is a modern-day absolute monarch. He inherits his position and has legislative, executive, and judicial powers. There are no recognized political parties or national elections in Saudi Arabia. The king may seek support from the royal family, reli gious leaders, and other important members of Saudi society. However, in theory, only Islamic law and Saudi traditions limit the king’s powers.

In 2011, a series of uprisings known as the Arab Spring challenged monarchies in Middle Eastern countries. Protesters sought to gain the rights and privileges that people in democracies like the United States have. They protested for individual rights and economic freedom. They wanted representative government in which they had a voice. They demanded their leaders and governments follow the rule of law, grant due process, and govern within the limits of the law. Several protests happened in Saudi Arabia, but the king maintained his power.

Regardless of a monarch’s power, some aspects of the monarchy remain unchanged. In most monarchies, there is a clear line of suc cession. One of the monarch’s children or relatives is usually next in line for the throne. Unlike in the United States, people have no say in choosing the head of government.

Autocracy: Rule by a Dictatorship

Whereas monarchs inherit their power, dictators take and hold power by force. Muammar alGaddafi, for example, took control of Libya in a military coup d’état, or coup, in 1969.

The term coup d’état means “blow to the state” in French. A coup is the sudden overthrow of a government by a small group of military officers or political leaders. This often happens during a time of political unrest or a national emergency.

Dictatorships share some of the same qualities of absolute monarchies. Power is in the hands of a single leader who controls the military and police. The leader can stop political unrest and maintain peace and order with this power. However, the leader can also easily use it to abuse the opposition or anyone who is viewed as a threat. Unlike in a constitutional republic, the rule of law does not exist, and there are no checks on the ruler’s power.

Dictatorships face serious legitimacy problems. Pressure often builds to turn over the government to elected leaders. When this hap pens, ruling becomes increasingly difficult. For example, in February 2011, growing discontent led to a wave of protests in Libya, calling for an end to Gaddafi’s rule. Months later, he was overthrown.

Theocracy: Rule by the Few Religious Leaders

A theocracy is a government headed by religious leaders. In ancient city-states, theocracies were common, with government officials serving as religious leaders as well. Having a government based on one set of religious beliefs had clear benefits. A single, state-supported religion encouraged political and social unity. It also ensured that political decisions were in line with the people’s moral values and beliefs.

As states grew larger, however, religious unity became increasingly difficult. Religious minorities were often persecuted. Religious warfare broke out as groups with differing beliefs fought for control of their governments.

By 2018, only two theocracies existed in the world: Vatican City and Iran. Vatican City is the governmental and spiritual center of the Catholic Church. Although located in the heart of Rome, Italy, it is an independent state headed by the Catholic pope.

Iran changed from a monarchy to a theocracy in 1979. That year, Iranians drove out their hereditary ruler and formed an Islamic republic headed by a religious leader, Ayatollah Khomeini. As Iran’s supreme leader, the Ayatollah put into practice his belief that “in Islam, the legislative power and competence to establish laws belong exclusively to God Almighty.” The most influen tial body in Iran’s theocracy is the 12-person Council of Guardians. Their job is to make sure that the laws of the country are in line with Islamic religious law.

Vatican City is an independent state, even though it is in the middle of Rome, Italy. The members of its government are all members of the Catholic Church, with the pope as its head of state.

Vietnam has been a single-party state since the end of the Vietnam War in 1975. In 2011, this propaganda poster called on Vietnamese people to celebrate Vietnam’s independence from France and to recognize the Communist Party’s continuous political dominance.

Oligarchy and Single-Party State: Rule by the Elite Few In a single-party state, the constitution allows only one political party to govern. Power is held by the nation’s political elite, or a small group of people who have more power or wealth than others. The party elite nominate candidates for public office and make most policy decisions.

Ideally, a single-party system avoids much of the political disagree ments that are common in multiparty states. This makes it easier to pass laws and implement government policies. This party unity comes at a cost, however. Because leaders are unelected, people have little or no voice in government. Government does not necessarily represent the views of the people. Those with differing political views or solu tions to problems are often completely shut out of the political process.

The handful of single-party states today are mainly socialist republics, in which the local communist party rules. In China, for example, the Communist Party is the only governing political party. It has controlled the government since 1949.

Aristotle coined the term oligarchy to refer to rule by the wealthy. An example of modern oligarchy was the system of apartheid in South Africa. Under apartheid, the minority White population had access to economic and educational opportunities that were denied to the native Black population. Many believe that Aristotle’s original definition still holds true for governments around the world.

Direct Democracy: Rule by All Citizens In the direct democracy of ancient Athens, several thousand citizens met regularly as an assembly to make decisions for their city-state. Each citizen had an equal voice in public affairs, and decisions, once made, had widespread support. Nonetheless, this form of government was timeconsuming for citizens. That may be one reason why Athenian-style democracy was not widely copied in the ancient world.

No modern country is governed as a pure direct democracy. The country that comes closest is Switzerland. Swiss citizens regularly vote on laws passed by their legislature. This is known as the referendum process. Citizens may also suggest laws and submit them directly to voters. This is called the initiative process. As much as the Swiss value direct democracy, voter turnout is often low.

Limited forms of direct democracy exist in the United States. One is the New England town meeting, where townspeople meet to discuss and solve local problems. In several states, voters help shape public policy through the initiative and referendum processes. They may also be able to vote an elected official out of office by means of a recall election.

Parliamentary Democracy: Rule by a Legislative Majority

Most nations today have one of two forms of representative democ racy: parliamentary or presidential. Both forms use elections to choose national leaders. But they differ in other ways. For example, some are constitutional republics in which voters choose the head of state, and others are monarchies.

The United Kingdom and India are examples of parliamentary democracies. In these countries, voters elect lawmakers to represent them in the nation’s parliament. The political party that wins a legislative majority forms a new administration to lead the nation. If no single party wins a majority, several parties can form a ruling coalition.

The legislative majority selects a member of parliament to be prime minister, or head of government. Usually this is the leader of the party with the most seats. The prime minister then chooses other members to lead government ministries, or executive branch departments. Unlike a president, a prime minister is not the head of state. In some parliamen tary democracies such as Denmark, a monarch is the head of state.

In a parliamentary democracy, there is no clear separation between the executive and legislative branches. Members of the legislative majority usually vote with the prime minister. This lack of friction between the branches may make it easier to pass legislation than in a presidential system. However, the lack of separation means there is no real check on the prime minister’s power.

Prime ministers can remain in power as long as they have the support of parliament, their party, and the public. Should parliament approve a vote of no confidence, the prime minister must resign. Likewise, a prime minister can be voted out of party leadership. In both cases, an election is usually then held to choose a new parliament. This also occurs if a party leaves a ruling coalition, leaving no majority. Additionally, parliamentary democracies have scheduled elections. A new election must be held a certain number years after the last election.

Presidential Democracy: Rule by Representatives of the People The United States and most countries in Latin America are presidential democracies. Most, including the United States, are constitutional republics. This means that voters choose a president to lead the government as the head of the executive branch. Voters also elect lawmakers to represent them in a national legislature. Both the president and the legislators serve fixed terms that begin and end on specific dates.

Because presidents are elected directly by the people, they may be more responsive to the public than to their party. As such, they may enjoy more legitimacy and public support than a prime minister. The presidential system also separates executive and legislative powers, which allows each branch to watch over the other to prevent abuses of power. Despite this, it is extremely difficult to remove presidents from power during their terms, no matter how unpopular they might be.

With elections on fixed dates, the term of a president may be more stable than that of a prime minister. However, that stability may be of little benefit. When presidents are not from the majority party in the legislature, gridlock can result—a situation in which little or no progress on pressing issues is made and little or no significant legislation is passed. Finally, in some countries, presidents have used their power to implement authoritarian policies or establish authoritarian regimes.

The Folketing, the Danish Parliament, has legislative power in Denmark. Like in most parliamentary democracies, the party that wins the most seats in parliament selects a member to serve as the prime minister of Denmark.

In Mexico City, the Legislative Palace of San Lázaro (top) is the main seat of the Mexican legislature, called the Congress of the Union, and the permanent seat of the lower house, called the Chamber of Deputies. The National Palace (bottom) is the seat of the executive branch and, as of 2021, the home of the Mexican president.

Forms of Government Around the World, 2022

Form of Government Monarchy

Governments in which a monarch exercises considerable power are no longer common. They are usually found in parts of the world where tradition outweighs the forces of modernity.

Theocracy

Governments headed by religious leaders are rare. As of 2022, only three countries are considered a theocracy.

Oligarchy (Single-Party State)

Most single-party governments today are dominated by the Communist Party. Elections may be held, but only for candidates chosen by the party. Real power rests with party leaders.

Parliamentary Democracy

In a parliamentary system, elected members of parliament choose the prime minister. The prime minister then serves as both head of the executive branch and leader of the legislature. Some parliamentary democracies are constitutional monarchies in which the monarch is the head of state. In some countries, the monarch still has power over parliament.

Presidential Democracy

In some presidential systems, such as the constitutional republic of the United States, the president is the head of state and government. In others, the president shares power with a prime minister. In a few counties, the president may be elected but preside over an authoritarian regime.

Transitional, Unstable, or Disputed

In 2022, a handful of countries had governments that were in transition from one form to another, unstable and essentially unable to function, or disputed by competing governments.

As this map clearly shows, the governments of the vast majority of nation-states are some form of democracy. These democratic states, however, are not equally open and free. Which countries would you describe as republics? Dictatorships?

Power is highly centralized in a unitary system, divided in a federal system, and decentralized in a confederal system. Most nations today have a unitary system. None has a confederal system. Federal systems are more likely to be found in large nations that have diverse populations.

4. The Distribution of Power in Governments Today

In almost all countries, there are at least two levels of government power: national and regional. In the United States, each region is called a state. In other countries, regions have names such as canton, province, and prefecture. Just how power is distributed between these levels depends on the country’s system of government: unitary, federal, or confederal.

Unitary Systems Centralize Power In a unitary system, the constitution concentrates power in the national, or central, government. The national government may create regional governments to carry out its policies. However, regional governments have only those powers granted by the national government. The national government may also appoint the leaders of the regional governments.

Most nation-states have unitary systems, including China, Japan, Denmark, and Kenya. The main advantage of this system is that it promotes national unity by having all parts of a country follow the same laws and policies. However, most unitary nations have discovered that too much centralization is not good in practice. Policies that work for one region of the country may not work as well in another. Also, officials working at the national level cannot know the needs of every town and village. As a result, most unitary states have decentralized to a certain degree, allowing regions some powers of their own.

How Power Flows in Three Systems of Government

Unitary System

Federal System

Confederal System

Federal Systems Divide

Power

In a federal system of government, power is divided between the national government and the regional governments. The national government has some responsibilities, such as protecting the nation. The regional governments have other responsibilities, such as setting up schools.

Language Divisions in Switzerland

Equal-Area

TC I (Teacher s' Curriculum Institute) Middle School Civics

Map Title: Lingui st ic Map of Swit zerland

File Name: MS _CIV_S E_ 02

Map Size: 26 p0 x 15p5

3 rd Proof: 22-Sep -2020

A federal system of govern ment, or federalism, is most likely to be used in large countries with diverse populations, such as the United States, Russia, India, and Brazil. The main advantage of such a system is the flexibility it gives regional governments in meeting the needs of different language groups, ethnic groups, and regional interests. For example, the regions of Switzerland, known as cantons, were historically divided by religion. Today, they are divided by language, with most cantons having German, French, or Italian as their official language. However, this can create a patchwork of competing laws between regions. Also, conflicts may arise between the central government and the regional governments.

Confederal Systems Decentralize Power In a confederal system of government, power is in the regions, which are independent states. The regions give power to the national government only to maintain security and to plan activities among the regions.

This can allow for greater flexibility in meeting local needs. And, by limiting the powers of the central government, a confederal system reduces the likelihood that it will become an authoritarian regime.

However, the central government can be too weak to meet the needs of the nation as a whole. It also lacks the power to end argu ments among regions. The result can be an unworkable system that threatens the survival of a nation. This happened in the early United States under the Articles of Confederation, the country’s first written plan of government. The central government was weak and lacked cooperation from the states. The 1787 adoption of the Constitution changed the country to a federal system.

Similarly, from the 1300s until 1848, Switzerland was a confedera tion. The country’s official name is the Swiss Confederation. However, the confederation fell apart when political and religious differences led to a brief civil war. After the war, the Swiss sought greater unity, and the country adopted a federal system under its 1848 constitution.

Although Switzerland is no longer a confederation, many of the historical differences still remain. For example, the official language varies between regions. However, the Swiss government recognizes the main languages used—German, French, Italian, and Romansh—as national languages.

French German Italian

market economy an economic system that relies mainly on markets to determine what goods and services to produce and how to produce them

capitalism an economic system in which individual investors, or capitalists, privately own the means of production; also known as a free enterprise system

5. Economic Systems Around the World

Just as forms of government vary between nations, so do economic systems. An economic system is a way of organizing how goods and services are produced and consumed. Economic systems exist because people must meet certain needs to survive. These needs include food, clothing, and shelter. People also have endless wants. Such wants may include things that make life more comfortable or satisfying.

Two of the basic types of economic systems that exist in the world today are market economies and command economies.

Market Economies: Decision Making by Individuals In a market economy, individual producers and consumers make the decisions. Their interactions guide decisions about what to produce, how to produce it, and how to distribute it. In a pure free-market economy, the government plays little or no role. Producers decide which goods and services to produce and how much to charge for them. Consumers decide what to buy. Prices are set by the market. In economic terms, a market is any place or situation in which people buy and sell goods and services.

The term capitalism is often used to describe a market system. Under capitalism, individual investors, or capitalists, own the means of production, such as farmland or factories. Workers provide labor in exchange for wages or a salary.

In a capitalist economy, like that of the United States, people enjoy many freedoms. They are free to start a business, choose and change jobs, and own private property. Some political scientists believe that free markets and democracy go hand in hand.

One advantage of a market system is its efficiency at meeting people’s needs. Each element of the system responds to the other ele ments. When demand for a product rises, its price in the market goes up. This tells businesses to produce more. Meanwhile, competition among producers of similar goods usually keeps prices from rising too high. Efficiency also leads to economic growth. Businesses invest in factories and equipment, as well as in research and technology, to stay competitive. This helps the economy grow. However, periods of growth and prosperity, or success, in market economies usually alternate with slowdowns in business and employment.

One disadvantage of a market economy is its unequal distribution of wealth. The market divides wealth among people according to how society values what they do. For example, a CEO of a successful company can earn many times more than a regular employee. Society often values the CEO’s contribution more than that of the employee.

Government-Controlled Economies: Decision Making by Government Planners In a government-controlled economy the government decides what to produce, how to produce it, and how to distribute it. This type of system is also known as a command economy. In a pure command economy, the means of production are publicly owned. Government planners decide which goods and services to produce and how. They also determine how goods and services should be distributed to consumers and at what cost.

Government-controlled economies are based on socialism and communism. These theories try to address the inequalities of capitalism by calling for public ownership of factories and farms. They argued that once the public, or the people, owned the means of production, the economy could be operated on such principles as equality and fairness. Karl Marx, the originator of this form of economy, summed up how such an economy would work: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

In theory, a government-controlled economy has some advantages over a market economy. Central planners can ensure full employment by devising enough projects to employ all workers. This ability, along with price controls, can bring economic stability. Also, a governmentcontrolled economy can spread income more equally than a market economy because everyone shares in the nation’s wealth.

In practice, however, the performance of command economies has been disappointing. Because the government controls wages and prices, workers have little incentive to work hard or produce highquality goods. The goods they produce are often inferior to similar goods made in a market economy.

The core problem in a government-controlled economy is that government planners are less efficient at making economic decisions than the market is. By reacting to millions of buyers and sellers, the market provides people with what they want and need better than government officials ever could.

A Market Economy Versus a Government-Controlled Economy

Market Economy

government-controlled economy an economic system that relies mainly on the central government to determine what goods and services to produce and how to produce them; also called a command economy

The aims and effects of market and government-controlled economies differ.

Government-Controlled Economy

The Human Development Index (HDI) ranks countries according to their standard of living. The HDI is based on three factors: average lifespan, years of education, and income per person (gross national income). Is there a relationship between a country’s HDI and economic system? What about between its HDI and political system?

Mixed Economies: Shared Decision Making Pure forms of market and government-controlled economic systems do not exist. They are theoretical extremes. In reality, most countries have a mixed economy that falls between those extremes. A mixed economy blends reliance on market forces with some government involvement in the marketplace. The level of involvement varies between countries.

The United States has historically had a free-market economy. Yet the government plays a vital role in economic affairs. The government protects private property rights and regulates the marketplace to limit unfair business practices. It also provides services and financial support to those in need through social welfare. These policies have helped the United States have a very high standard of living and the highest gross domestic product (GDP) in the world for decades.

In contrast, China has had a government-controlled economy since the Communist Party took control of its government in 1949. Over decades, government control of the economy led to economic stagna tion, or little or no growth. In the late 1970s, the Chinese government moved to a system called market socialism. This system mixes public and private ownership of businesses. It also encourages competition in the marketplace. However, the Communist Party has remained in overall control of the economy.

These changes in economic policy have greatly affected China’s GDP and living standards. From 1960 until the early 2000s, China’s GDP was around 9 or 10 percent that of the United States. In the early

PA

ARCTIC

2000s, China began closing the gap. Today, it has the second largest economy in terms of GDP. During this period, China’s standard of liv ing has likewise increased. However, the change has not been as great. (GDP does not reflect how money is distributed among a population.)

In 1990, the Human Development Index (HDI) ranked China as having medium development. Today, it is ranked as having high development. These economic changes are also reflected in the size of China’s middle class. In 2002, only 4 percent of the population was middle class. By 2018, more than half the population was.

In contrast to the United States and China, other countries openly embrace having a mixed economy. For example, Germany has called its economy a social market economy since the late 1940s. This system aims to balance free-market capitalism, support for fair competition, and social welfare policies. This economic system was the basis for Germany’s recovery after World War II. It is still in place today. Other European countries, such as Sweden and France, have similar systems. In varying ways, they try to balance the interests of the people, busi ness, and the government to maintain economic stability and growth.

All countries in Europe are ranked as having a high or very high HDI. However, the countries that adopted a market economy tend to be ranked higher than those that adopted a government-controlled economy after World War II.

LESSON SUMMARY

Governments have existed since the rise of ancient city-states. Over time, governments have evolved in size, complexity, and form. Even today, who rules and for what purpose varies between countries.

The Origins and Evolution of Government Throughout much of history, strong leaders, such as mon archs, have held all the power. Democracy emerged in Greece in the 400s b.c.e. However, in much of the world, strong leaders continued to hold power. Until the 1700s, most territories were ruled by autocrats.

The Age of Revolutions Revolutions led to new forms of government: a constitutional monarchy in England, a constitutional republic in the United States, and authoritarianism in France. In the 20th century, totalitarian regimes emerged based on political philosophies such as communism, fascism, and Nazism.

Forms of Government in Today’s World Modern governments can be classified according to who holds power. Monarchies and dictatorships ruled by one person are relatively rare. So are theocracies and single-party states in which leaders of a religion or political party run the government. Most governments today are either parliamentary or presidential democracies.

The Distribution of Power in Governments Today In a unitary system, power is centralized at the national level. In a federal system, the national and regional governments share power. In a confederal system, power is decentralized to regional governments.

Economic Systems Around the World In a market economy, producers decide what to produce, how to produce it, and how to distribute it. In a government-controlled economy, the government decides. However, no economic system is purely a market or government-controlled economy. Countries with many features of market economies tend to have higher standards of living.

End-of-Course Prep Guide

Return to the Student Learning Targets at the beginning of this lesson and review the “I can” statements. Use the checklist to decide which key ideas to focus on in this review guide. You can also learn more about these topics online using Reading and Notes, Lesson Games, Slideshows, and Video Activities.

The Advantages of the United States’ Form of Government

Analyze the advantages of the United States’ constitutional republic over other forms of government in safeguarding liberty, freedom and a representative government. (CG.3.1)

Comparing Forms of Government

Form of Government Organizational Structure Scenarios/Examples

republic

The people elect leaders to represent them in government. The leaders then make laws and start programs that their constituents want.

In a direct democracy, all people vote on every law, rather than electing leaders who pass laws on their behalf.

Ancient Rome was a republic for nearly 500 years before it became an empire. The United States and many other nations today are republics.

Advantages of the United States’ Constitutional Republic Over This System

monarchy One person is the ruler. They inherit their power and rule for life. Some countries that were once absolute monarchies now have democratically elected leaders, and the monarch is a figurehead.

oligarchy

A small number of people, who are usually from a few wealthy families, control the government.

Some ancient Greek city-states were direct democracies in which all citizens voted on everything. Switzerland today comes close to a direct democracy, because the citizens vote to approve laws that have been passed by the legislature.

In the past, many countries with kings and queens were monarchies. Today, Saudi Arabia is a monarchy. King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud is the monarch and has absolute power, in contrast to Queen Elizabeth of Great Britain, who is a ceremonial monarch.

China today is essentially an oligarchy. Power is in the hands of a few families who had a leading role in the 1949 Communist victory in the civil war.

theocracy

A small group of religious leaders run the government. The nation has a state religion.

Also known as a dictatorship, an autocracy has a powerful ruler who often comes to power through the military or a rebellion. The government oppresses people’s freedom.

Today, Iran is a theocracy. The Supreme Leader is a religious leader, as is the Council of Guardians, who ensure that their view of Islamic law is followed.

Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic rose to power through the military in the 1920s and was a cruel dictator for 30 years. Benito Mussolini ruled Italy for 21 years.

Getting everyone to vote on everything is tedious and time-consuming. Electing leaders in a republic to represent the people is more efficient.

If the monarch is a bad ruler, the people are stuck with him or her for life. In contrast, the president doesn’t have absolute power and can be voted out of office in four years.

Oligarchies don’t represent all the people and tend to abuse power. In contrast, the president and every member of Congress are elected by a majority of the people.

Theocracies oppress religious freedom and often abuse power. In contrast, the United States separates religion from government to protect both.

Autocracies use violence and intimidation to stay in power. The U.S. government protects the people’s freedom. The military is not used to oppress the American people.

Principles of a Constitutional Government

Principle What Happens in the United States

checks and balances

Branches of government have ways to limit, or “check,” what another branch does. For example, if Congress passes a law that goes against the Constitution, the Supreme Court can strike it down.

What Happens in Authoritarian and Totalitarian Nations

There is no system in place for checks. For example, leaders and legislatures pass any law that they want, and no one can do anything about it.

separation of powers

Each branch of government has specific roles and jobs to do, and they act independently of each other. Congress can’t strike down a Supreme Court decision, for example.

Typically, the judicial branch does what it’s told by the leader or legislature. The leader might also dissolve the legislature at will.

consent of the governed

democracy, represen tative government, and republicanism

federalism, limited government

individual rights

The government is elected by the majority of the people, so laws that are passed are those that most people want.

The people regularly vote and elect leaders. If a leader is disliked, the leader will not win re-election.

Power is carefully divided among national, state, and local governments. The government is limited in its power.

People are guaranteed freedoms by the Bill of Rights, including freedom of speech, religion, assembly, press, and protections for the accused. Citizens can criticize the government without fear.

The government doesn’t consult with the people about anything and does whatever it wants.

The people usually don’t vote. If they do, there is either only one name on the ballot or all the candidates are chosen by the people in power.

Power is concentrated in the national govern ment, which has total control over people’s lives.

Speaking out against the government may result in imprisonment, where they may be killed. The press is controlled by the government, so people do not know what is really going on. Meeting together for many purposes is illegal.

rule of law

Everyone must obey the law, including leaders. Leaders are above the law. They can break any law and nothing happens. They give themselves large paychecks, do not pay taxes, and live lavish lifestyles.

due process of law

There must be sufficient evidence to arrest someone and then charge them with a crime. A person is entitled to a lawyer and a fair trial with a jury of impartial peers.

People can be arrested for no reason and with no evidence. They can be held in prison indefinitely with no trial. Trials are shams in which the judge rules however the government wants.

VIDEOS ONLINE

Sign in to access a Video Activity that explains the main ideas of the text with meaningful visuals.

The Advantages of a Federal System of Government

Explain the advantages of a federal system of government over other systems in balancing local sovereignty with national unity and protecting against authoritarianism. (CG.3.2)

System Description Scenarios/Examples

federal Power is divided between national and regional governments.

In the United States, the national government is in charge of some things (national defense), while the states and the local governments handle other things (schools). Russia, India, and Brazil also have federal systems.

confederal Power is in the regions, which are independent. The national government is mainly responsible for national security and coordina tion of activities between regions.

When the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, many of the nations within it were joined in a confederal system (Commonwealth of Independent States.) Switzerland had a confederal system until 1848, and the Confederate States of America (1861-1865) was a confederal system.

Advantages of a Federal System over This System

unitary Power is concentrated in the national government. Regional governments exist, but they are usually appointed by the national government and carry out national policies.

In France, many regional officials are appointed by the government rather than elected. The central government sets the curriculum that is taught at each grade level rather than individual provinces or states deciding this.

A federal system’s advantage is that with a confederal system, the national government is usually too weak to be very effective. Disputes between regional governments can threaten the existence of the nation.

A federal system’s advantage over a unitary system is that needs may vary from one region of the country to another, and the same thing won’t work in every region. Federalism allows regions to make decisions that are best for their people.

The Advantages of Capitalism and the Free Market

Analyze the advantages of capitalism and the free market in the United States over government-controlled economic systems (e.g., socialism and communism) in regard to economic freedom and raising the standard of living for citizens. (CG.3.15)

Economic System Description Current Examples

capitalism Businesses, factories, and farms are privately owned by investors called capitalists. Based on what consumers buy, producers decide what to make and set the prices. This is also known as a market economy. Individuals have freedom to make choices and can become wealthy.

The United States and many other nations are capitalist. An individual may borrow money to start a coffee shop, for example. They set prices and decide what to sell based on what customers want to buy. They keep the profits and may open another shop if the first shop is successful.

Advantages of Capitalism over This System

communism

Collectively, the people own all businesses, but the government makes the decisions about what is produced and sets the prices. The goal is to spread wealth around equally. People do not always have choices about where to work. People are guaranteed jobs and that their basic needs will be provided by the government.

No country is completely com munist, but North Korea is one of the few that still attempts it. The government plans what and how much will be made in factories and provides the materials.

Unlike capitalism, communism does not allow people freedom of choice in their profession, and there is no reward for creativity or hard work since people cannot earn profits by owning a business. The standard of living in com munist countries is much lower than in capitalist countries since businesses do not thrive.

socialism

Socialism is something in between capitalism and communism.

People still own private property, but businesses are collectively owned by the people and the government plans production. The goal is to distribute income more fairly but not necessarily equally. People are compensated according to how much they contribute.

Like communism, there are probably no countries that have completely adopted socialism. However, many have incorporated elements of socialism, particularly in some European nations where health care and education are provided to everyone. The government does not control all aspects of production, though.

Capitalism gives business owners a greater degree of freedom and opportunity to become wealthy than socialism, where the government is involved in planning and in the distribution of income. Socialist countries require that high taxes be collected to provide services to everyone, which places a cap on wealthy people’s incomes.

Relationship Between Antisemitism and the Holocaust

Examine the Holocaust as the planned and systematic state-sponsored persecution and murder of European Jews by Nazi Germany and its collaborators between 1933 and 1945. (HE.1.1)

Event or Circumstance

Jewish people migrated to Europe in ancient times, both for economic opportunity and because they rebelled against the Romans.

Germany lost World War I in 1918.

Connection to Antisemitism

When Europe became Christian, prejudice against Jews began in Europe due to religious differences.

Many people wanted someone to blame, so the idea circulated that Germany hadn’t really lost, but rather that there were people (Jews and communists) within Germany who betrayed it by working with its enemies.

Germany’s economy suffered greatly after World War I.

People blamed Jews, who were well-represented in the fields of banking and finance. People falsely accused Jews of conspiring to control the world economy.

Adolf Hitler, a charismatic leader, came to power in 1933.

Hitler was fanatically antisemitic. He built his political platform around blaming Jews for most of Germany’s problems, and began referring to the Jewish people themselves as a problem. His "final solution" would turn out to be an attempt to kill every Jewish person in Europe, known as the Holocaust.

Lesson Objectives

• Analyze the influences of ancient Greece, ancient Rome and the Judeo-Christian tradition on America’s constitutional republic. (CG.1.1)

• Trace the principles underlying America’s founding ideas on law and government. (CG.1.2)

• Analyze how Enlightenment ideas, including Montesquieu’s view of separation of powers and John Locke’s theories related to natural law and Locke’s social contract, influenced the Founding. (CG.1.4)

Student Learning Targets

Below are your goals for this lesson. Review them before you start and again at the end of the lesson.

I can explain the influence of ancient Greece on America’s constitutional republic (e.g., civic participation, legislative bodies, polis, voting rights, written constitution). (CG.1.1)

I can explain the influence of ancient Rome on America’s constitutional republic (e.g., civic participation, republicanism, representative government, rule of law, separation of powers). (CG.1.1)

I can compare and contrast the democratic principles of ancient Greece and ancient Rome with those of the United States. (CG.1.1)

I can explain how the Judeo-Christian ethical ideas of justice, individual worth, personal responsibility, and the rule of law influenced America’s constitutional republic. (CG.1.1)

I can recognize principles contained in the founding documents (e.g., due process of law, equality of mankind, limited government, natural rights, the rule of law). (CG.1.2)

I can explain why religious liberty is a protected right. (CG.1.2)

I can identify and describe the Enlightenment ideas of separation of powers, natural law, and social contract. (CG.1.4)

I can examine how Enlightenment ideas influenced the Founders’ beliefs about individual liberties and government. (CG.1.4)

I can evaluate the influence of Montesquieu’s and Locke’s ideas on the Founding Fathers. (CG.1.4)

Lesson Vocabulary

• limited government - a political system in which government powers are restricted, usually by a written constitution

• natural law - a universal set of moral principles believed to come from humans’ basic sense of right and wrong; can be applied to any culture or system of justice

• natural rights - the rights and liberties that all people have by virtue of being human; sometimes called individual rights or human rights

• popular sovereignty - the principle that the people are the ultimate source of the author ity and legitimacy of a government

• representative government - a political system in which elected leaders exercise power and work in the interests of the people

• separation of powers - the idea that government powers should be split between two or more strongly independent branches to prevent any one person or group from gaining too much power

Academic Vocabulary

• monotheism - the belief that there is only one god

• polis - an ancient Greek city-state that usually included a city and surrounding areas

• social contract - an agreement in which people give power to a government in exchange for protections

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ONLINE

The Roots of American Government

Introduction

Cincinnatus was a renowned general who retired to a small farm outside of Rome in the fifth century b.c.e. According to legend, after he retired, Cincinnatus was twice named dictator of Rome and served briefly each time to defend the Roman Republic. After each victory, he stepped away from power to return to his farm. He was praised for his humility and civic virtue—that is, his self-sacrifice for the good of the republic.

Cincinnatus’s commitment to public service is said to have inspired the actions of later leaders such as George Washington. Like the Roman general, Washington was called out of retirement to lead the army—in his case, the Continental army in the American Revolution. He did this not for power or prestige but because he viewed it as a duty. In a letter to his wife Martha, he explained, “It was utterly out of my power to refuse this appointment without exposing my Character to such censures as would have reflected dishonour upon myself. . .”

Washington led the army to victory over the British, but he did not seek to use his newfound power. Like Cincinnatus, he resigned from the military and returned home to oversee his property. Washington’s decision only made him more respectable and admired by the nation. This eventually led to him being offered another role he could not refuse —the first president of the United States. After serving two terms, he again stepped away from power rather than ruling for life.

The parallels between Cincinnatus and Washington are not entirely accidental. The political philosophies of ancient Greece and Rome were well known in the period before the American Revolution. Colonial thinkers viewed the writers and figures from these eras as heroes.

Greek and Roman works colored how some of the founders of the United States viewed the world. This influence extended to how they approached the creation of the United States. Works about Greek democracy and Roman republicanism ultimately gave the founders the language to describe the government they wanted.

According to legend, retired general Cincinnatus (right) was called out of retirement to serve as dictator of the Roman Republic.

Social Studies Vocabulary limited government natural law natural rights popular sovereignty representative government separation of powers

What ideas influenced the creation of the world’s first modern democratic nation?

Colonial thinkers were strongly influenced by many ideas throughout history, illustrated by this timeline. These ideas formed the foundation of the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

1. The Religious Roots of Colonial Ideas About Government

Some colonial influences predate ancient Greece and Rome. Colonial thinkers were strongly influenced by ideas from Judaism, as well as later Judeo-Christian principles.

Judaism and Ethics Judaism is one of the world’s oldest monotheistic religions. Monotheism is the belief there is only one god. Judaism teaches that God is the source of morality, or standards of right and wrong. The Torah, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, instructs Jews how to lead moral lives. For example, Jews are taught to “love your neighbor as yourself.”

Among Judaism’s oldest and best-known laws and teachings are the Ten Commandments. The commandments explain how to lead an upright and honorable life. They also lay down standards of right and wrong, such as “You shall not steal” and “You shall not murder.” These are part of the ethics, or moral values of right and wrong, that are essential to Judaism. Two values that are important to these ethics are equality and justice, which have influenced many societies.

In line with these beliefs, ancient Jews did not view their leaders as gods. They believed in only one god, and even kings had to obey God’s laws and teachings, like a religious rule of law. Related to this, the Hebrew Bible also highlights personal responsibility. Biblical stories describe punishments for people who went against God.

Judaism also teaches that God considers all people equal. Each person has fundamental worth and dignity, or individual worth. However, few ancient civilizations embraced this belief.

Belief in equality goes hand in hand with a concern for justice. Many stories and sayings in the Hebrew Bible teach about treating everyone fairly. For example, one passage says, “You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor.” Caring for less fortunate people in society is a basic value in Judaism.

Foundational Concepts of American Democracy

Judeo-Christian Influences

Most of the founders of the United States were Protestant Christians who were familiar with the Bible. They often used language, themes, and principles from the Bible in their written and spoken works. They also considered its insights into human nature and authority, which were important for creating a new political system. The founders’ familiarity extended to both Christian and Jewish teachings. The Hebrew Bible is the Old Testament in the Christian Bible.

Judeo-Christian influences can be found in colonial thinkers’ views of justice, for example. Their views were rooted in ancient Judaism. They stressed that people should seek to create a just society based on respect for the law. The rule of law and personal responsibil ity are fundamental to this. Additionally, ideas about equality and individual worth were included in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. However, colonists were limited in their think ing about an equal society. Their ideals applied mostly to White men and rarely to Black people, Indigenous people, or women.

Colonial thinkers were also influenced by natural law. This is the belief that beyond human laws, there is a universal set of moral rules that can be applied to any culture or system of justice. This idea has influenced Jewish, Greek, Roman, and Christian thinkers. According to the Christian philosopher Thomas Aquinas, people could discover these natural laws by using both their mind and their sense of right and wrong. A human law that violated natural law, many colonists believed, was unjust and should be changed.

The creators of the Declaration of Independence used natural law to explain why the 13 colonies needed to rebel against the British. The Declaration states that “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle” the colonies to a “separate and equal station.” In other words, natural law empowered the colonists to separate from the oppressive rule of the British government.

natural law a universal set of moral principles believed to come from humans’ basic sense of right and wrong; can be applied to any culture or system of justice

representative government a political system in which elected leaders exercise power and work in the interests of the people

2. The Classical Roots of Colonial Ideas About Government

For nearly 2,000 years before the founding of the United States, the world had been ruled by monarchs. People were expected to be obedient to and honor their leaders. This would change with the founding of the United States.

The political systems of ancient Greece and Rome influenced the creation of the United States and its government. In particular, Greek democracy and Roman republicanism inspired the founders.

Democracy and Representative Government Colonial leaders specifically looked to the ancient Greek city-state of Athens for ideas about self-government. From there came the tradition of direct democ racy, or decision making by all citizens. In Athens, this meant that all public decisions were made directly by citizens. They either voted by ballot or met in an assembly, like a legislative body.

In a direct democracy, citizens cast votes to make public decisions. It originated in ancient Greece and was later adopted by towns in colonial New England. Although state and federal governments are representative governments, direct democracy continues to be used in some towns. At this meeting in Calais, Vermont, citizens vote on a school board issue.

Some parts of the colonies adopted this system before the revolution. Direct democracy took root in New England’s town meetings. Even today, citizens gather to discuss and solve their local problems. However, for the national government, the founders combined democracy with republicanism, or representative government, from the Roman Republic. This refers to a government in which leaders are elected by citizens to make decisions and exercise power. These leaders are chosen to represent the interests of voters.

In these ancient civilizations, the number of citizens who could vote was limited. Although Athenian and Roman women were citizens, only adult males could vote. Women and people who were enslaved were not granted the right to vote.

In Rome, at first, only men in the wealthy patrician class could vote. Patricians held all the power until the plebeians, who made up 95 percent of the population, revolted and demanded the right to vote. Voting rights were given to plebeian men. However, it took around 200 years for plebeians to gain political equality with the patricians.

Similar voting restrictions existed in the early United States. Laws varied, but voting was limited primarily to White male landowners. It was not until the 19th century that voting rights began to expand to men who were not landowners and later Black men. Women and most Indigenous people did not gain the right to vote until the 1920s.

Today, in the United States, all citizens age 18 and older are able to vote. This is one way in which people in the United States—like those in ancient Athens and Rome—can engage in civic participation.

Constitutions and the Rule of Law The founders also took inspiration from Athens and Rome in writing the U.S. Constitution. Like the U.S. Constitution, the Athenian and Roman constitutions contained a set of laws that ruled how government operated.

The Constitution of the Athenians was compiled by Aristotle or one of his students. It describes the political system of Athens and shares many features with the U.S. Constitution. Both constitutions provide for judicial review and the right to a trial by jury. The Constitution of the Athenians also established the concept of one person, one vote, which was adopted by the United States.

In contrast to these constitutions, the constitution of the Roman Republic was not written. Rather, it was a combination of written laws and legal norms and customs. However, it otherwise has some of the same features as the U.S. and Athenian constitutions. One of its major innovations, however, was the separation of powers

The Constitution of the Athenians was compiled by Aristotle or one of his students. Some of the papyrus scrolls survived and are in the collection of the British Library.

separation of powers the idea that government powers should be split between two or more strongly independent branches to prevent any one person or group from gaining too much power

To ensure the rule of law in the Roman Republic, plebeians demanded that all laws be written. This prevented the patricians from changing the law without an announcement. All new laws were published on the Twelve Tables.

The significance of this development was proposed in an analysis of Roman government by Polybius, a Greek historian in Rome. The branches in ancient Rome were not the executive, legislative, and judicial, as in the United States. However, like the branches of the U.S. government, each Roman branch had its own purpose, duties, and responsibilities. Polybius observed that each could check the power of the others. This limited any one branch of Roman government from gaining too much power over the others.

Additionally, the Roman Republic established the rule of law. The rule of law is a fundamental principle of the U.S. Constitution. In Rome, it became law as part of the plebeian fight for political equality. The plebeians demanded that all laws be written so that the patricians could not simply change them. All laws were then published on tablets called the Twelve Tables.

The Greek Polis In ancient Greece, a polis was a city-state. Each was an independent region that developed around a city, such as Athens. The cities became commercial centers, and the surrounding territories provided resources. City-states emerged as regions with their own culture and identity. Poleis—the plural of polis—were ruled by bodies of citizens, and the government collected taxes.

In some ways, the federal system of government in the United States treats states like city-states. States have a fair degree of independence in how they operate, enact laws, and collect taxes. However, the United States, unlike ancient Greece, is a single entity. States must abide by federal, or national, law. No single government united the city-states of ancient Greece.

3. The Influence of English Enlightenment Thinkers

Colonial leaders were also strongly influenced by the ideas of the Enlightenment, an intellectual movement of the 1600s and 1700s. Enlightenment thinkers stressed the value of science and reason for studying the natural world and improving society and government.

Two key figures of the early Enlightenment were the English phi losophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Both men helped develop the social-contract theory. According to this theory, people in society agree to give up some of their freedom to governments in exchange for security and order.

Hobbes first introduced the idea that government was the result of a contract between people and their rulers. In his book Leviathan, published in 1651, Hobbes theorized that people entered into an agree ment known as the social contract. This contract obliged the people to give up some of their freedom by agreeing to obey a ruler. In exchange for this obedience, the ruler agreed to bring peace and order to society. Hobbes’s social-contract theory laid the groundwork for the idea that government was formed by the consent of the people.

Locke took the idea of a social contract a step further in his Second Treatise, published in 1689. In it, Locke argued that in the state of nature, all people were equal and enjoyed certain natural rights. These are rights that all people have by virtue of being human. These rights include the right to life itself, liberty, and the ownership of property.

Locke agreed with Hobbes that it was in people’s self-interest to enter into a social contract that exchanged some of their freedom for the protection of government. However, Locke went on to argue that this social contract came with conditions. If a ruler failed to protect the life, liberty, and property of the people governed, then the people had a right to overthrow that ruler and establish a new government.

The founders viewed these rights as so fundamental that they included them in the Declaration of Independence.

.

. . all men . . . are endowed by their Creator with certain unalien able Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, . . .

Variations on the Social Contract

John Locke

natural rights the rights and liberties that all people have by virtue of being human; sometimes called individual rights or human rights

Ideas about the social contract existed in ancient Greece and Rome. These ideas reemerged in the 17th and 18th centuries and were embraced by American colonists.

The social contract requires people agree to give up some of their freedom and obey a ruler. In exchange for this obedience, the ruler agrees to bring peace and order to society.

The social contract comes with conditions. If a ruler fails to protect the life, liber ty, and property of the people governed, then the people have a right to overthrow that ruler and establish a new government.

Thomas Hobbes

limited government a political system in which government powers are restricted, usually by a written constitution

Furthermore, because Locke believed all people were equal, he supported the rule of law. He argued that rulers should govern by established laws and that the laws should apply to them. To support natural rights and the rule of law, limited government was necessary.

The idea that the purpose of government was to protect the rights of the people exerted a powerful influence on colonial thinkers. Eventually, this idea would be used to help justify the American Revolution.

Natural Rights and Religious Liberty Many Europeans came to the American colonies to escape religious persecution. However, most colonies set up a government-sponsored church and required people to attend services. People who practiced a different faith could be punished by being fined, jailed, whipped, or even killed.

As more colonists arrived, the variety of religious faiths grew. This made it harder to impose a single faith on a colony. Also, the spread of Enlightenment beliefs led people to question government-sponsored religion. Leading thinkers, such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, believed that people had a natural right to equality. This meant that no religion or church should be favored over any other. To favor one religion, they argued, would deny equal rights to all and limit religious liberty.

To ensure this freedom, Jefferson believed there should be a separa tion between church and state. As governor of Virginia, he proposed a bill to make religious freedom state law. In 1786, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom became law. It states,

.

. . no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship . . . nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, . . . their opinions in matters of Religion, and that the same shall in no wise . . . affect their civil capacities.

Later, Madison highlighted the importance of religious liberty and the separation of church and state in the Bill of Rights. In fact, the First Amendment begins, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”

The Pilgrims fled England in search of religious liberty. In Plymouth Colony, they were able to freely practice their Calvinist religion.

The Influence of French Enlightenment Thinkers

Two French thinkers also made major contribu tions to political thought during the Enlightenment. One was Charles-Louis de Secondat, more com monly known as Baron de Montesquieu. The other was Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Montesquieu is most famous for his book The Spirit of the Laws, published in 1748. In this book, he argued that governments should be organized in a way that prevents any one person or group from dominating or oppressing others. He wrote,

To prevent this abuse [of power], it is necessary from the very nature of things that power should be a check to power. A government may be so constituted, as no man shall be compelled to do things to which the law does not oblige him, nor forced to abstain from things which the law permits.

—Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws

This argument led him to propose a threebranch system of government—executive, legislative, and judicial. Each branch would have separate and independent functions and duties and would act to limit the power of the other branches. American colonists admired the principle of separation of powers. They applied it to colonial governments. Later, this principle was written into the Constitution to establish the structure of the U.S. government. However, the Constitution does not mention separation of powers. Rather, each branch’s functions and duties are outlined in separate articles of the Constitution: the legislative branch in Article 1, the executive branch in Article 2, and the judicial branch in Article 3. Montesquieu also discussed his views on the judicial system. He described elements that would ultimately be included in the Constitution, such as the right to a fair trial, the presumption of inno cence, and the jury system. However, he did not use familiar terms. For example, he never refers to “due process,” but wrote,

But in moderate governments, where the life of the meanest subject is deemed precious, no man is stripped of his honour or property until after a long inquiry; and no man is bereft of life till his very country has attacked him—an attack that is never made without leaving him all possible means of making his defence.

—Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws

Baron de Montesquieu’s The Spirit of the Laws influenced the structure of governments in the American colonies. Colonial governments applied his principle of separation of powers. After independence, the founders likewise used his ideas in developing the structure of government, as outlined in the Constitution.

Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) was an English philosopher who developed the idea of a social contract between rulers and their subjects. He thought that people were too selfish to govern themselves and needed the protection of a strong ruler. He wrote, “All mankind [has] a perpetual and restless desire of power . . . that ceaseth only in death.”

John Locke (1632–1704) was an English political theorist and philosopher whose ideas helped lay the foundations for democratic government. Unlike Hobbes, Locke believed that people formed governments to protect their rights, not to save them from themselves. “The end [purpose] of law is not to abolish or restrain,” he wrote, “but to preserve and enlarge freedom.”

Baron de Montesquieu (1689–1755) was a French aristocrat and political philosopher. He believed that democracy was the best form of government. But he said that power must be divided among different groups for democracy to work. “When the [lawmaking] and [law enforcement] powers are united in the same person,” he wrote, “there can be no liberty.”

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), a French philosopher, believed that people were naturally good but were corrupted and enslaved by society. “Man is born free,” he observed, but “everywhere he is in chains.” Rousseau said that governments had a duty to ensure freedom for their people. If they did not, they had no right to exist. “Force does not create right,” he wrote. “Obedience is due only to legitimate powers.”

Rousseau was a Swiss-born philosopher who spent much of his life in France. In his book The Social Contract, he expanded on the concept of a social contract. He proposed that a government formed by a social contract must be based on popular sovereignty, or the general will of the people. Rousseau’s ideas about the general will are reflected at the beginning of the U.S. Constitution: “We the people . . .”

Rousseau further argued that if a government acted against the general will, it had broken the social contract and should be dissolved. Many colonial leaders agreed with Rousseau that government should be based on the will of the people. This is expressed in the Declaration of Independence.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, . . . evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.—Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

The Declaration also highlights the role of consent. It begins, “The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America . . .”

LESSON SUMMARY

In The Social Contract, Rousseau proposed that social contracts must be based on popular sovereignty. This image shows the first page of the book’s 1762 first edition.

popular sovereignty the principle that the people are the ultimate source of the authority and legitimacy of a government

The United States was founded on a set of ideas and principles developed over many centuries. Those ideas helped give rise to a system of representative government based on the rule of law and a respect for individual rights and liberties.

The Religious Roots of Colonial Ideas About Government Colonial thinkers were influenced by Judeo-Christian principles. The founders used religious ideas about the rule of law, justice, personal responsibility, and natural law in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The Classical Roots of Colonial Ideas About Government The political systems of ancient Greece and Rome inspired colonial thinkers to reintroduce democracy, a type of government that had not been used in almost 2,000 years.

The Influence of English Enlightenment Thinkers Two key English philosophers who influenced colonial thinkers were Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Both helped develop social-contract theory—the idea that people give up some freedom for the safety and order brought by a ruler and government. Locke, however, argued that if the ruler failed to protect the people’s life, liberty, and property, the people had a right to overthrow that ruler and establish a new government.

The Influence of French Enlightenment Thinkers Colonial thinkers were influenced by French philosophers, particularly Baron de Montesquieu and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Montesquieu believed governments should have a separation of powers to limit the ability of one group or person to dominate others. Rousseau argued that governments formed by a social contract must be based on popular sovereignty.

End-of-Course Prep Guide

Return to the Student Learning Targets at the beginning of this lesson and review the “I can” statements. Use the checklist to decide which key ideas to focus on in this review guide. You can also learn more about these topics online using Reading and Notes, Lesson Games, Slideshows, and Video Activities.

Ancient Influences on America’s Constitutional Republic

Analyze the influences of ancient Greece, ancient Rome and the Judeo-Christian tradition on America’s constitutional republic. (CG.1.1)

Ancient Influence Description

Ancient Greece

• civic participation

• legislative bodies

• polis

• voting rights

• written constitution

Ancient Greece was organized into citystates called poleis. Each had its own government ruled by groups of citizens, and some, such as Athens, were direct democracies. Men (but not women or people who were enslaved) participated in political debates and voted. Athens had the first written constitution in which laws were collected and recorded.

Compare/Contrast to United States

Colonies in America were based on town meetings and group participation. The United States was also founded with a written constitution, but people do not vote directly on every issue like in Athens. Athens did inspire the idea of one person, one vote, however. In the beginning, the United States also allowed only free men to vote, but this later changed.

Ancient Rome

• civic participation

• republicanism

• representative government

• rule of law

• separation of powers

Before Rome became an empire, it also had a great deal of civic participation in government. Rome was a republic, where people nominated others to represent them. Government was divided into different councils that represented different groups. Laws were written down on the Twelve Tables and everyone had to follow them. Rome also had a constitution.

The United States borrowed many ideas from ancient Rome, especially the idea of representative government. The U.S. Senate is named after the Roman Senate. Rome’s branches of government helped inspire the different branches of U.S. government and the concept of separation of powers. The rule of law also came from Rome.

Judeo-Christian Ethics

• justice

• individual worth

• personal responsibility

• rule of law

The ancient Hebrews (Jews) believed that all humans were created in God’s image and therefore had worth. They lived by laws that were written in their holy scriptures requiring that everyone live a moral life. They believed that God requires justice when people break laws. The Bible states that the law of God is written on people’s hearts, meaning that they are born knowing right from wrong.

Judaism became the foundation of Christianity, which spread across Europe. The framers were raised in and influenced by these traditions, which gave them basic beliefs in equality and dignity of all people, natural laws, and individual responsibility to obey laws.

. . . So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them . . .

Genesis 1:27

Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature what the law requires . . . So they show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts either accusing or defending them . . .

Romans 2:14-15

GOVERNMENT

Principles Underlying American Government

Trace the principles underlying America’s founding ideas on law and government. (CG.1.2)

Principle Meaning Place in Founding Documents

due process of law

equality of mankind

The government must follow correct legal proce dures when someone is accused of a crime.

All people are born equal.

limited government Government should be structured in such a way that it cannot become too powerful.

The Fifth Amendment (and later, the Fourteenth) No person shall . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law . . .

The Declaration of Independence We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal . . .

The Declaration of Independence Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government . . .

The separation of powers in Articles I, II, and III of the Constitution

Tenth Amendment (reserves power for the states)

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people . . .

natural rights People are born with certain rights, just because they are human. These include life, liberty, and the right to own property.

the rule of law

religious liberty

Everyone, including leaders, must obey the law. No one is above the law.

The framers believed that equality for all people meant that all religions must be treated equally, too, and no one religion could be favored. Through out European history, various religious groups had oppressed others and denied them freedom. Therefore, people must be guaranteed the freedom to practice any religion.

Declaration of Independence that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Constitution, Article VI This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States . . . shall be the Supreme Law of the Land . . .

First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .

VIDEOS ONLINE

Sign in to access a Video Activity that explains the main ideas of the text with meaningful visuals.

The Influence of Enlightenment Ideas

Analyze how Enlightenment ideas, including Montesquieu’s view of separation of powers and John Locke’s theories related to natural law and Locke’s social contract, influenced the Founding. (CG.1.4)

Enlightenment - The Enlightenment was an intellectual movement in Europe in the 1600s and 1700s. Enlightenment thinkers shifted the focus from religion to science and reason for studying the natural world. They wanted to apply these ideas to improve government.

John Locke Baron Montesquieu

John Locke (1632–1704) was an English political thinker who wrote Two Treatises of Government, which became the foundational ideas of democratic government.

Natural law - Locke said that there were natural laws that everyone understood without them being written down, an inborn sense of right and wrong. He said that in a state of nature, everyone was equal and entitled to basic rights: life, liberty, and property.

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.

Social contract - Social contract theory is the idea that people enter into a contract with their government. They agree to give up some freedom to the government in exchange for the security and order that government provides. However, if the government did not protect people’s life, liberty, and property, then the people should establish a new government.

The end [purpose] of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom.

Baron de Montesquieu (1689–1755) was a French Enlightenment thinker who wrote a book called The Spirit of the Laws

Separation of powers - Montesquieu said that governments needed to be constructed so that no part of the government could dominate or control another. He said that there should be three branches, the execu tive, legislative, and judicial. Each branch would have its own duties and could limit the powers of the others.

When the [lawmaking] and [law enforcement] powers are united in the same person, there can be no liberty.

Influence on Founding Fathers - Natural law and social contract theory are referred to in the introduction to the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jef ferson referred to the Creator who gave people certain rights, and said that Great Britain had violated them, so it was the colonists’ right to form a new government.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government . . .

Influence on Founding Fathers - This idea became the basic structure of the United States’ government. Articles I, II, and III of the Constitution divide the government into the legislative (Congress), executive, and judicial branches.

Lesson Objectives

• Trace the impact that the Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, English Bill of Rights, and Thomas Paine’s Common Sense had on colonists’ views of government. (CG.1.3)

• Describe how British policies and responses to colonial concerns led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence. (CG.1.5)

• Analyze the ideas and grievances set forth in the Declaration of Independence. (CG.1.6)

Student Learning Targets

Below are your goals for this lesson. Review them before you start and again at the end of the lesson.

I can identify the important ideas contained in the Magna Carta (e.g., due process of law, limitation of government power, right to justice, right to fair trial), Mayflower Compact (e.g., consent of the governed, self-government), English Bill of Rights (e.g., right to life, liberty, and property; no taxation without representation; right to a speedy and fair jury trial; no excessive punishments; habeas corpus) and Common Sense (representative selfgovernment). (CG.1.3)

I can trace the causal relationships between British policies, British responses to colonial grievances, and the writing of the Declaration of Independence (e.g., Stamp Act, Quartering Act, Declaratory Act, Townshend Acts, Tea Act, Intolerable Acts). (CG.1.5)

I can recognize the underlying themes of British colonial policies concerning taxation, representation, and individual rights that formed the basis of the American colonists’ desire for independence. (CG.1.5)

I can identify the unalienable rights specifically expressed in the Preamble of the Declara tion of Independence (e.g., life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). (CG.1.6)

I can explain the concept of natural rights as expressed in the Declaration of Independence. (CG.1.6)

I can recognize natural rights, social contract, limited government, and the right of resis tance to tyrannical government. (CG.1.6)

I can analyze the relationship between natural rights and the role of government: 1. People are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; 2. Governments are instituted among men to secure these rights; 3. Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed; and 4. Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and to institute new govern ment. (CG.1.6)

I can recognize the connection between specific grievances in the Declaration of Indepen dence and natural rights violations. (CG.1.6)

I can recognize colonial grievances identified in the Declaration of Independence (e.g., imposing taxes without the consent of the people, suspending trial by jury, limiting judicial powers, quartering soldiers, dissolving legislatures). (CG.1.6)

Lesson Vocabulary

• grievance - a cause of hardship that serves as a rightful reason to resist or complain; a complaint

• habeas corpus - the right of accused persons to be brought before a judge to hear the charges against them

• individual rights - the rights and liberties that all people have by virtue of being human; sometimes called natural rights or human rights

• representation - having a say in government

• self-government - a government of a state, community, or other body controlled by its members

Academic Vocabulary

• assent - approval

• boycott - a refusal to buy goods from or conduct business with a person, organization, or country as a form of protest

• charter - a written grant of authority

• compact - a written agreement between two or more parties or nations to perform some action

• Declaratory Act - a 1766 law passed by the British Parliament that confirmed British lawmaking power and authority over the colonies; officially called the American Colonies Act 1766

• Intolerable Acts - our laws passed by the British Parliament in 1774 to punish the American colonies; also called the Coercive Acts. The laws are the Boston Port Act, the Massachusetts Government Act, the Administration of Justice Act, and the Quartering Act.

• limited monarchy - a system of government in which the monarch’s powers are limited, usually by a written constitution

• Quartering Act - laws passed by the British Parliament in 1765 and 1774 that required colonies to provide quarters (housing) and food for British soldiers. The 1774 act was one of the Intolerable Acts.

• self-evident - evident from understanding and without proof

• Stamp Act - a 1765 law passed by the British Parliament that taxed every piece of paper sold in the American colonies. Colonists had to buy a stamp to place on each piece of paper.

• taxation - the act of imposing and collecting taxes

• Tea Act - a 1773 law passed by the British Parliament that taxed imported British tea in the American colonies

• Townshend Acts - a group of laws passed by the British Parliament in 1767 and 1768 to tax and punish the American colonies. The acts include the New York Restraining Act of 1767, the Revenue Act of 1767, the Indemnity Act of 1767, the Commissioners of Customs Act of 1767, and the Vice-Admiralty Court Act of 1768.

• tyranny - unjust government

• unalienable rights - rights that all people have by virtue of being human and that cannot be taken away

Lesson 4 Moving Toward Independence

Introduction

On July 4, 1976, Americans celebrated their nation’s 200th birthday. Two centuries earlier, in 1776, the United States of America first began with the signing of the Declaration of Independence. No one had been more pleased than John Adams, who had worked tirelessly for indepen dence. The anniversary of this first Independence Day would, he hoped, . . . be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward forevermore.

In 1976, President Gerald Ford marked the bicentennial. He gave a speech in Philadelphia, where the Declaration was signed. “The American adventure is a continuing process,” he said. “As one mile stone is passed, another is sighted. . . . As we begin our third century, there is still so much to be done.” Two hundred years later, just as John Adams had hoped, the day was celebrated with magnificent fireworks displays that lit the skies across the nation.

Eleven years later, on September 17, 1987, Americans celebrated another bicentennial. This time they celebrated the signing of the U.S. Constitution. In Philadelphia, where the Constitution had been written during a long hot summer, a quarter million people turned out for the celebration.

These two bicentennial events reminded Americans that they live in a country that is held together not by blood or history, but by ideas. Those ideas, first put forth in the Declaration and then given shape in the Constitution, were not all new. In fact, some ideas had their roots in English government. But never before had anyone tried to build a new nation on something so powerful as ideas.

Social Studies Vocabulary grievance habeas corpus individual rights representation self-government

Americans gather around Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to celebrate the bicentennial in 1976.

What events led to the colonies declaring independence?

The Magna Carta put forth the idea that the power of the monarch was limited. Here, we see a depiction of King John assenting to the Magna Carta at Runnymede in 1215.

1. The English Roots of American Government

The traditions and ideas of English government greatly influenced political views in the colonies. Britain’s constitutional system was based on a set of laws, customs, and practices. This system limited government powers and guaranteed the people certain basic rights. Although they eventually rebelled against British rule, colonists respected this system. In fact, one reason the colonists rebelled was to secure the “rights of Englishmen” that they had been denied. This tradition of English rights was based on three key documents: the Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, and the English Bill of Rights.

In 1215, King John gave his assent to the first—the Magna Carta, or “Great Charter.” A charter is a written grant of authority. The Magna Carta defined the rights and duties of English nobles. It also set limits on the monarch’s power. For example, the charter stated that the monarch could not make special demands for money from nobles without their consent. In time, this section was used to support the idea that a monarch could not demand a tax without Parliament’s consent. This helped create a limited monarchy in Great Britain, and the monarch and Parliament eventually came to share power.

In addition, the Magna Carta established the idea of the rule of law. This idea held that government is based on clear and fairly enforced laws and that no one is above the law. It made it clear that all people, including the monarch, had to follow the rule of law.

Furthermore, the Magna Carta included early versions of laws related to due process, the right to justice, the right to a jury trial, and the right to a fair trial. Only four of the Magna Carta’s 63 clauses remain part of English law today. Two of these—clauses 39 and 40—relate to these protections:

39. No free man shall be seized, imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, exiled or ruined in any way, nor in any way proceeded against, except by the lawful judgement of his peers and the law of the land.

40. To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice.

Over the next few centuries, English monarchs often ignored or defied the ideas set down in the Magna Carta. Royal taxation and abuse of power created ongoing struggles with Parliament. In 1628, Parliament tried to limit the power of King Charles I. It passed a law called the Petition of Right. This second key document banned random arrests and the housing of troops in private homes without the owners’ consent.

The Petition of Right emphasized the principle of limited govern ment by affirming that the king’s power was not absolute. It also more firmly established the idea of a limited monarchy that was first set forth in the Magna Carta.

The third key document, the English Bill of Rights, was passed by Parliament in 1689. At the time, Britain was just ending years of political trouble and civil war. Parliament offered the throne to a new king and queen, William and Mary of Orange. (William, a Dutch prince by birth, and Mary were the grandchildren of Charles I of England.) Before taking the throne, they accepted a Declaration of Rights, which later became the Bill of Rights. When Parliament passed the declaration as a bill, William and Mary assented.

The English Bill of Rights reaffirmed the principle of individual rights, particularly the right to life, liberty, and property. These had previously been established in the Magna Carta and the Petition of Right. The English Bill of Rights also reaffirmed and clarified the right to trial by jury. It addressed taxation without representation by requiring Parliament to approve new taxes. Moreover, it bolstered support for previously passed acts of Parliament, such as the Habeas Corpus Act 1679. Habeas corpus is the right of accused persons to be brought before a judge to hear the charges against them. This aims to stop unlawful imprisonment.

Additionally, the English Bill of Rights guaranteed new rights including the right to bear arms. It also provided freedom from exces sive fines and bail and from cruel and unusual punishments. Another provision required that elections be held without royal interference. The English Bill of Rights established the power of Parliament over the monarchy.

habeas corpus the right of accused persons to be brought before a judge to hear the charges against them

individual rights the rights and liberties that all people have by virtue of being human; sometimes called natural rights or human rights

William and Mary of Orange became William III and Mary II of England in 1689. After they took the throne, they gave their assent to the English Bill of Rights.

self-government a government of a state, community, or other body controlled by its members

2. Colonial Experiences with Self-Government

Most of the 13 colonies were established under royal charters from the king. These charters gave ultimate power to the king and his appointed officials. But because the colonies were so far from Britain, the charters gave them a large amount of local control.

In several colonies, the colonists changed their royal charters or added other agreements. One example of an early agreement was the Mayflower Compact. This historic document was named after the Mayflower, the small ship that brought English colonists to Massachusetts in 1620.

Before the Mayflower ’s passengers landed, they drew up a compact, or agreement, for the governing of the new colony. In this compact, they agreed to live in a “Civil Body Politic.” In other words, the passengers consented to be governed. They also agreed to obey “just and equal Laws” enacted by representatives of their choosing “for the general good of the Colony.” This was the first written framework for self-government in the American colonies.

New England colonists soon developed their own form of local government. They used a version of direct democracy known as the town meeting. At these town meetings, residents could discuss issues and make decisions that affected their entire community.

Later, in 1641, colonists in Massachusetts created New England’s first code of laws, called the Massachusetts Body of Liberties. This code followed the tradition of English government. It guaranteed certain basic rights to the colonists.

By the early 1700s, most colonies had developed a governing structure of executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The executive was a governor, usually appointed by the king. Royal governors had substantial power, although that power could be partly limited by colonial legislatures.

At colonial town meetings like this one, women were allowed to be present but could not participate.

The legislatures typically consisted of two houses. The upper house was a council appointed by the governor. The lower house was an elected assembly with members chosen by voters in the colony.

The first elected assembly in the colonies was Virginia’s House of Burgesses, established in 1619. Later, the other colonies formed elected assemblies. Like Parliament, these assemblies held the “power of the purse”—the power to approve new taxes or spending—which meant they could exercise some control over the governor.

The colonial assemblies were hardly models of democracy. In most cases, only White male landowners were allowed to vote. Nevertheless, the assemblies reflected a belief in self-government. They also affirmed the principle that the colonists could not be taxed except by their elected representatives. Over time, the assemblies would play an increasingly important role in colonial government.

3. From Ideas to Independence

Many sources and traditions influenced colonists’ ideas about government. However, colonial governments were ultimately controlled by the king, limiting colonists’ ability to affect government decisions. The colonies would need to gain independence before colonists could establish a new type of government.

From “Benign Neglect” to Armed Rebellion By the mid-1700s, the colonies largely managed themselves. Although Britain provided defense and a market for colonial products, it rarely interfered with the day-to-day business of government.

In the 1760s, however, Britain reversed this policy of “benign neglect” by enforcing taxes and restrictions on the colonies. This change occurred after the French and Indian War. During the war, Britain fought France and its Indigenous allies in North America. It was part of the Seven Years’ War, a global fight between Great Britain and France over land and power.

Britain won the French and Indian War in 1763 and gained control of Canada and the Ohio Valley. To defend its new territory, Britain sent more troops to the colonies. There had never been a standing army in the colonies before. Many questioned why this was needed when the French had been defeated, and colonial assemblies refused to pay to house the soldiers. British military leaders then sought help from Parliament. In 1765, it responded by passing the Quartering Act. As needed, colonial legislatures would have to provide housing for soldiers in places such as inns, stables, and pubs. The act also required colonial authorities to pay for soldiers’ housing and food. (The act did not require colonists to have British soldiers live with them in their homes.)

Additionally, to pay for the increased costs of defense, Parliament enacted the Stamp Act in 1765. This law required colonists to buy stamps to place on every piece of paper sold in the colonies. This angered the colonists. In their eyes, the stamps were a form of taxa tion. As British citizens, only their elected representatives could tax them. Because the colonies had no representation in Parliament, they viewed the taxes as illegal.

Raising the cry of “no taxation without representation,” the colonists united in protest against the Stamp Act. In response, the British government repealed the act. However, on the same day in 1766, Parliament also passed the Declaratory Act. This law declared that Parliament had the “full power and authority to make laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and people of America, . . . in all cases whatsoever.” Parliament made it clear that Britain controlled the American colonies.

In 1765, colonists protested the passage of the Stamp Act. This act placed a tax on every piece of paper sold in the colonies. Stamps were needed for deeds, mortgages, liquor licenses, playing cards, and newspapers.

representation having a say in government

This present-day drawing depicts Boston Harbor during the time of the Intolerable Acts. The first of the Intolerable Acts, the Boston Port Act, closed Boston Harbor to all shipping until the destroyed tea from the Boston Tea Party was paid for. As a result, sailors and dockworkers lost their jobs, and stores closed because of a lack of goods to sell.

Although Parliament had repealed the Stamp Act, it still tried to control the colonies through taxes and other means. For example, in 1767 and 1768, it passed a series of new taxes and punishments as part of the Townshend Acts. (The acts are named for Charles Townshend, the official who proposed the laws.)

As with the Stamp Act taxes, colonists resisted these new taxes and punishments. In Boston, one colonist, Samuel Adams, led the opposition to the Townshend Acts. In a letter protesting the laws, Adams argued that the new duties violated the colonists’ rights as British citizens. The letter was sent to many of the other colonies. Soon, the colonies decided to boycott British goods to protect their rights.

On March 5, 1770, to stop British merchants from losing more money, Parliament ended most of the Townshend taxes, but the tax on tea remained. This news took weeks to reach the colonies. In the meantime, protests continued and violence erupted. On that same day, British troops shot and killed five people at a protest at the Boston Custom House, an incident known as the Boston Massacre.

In May 1773, Parliament tried again to force colonists to accept its authority to tax them. Colonists had stopped buying British tea in favor of smuggled Dutch tea. The Tea Act introduced a new tax on British tea but still reduced its cost. However, colonists recognized this as another attempt to tax them. In the fall, protests prevented tea ships from unloading throughout the colonies. The exception was in Boston. In late 1773, three ships arrived in Boston Harbor with the first load of taxed tea. Colonists boarded the ships and emptied 342 chests of tea into the harbor in protest, an event known as the Boston Tea Party.

In 1774, to crack down on such protests, Parliament passed four laws, known as the Intolerable Acts, to punish the colonists. One act closed the port of Boston, one removed Massachusetts’s ability to self-govern, and another allowed royal officials to be tried outside Massachusetts for crimes committed there. The fourth act was the new Quartering Act. Colonial legislatures had refused to cooperate with the 1765 Quartering Act. This version allowed royal governors to find housing in uninhabited buildings. This angered colonists who did not want British soldiers in their cities.

These harsh penalties further inflamed colonial resistance to British rule. Hoping to stop the escalating conflict, colonial leaders met in Philadelphia in 1774. This assembly, made up only of White men and known as the First Continental Congress, called for peaceful opposition to British policies.

By this time, however, colonial patriots were already forming militias, or groups of armed citizens, to defend their rights. On April 19, 1775, militia troops from Massachusetts clashed with British soldiers in battles at Lexington and Concord.

A Convincing Call for Independence

Even though hostilities had begun in the American colonies, many colonists still did not want to break with Great Britain. They considered themselves British subjects and wanted to remain loyal to King George III. They believed that, with time and diplomacy, they could improve relations with the British government. However, other colonists disagreed. They thought it was time for colonists to start thinking of themselves as Americans, not as British. One of these was a British immigrant named Thomas Paine.

Paine was born in England and lived and worked there until he was 37 years old. He did not have much formal education and started working with his father when he was just 13 years old. After that, he secured a job as a tax collector. Paine eventually got into trouble at his job by publicly demanding higher wages. Soon after, an important meeting would change the course of Paine’s life.

In 1772, Benjamin Franklin was in London serving as the colonial representative of Pennsylvania. It was at that time that Franklin heard Paine speaking about securing higher wages for himself and his fellow tax collectors. He was impressed with what he heard from Paine. The two met and became lifelong friends. During their time together in England, Franklin urged Paine to travel to America, specifically Philadelphia, where Franklin lived. At first Paine resisted, but eventually he took Franklin’s advice. Franklin supplied letters of introduction for Paine, and he booked passage to the colonies.

Paine arrived in the colonies in November 1774, just as hostilities began to intensify. He began work in Philadelphia as a journalist. Paine was disturbed by what he considered the colonists’ lack of concern about certain actions being taken by the British government against the colonies. He was especially concerned by the taxes being imposed by the British crown to pay for the recent war with France. Paine began to write a series of letters to local newspapers to express his concerns. Then Paine decided to combine the letters into a pamphlet.

Paine’s original idea was to call the pamphlet Plain Truth, but he changed the title to Common Sense. The new title better expressed Paine’s belief that colonists needed to trust their feelings about the unjust actions of the British government. He was particularly con cerned that the colonists had no say in the taxes that they had to pay. Paine wanted to avoid difficult political theories in his pamphlet. He wanted to write in a style that people could understand and relate to.

A meeting with Benjamin Franklin in London helped bring Thomas Paine to America. In addition to Common Sense, Paine was also the author of “African Slavery in America,” which cemented his viewpoint against the trade of Africans who were enslaved.

Although only 50 pages in length, Common Sense is credited as the single most important publication in swaying the majority of colonists to the idea that independence from Britain was the only path forward. Over 500,000 copies were sold in the first few months of 1776 alone.

Some likened Paine’s pamphlet to a sermon because he often quoted from the Bible. By doing so, Paine showed his opposition to the idea that the king ruled by divine right—that is, that his power had been given to him by God.

Common Sense became the first publication to call for the complete separation of the American colonies from Great Britain. Paine saw an opportunity not only to sever ties with Britain, but also to create an entirely new system of government. The monarchy would be replaced by representative self-government. He hoped to create an America where power and wealth were not a condition to have a voice in government or to hold office. He also believed that the colonies had the raw materials to build a fleet to rival the Royal Navy. The moment in history was “that peculiar time, which never happens to a nation but once,” he wrote.

Paine believed that the obligation of government was to protect the rights of all people. He viewed government as a “necessary evil” and thought government should exist only to create a structure where people could work together. The government should not rule through tyranny, a cruel and oppressive form of government. Therefore, the idea of religious freedom was very important to him. In Common Sense, he wrote,

This new world hath been the asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty from every part of Europe. Hither have they fled, not from the tender embraces of the mother, but from the cruelty of the monster; and it is so far true of England, that the same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from home, pursues their descendants still.

Paine not only opposed the government of George III, he also opposed the idea of monarchy in general. He believed that rulers should not have power simply passed down to them. Paine wrote,

A pretty business indeed for a man to be allowed eight hundred thousand sterling a year for, and worshipped into the bargain! Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.

When it was published in January 1776, Common Sense became extremely popular throughout the colonies. It sold over 100,000 copies in its first printing. It was read aloud in coffeehouses and at public gatherings. Although many people already believed breaking with Britain was their only option, a lot of people were unhappy to have to do so. Common Sense helped convince people that declaring independence was not something they had to do, but something they wanted to do. Its claim that colonists needed to break with the British crown and form a distinctly American form of government helped pave the way for the Declaration of Independence and the American Revolution.

The Route to Rebellion

A series of actions and events starting in the 1760s set the American colonies on a course toward armed revolution and independence.

A tax levied by Parliament on all paper goods in the colonies raises cries of “no taxation without representation.”

These acts place taxes on goods imported from Britain and increase tax collection enforcement. The colonists resist by boycotting all British goods.

Colonists protesting the Tea Act dump taxed tea into Boston Harbor. Britain responds by imposing the Intolerable Acts on the colonies. George Washington calls the acts “repugnant to every principle of natural justice.”

Protesters in Boston provoke British soldiers, causing them to fire into the crowd, killing five people. Paul Revere’s famous engraving of the event helps spark further protests.

Militia troops skirmish with British soldiers at Lexington and Concord, beginning the American Revolution.

The Continental Congress adopts a resolution declaring the colonies to be “Free and Independent States.”

Thomas Jefferson, shown here with Benjamin Franklin and John Adams, was the main writer of the Declaration of Independence. Although he wrote “that all men are created equal,” Jefferson enslaved Black people.

4. The Declaration of Independence Sets a New Direction

After fighting broke out in Massachusetts, the Continental Congress voted to form the Continental army made up of volunteers from all the colonies. They chose George Washington, a leading officer in the Virginia militia, to be the new army’s commanding officer. Still, the Congress did not call for a final break with Britain. Many delegates hoped that a peaceful resolution could be reached.

Declaring Independence

Finally, in June 1776, the Congress formed a committee to draft a declaration of independence. This committee consisted of five men: Thomas Jefferson of Virginia, John Adams of Massachusetts, Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania, Roger Sherman of Connecticut, and Robert R. Livingston of New York. Jefferson wrote the first draft and then consulted the committee. The final version states,

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

—Declaration of Independence, 1776

In these two sentences, Jefferson set forth a vision of a new kind of nation born of four key ideas. The first was that people have unalienable rights. These are rights and liberties that all people have by virtue of being human—that is, natural or individual rights—that cannot be taken away. (Something that is unalienable cannot be surrendered.) In a small twist on Locke, Jefferson defined these rights as the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The second was that governments are created to protect these rights. The third was that governments get their power “from the consent of the governed.” The fourth addressed the rights of the people when the government breaks the social contract. People have the right to change or abolish a destructive or tyrannical government and create a new one that meets their needs. In this case, the founders believed that British rule threated their natural rights. They would ultimately create a limited government to meet their needs.

Despite the language used and the principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence, the reality was that “all men” ultimately included only White men. In fact, some of the Declaration’s signers, including Jefferson, were enslavers. The fundamental rights that they envisioned for the citizens of an independent America would not initially extend to women, Black people, or Indigenous people.

On July 4, 1776, the members of Congress formally approved the Declaration of Independence. It served a formal declaration of war against what was then the most powerful nation on Earth.

Declaring Grievances

The Declaration of Independence did not merely confirm the colonists’ desire to be free of British rule. It also explained why. The Preamble summarizes why the colonists sought independence:

. . .when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invari ably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. . . . The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

—Declaration of Independence, 1776

This was followed by a list of 27 grievances that led to their decision. These grievances identify some of the abuses and violations of natural rights—restrictions on life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness—that colonists faced. Among the most notable griev ances are the following:

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. King George III refused to approve laws passed by the colonial assemblies. This undermined colonial self-government.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. The king and royal governors had the power to dissolve the elected colonial assem blies. This power was used to get assemblies to comply with the British government. Assemblies that passed legislation that Parliament disliked or expressed views that differed from the British government’s could be dissolved. For example, several assemblies were dissolved for claiming that Great Britain had no right to tax the colonies without representation.

grievance a cause of hardship that serves as a rightful reason to resist or complain; a complaint

This poster shows the delegates leaving Independence Hall in Philadelphia to announce the signing of the Declaration of Independence.

George III was the king of Great Britain and Ireland from 1760 to 1820. The grievances describe the colonists’ problems with him and his rule.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. This addresses one of the Intolerable Acts. The Massachusetts Government Act gave the royal governor the power to choose judges in the colony. The colony could no longer elect or appoint its own judges.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. Judges were paid by the British government, not the colonial governments. Colonists feared that this made them biased. They were concerned that judges would care more about pleasing the government than being impartial. The effect would be viola tions of their natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. After the French and Indian War, the British sent more troops to the colonies. There had been no standing army before the war. In 1765, Parliament passed the Quartering Act and the Stamp Act so the colonies would cover some of the increased costs.

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us. The Quartering Act of 1774 required the colonies to provide hous ing and food for soldiers. Colonists viewed this as an unfair burden and did not want soldiers living in their cities. Many saw their presence as a threat. Moreover, they did not want British authorities using their property to house soldiers, a violation of their natural rights to liberty and property.

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent. The colonists had no representation in the British Parliament. They believed taxes, such as those in the Stamp Act, were unfair because they had no say in their creation.

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury. Cases related to the laws regulating shipping, trade, and commerce were tried in a court without a jury. In such cases, a judge decided the case.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. In his October 1775 address to Parliament, George III declared the American colonies to be in rebellion and sent troops. In effect, this was viewed as a declaration of war against the colonies. Some, such as John Adams, believed that this essentially made the colonies independent.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. In 1775 and 1776, the governor of Virginia ordered the seizure of colonial merchant ships—that is, ships that were private property. Also, several land and naval assaults were made in Virginia and along its coast.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall them selves by their Hands. Parliament passed a law in December 1775 that allowed the Royal Navy to capture colonial ships. The navy did not treat the captured sailors as prisoners of war. Rather, they were forced to work on Royal Navy ships, violating their natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

These grievances would be recalled at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 after the war for independence was over. They would help shape the role of government described in the Constitution.

LESSON SUMMARY

The founding of the United States was inspired by colonial experiences under British rule and by traditions and ideas of English government. These helped lead to the decision to declare independence and, later, to establish a system of representative government based on the rule of law and a respect for individual rights and liberties.

The English Roots of American Government In English law, certain natural rights had been guaranteed by the Magna Carta (1215), the Petition of Right (1628), and the English Bill of Rights (1689). One reason that colonists rebelled was to secure the “rights of Englishmen.”

Colonial Experiences with Self-Government Because of the American colonies’ distance from Great Britain, they were able to self-govern, especially in the 1600s. For example, the passengers on the Mayflower signed the Mayflower Compact in which they consented to be governed.

From Ideas to Independence Accustomed to self-rule, colonists were quick to react when Great Britain tried to impose taxes on the colonies. Thomas Paine and his pamphlet Common Sense helped convince colonists that independence from British rule was the best way forward.

The Declaration of Independence Sets a New Direction In 1776, colonists issued the Declaration of Independence in which they declared the colonies to be “Free and Independent States.” This document outlined their grievances with the king while establishing that people have inalienable rights.

End-of-Course Prep Guide

Return to the Student Learning Targets at the beginning of this lesson and review the “I can” statements. Use the checklist to decide which key ideas to focus on in this review guide. You can also learn more about these topics online using Reading and Notes, Lesson Games, Slideshows, and Video Activities.

The Impact of Early Documents on American Government

Trace the impact that the Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, English Bill of Rights and Thomas Paine’s Common Sense had on colonists’ views of government. (CG.1.3)

Magna Carta

The Magna Carta outlined agreements reached between King John of England and a group of nobles in 1215. It is the founda tional document for democracy. Several important concepts in the Magna Carta include:

Due process of law - The government must follow correct legal procedures when someone is accused of a crime. Due process is based on the concept of rule of law, which means that everyone obeys the law no matter who they are. No free man shall be seized, imprisoned, dispossessed, outlawed, exiled or ruined in any way, nor in any way proceeded against, except by the lawful judgement of his peers and the law of the land.

Limitation of government power - The Magna Carta stated that the monarch could not make special demands for money from his nobles without their consent. This was later used to support the idea that the king should not demand money without Parliament’s consent.

Right to justice - The Magna Carta stated that everyone would receive justice. To no one will we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice.

Right to a fair trial - The Magna Carta also included laws about the right to a fair trial and to a jury trial.

The English Bill of Rights

The English Bill of Rights was passed by Parliament in 1689. It expanded upon another document called the Petition of Right that was passed in 1628. The English Bill of Rights contains important ideas that are reflected in American government:

Right to life, liberty, and property - The English Bill of Rights reaffirmed the principle of individual rights established in the Magna Carta and the Petition of Right, and it introduced the right to bear arms.

No taxation without representation - It stated that the king could not demand a tax without Parliament’s consent.

Right to a speedy and fair jury trial - It reaffirmed the right to a jury trial.

No excessive punishments - It also prohibited excessive fines and bail, and cruel and unusual punishments.

Habeas corpus - It reaffirmed the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679, which said that accused people have the right to appear before a judge to hear the charges against them.

The Mayflower Compact Common Sense

The Mayflower Compact was an agreement that the Mayflower’s passengers signed in 1620 before they landed in Massachusetts. It described how the new colony would be governed. It contains important civic ideas:

Consent of the governed - In this compact, the colonists agreed to live in a “Civil Body Politic.” They also agreed to obey “just and equal Laws.” By saying this, they willingly placed themselves under government authority.

Self-government - The colonists stated that they would elect representatives of their choosing who would pass laws for “the general good of the colony.”

After the British government passed a series of laws that American colonists felt were unfair, a colonist named Thomas Paine wrote a pamphlet called Common Sense in 1776, in which he protested these laws. His pamphlet contained an important idea that helped convince many colonists that they truly wanted to break away from Great Britain:

Representative self-government - Paine began calling for independence from Great Britain. He wanted to create an entirely new system of government that was not controlled by a monar chy, wealth, or power. He viewed government as a “necessary evil” and thought its only purpose was to provide a framework for people to work together.

How British Policies and Responses Led to the Declaration of Independence

Describe how British policies and responses to colonial concerns led to the writing of the Declaration of Independence. (CG.1.5)

There was a cause-and-effect relationship between British policies, British responses to colonial grievances, and the writing of the Declaration of Independence.

British policy - Benign neglect, and then its reversal. Britain mostly left the colonies to manage themselves (benign neglect), but after Britain won the French and Indian War, it needed money to pay for the cost of defending the new territory. The Stamp Act of 1765 required colonists to buy an official stamp to place on almost every item of paper, from deeds to newspapers.

Colonial response - The colonists protested the Stamp Act with the rallying cry of “no taxation without representation.”

British response - The British government repealed the Stamp Act, but it still tried to control the colonies. The Declaratory Act declared that Britain’s authority to tax the colonies was the same as it was in Britain. The Quartering Act said that colonists had to provide food, shelter, and transportation to British soldiers stationed in their towns.

British policy - The Townshend Acts (1767) placed taxes on goods imported into the colonies.

Colonial response - The colonists boycotted all British goods. There were more protests, and some turned violent.

British response - On March 5, 1770, British troops shot and killed five people at a protest in Boston, an incident known as the Boston Massacre.

British policy - In 1773, Parliament passed the Tea Act, which taxed imported tea. The colonists had been importing Dutch tea as part of the boycott of British goods.

Colonial response - Colonists prevented ships from landing in port. In Boston, they protested by dumping the imported tea into the harbor.

British response/policy - Parliament passed laws, known as the Intolerable Acts, to punish the colonists for their protests. The Acts closed the port of Boston and took away Massachusetts’s right to govern itself, among other things.

Colonial response - Colonists became very angry. Colonial leaders met in Philadelphia in 1774 and called for peaceful opposition to British policies at the First Continental Congress. However, colonial patriots were already forming militias. On April 19, 1775, the first battle of what would be the Revolutionary War took place at Lexington and Concord. The Continental Congress met again, formed an army, and selected George Washington as its leader. Finally, in June 1776, the Continental Congress chose a committee of five men to write a declaration of independence.

The Underlying Themes of British Colonial Policy

Taxation Representation Individual rights

The colonists were angry about all the taxes that Parliament enacted and believed that they were an unfair burden.

The colonists were even angrier about the fact that, according to British law, only their representatives in Parliament were supposed to tax them. But the colonies had no representation in Parliament. The colonists believed the taxes were illegal.

Britain’s constitutional system was based on a set of laws, customs, and practices that limited government powers and guaranteed the people certain basic rights. The colonists felt that the “rights of Englishmen” had been denied to them.

The Ideas and Grievances in the Declaration of Independence

Analyze the ideas and grievances set forth in the Declaration of Independence. (CG.1.6)

The Declaration of Independence is a document written mostly by Thomas Jefferson in 1776. It stated the colonists’ intention to become a nation that was independent from Great Britain.

Jefferson spelled out the relationship between rights and government: People are born with rights; governments are set up to protect them; the people give power to the government, but can take it away if the government abuses its power.

The Declaration of Independence Important Ideas

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Natural rights - people are born with these, God gives them, people have them because they are human

Limited government - government’s purpose is to secure the people’s rights

Social contract - the people agree to allow government to rule them

The right of resistance to tyrannical government - people can and should overthrow a bad government

Jefferson went on to list specific grievances, or complaints, against the king of England to explain why the colonists were justified in setting up a new government. There are 27 grievances listed.

Grievance from the Declaration

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent

What It Means and What It Violated

Jefferson is referring to the various Acts (Stamp, etc.) and the fact that colonists were not represented in Parliament. Violated consent of the governed.

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: King George changed the way some offenses were treated in court so the accused would not get a jury trial. Violated right to liberty.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly . . . For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws,

King George limited the power of the judicial system. He took away the right of the people to elect their judges. Violated right to liberty.

Jefferson is referring to the Quartering Act, which allowed any soldier to request shelter and punished any colonist who refused. Violated right to liberty.

King George sent the colonial legislatures home if they did or said something against the British government. Violated consent of the governed and right to liberty.

VIDEOS ONLINE

Sign in to access a Video Activity that explains the main ideas of the text with meaningful visuals.

Lesson Objectives

• Explain how the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation led to the writing of the U.S. Constitution. (CG.1.7)

• Compare the viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists regarding ratification of the U.S. Constitution and including a bill of rights. (CG.1.10)

Student Learning Targets

Below are your goals for this lesson. Review them before you start and again at the end of the lesson.

I can identify the weaknesses of the government under the Articles of Confederation. (CG.1.7)

Congress had no power to tax.

Congress had no power to regulate trade.

Congress had no power to enforce its laws.

The national government lacked a national court system [judicial branch].

The national government lacked central leadership [executive branch].

There were no national armed forces.

Changes to the Articles required unanimous consent of the 13 states.

I can identify the viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists about the ratifica tion of the U.S. Constitution. (CG.1.10)

I can recognize the Anti-Federalists’ reasons for the inclusion of a bill of rights in the U.S. Constitution. (CG.1.10)

Lesson Vocabulary

• Anti-Federalists - opponents of ratifying the U.S. Constitution. They favored the loose association of states established under the Articles of Confederation.

• Articles of Confederation - the first written plan of government for the United States; ratified in 1781

• constitutionalism - the belief that governments should operate according to an agreed set of principles, which are usually spelled out in a written constitution

• Federalists - supporters of ratifying the U.S. Constitution. They favored the creation of a strong federal government that shared power with the states.

• majority rule - the idea that decisions approved by more than half of the people in a group or society will be accepted and observed by all of the people

Academic Vocabulary

• debt - a financial status in which a person, company, or government owes money to someone else

• ratification - formal approval of an agreement, treaty, or constitution

• unanimous consent - the approval of every voting member

Creating the Constitution

What challenges did the United States overcome to create and ratify the Constitution?

Introduction

After the American Revolution ended, the new United States still faced challenges. One of the most pressing of those challenges was debt During the war, many soldiers were not paid. They returned home and found themselves facing large debts and overdue taxes they could not pay. Debt collectors seized property and land, and, in some cases, imprisoned people. This treatment especially angered veterans. Among them was a former army officer named Daniel Shays.

Shays settled in Massachusetts after leaving the army. There, he found himself swept up in the unrest and protests in support of those who had their property taken as payment for debts and taxes. Shays led a group who called themselves “Regulators.” They protested at courthouses and stopped debt collectors from doing their work. George Washington could see the danger this put the new government in, writ ing, “commotions of this sort, like snowballs, gather strength as they roll, if there is no opposition in the way to divide and crumble them.”

Because the new nation’s government laid out in the Articles of Confederation was weak, it had little power to get involved or stop the rebellion. This led Massachusetts Governor Bowdoin to hire a militia. The rebellion ended in January 1787 when an army of more than 1,000 protesters led by Shays stormed the federal arsenal in Springfield. The militia met them and fired. Most of the protesters fell back and returned to their homes, although Shays fled to Vermont. He and others involved were later pardoned.

Shays’ Rebellion proved to many the need for a strong central government. James Madison wrote that the insurrection gave “new proofs of the necessity of such a vigor in the general government as will be able to restore health to the diseased part of the Federal body.”

The original Constitution of the United States is printed on four large parchment sheets and is signed by nearly all the delegates present at the Constitutional Convention.

Social Studies Vocabulary

Anti-Federalists

Articles of Confederation constitutionalism Federalists

majority rule

Articles of Confederation the first written plan of government for the United States; ratified in 1781

constitutionalism the belief that governments should operate according to an agreed set of principles, which are usually spelled out in a written constitution

majority rule the idea that decisions approved by more than half of the people in a group or society will be accepted and observed by all of the people

1. Creating a New Government During Wartime

During the American Revolution, the Second Continental Congress served as the new nation’s government. It raised troops and supplies for the war effort, borrowed large amounts of money, and negotiated treaties with foreign countries. Additionally, Congress appointed a committee to prepare a plan of government known as the Articles of Confederation This plan was approved by Congress in 1777 and sent to the states for ratification, or formal approval. The states approved the Articles in 1781, just a few months before the fighting ended.

The Articles of Confederation was only one of many new plans of government drafted during the war. Each of the 13 states also needed a constitution, but there were few models to guide them. England did not have a constitution. Its system of government was based on an assortment of laws, policies, and customs developed over the centu ries. When it came to writing formal constitutions, the Americans were on their own.

The Articles of Confederation was ratified by all 13 states in 1781. It gave limited powers to the national government, with state governments holding more power. This made it difficult for the national government to govern.

State Constitutions: Giving Power to the People In fram ing their new plans of government, state lawmakers clearly showed their commitment to constitutionalism, the idea that government should be based on an established set of principles. These principles included popular sovereignty, limited government, the rule of law, and majority rule. The lawmakers also separated the powers of govern ment by creating executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

The governments created under the new state constitutions were not entirely democratic. Many states limited voting rights to White men who paid taxes or owned a certain amount of property. None of the original 13 state constitutions outlawed slavery, and all states south of Pennsylvania denied people who were enslaved equal rights.

Governing Under the Articles of Confederation The national government created under the Articles of Confederation was much weaker than the governments established in the states. Although some members of Congress wanted a strong central govern ment, the majority preferred a loose confederation, with most powers remaining at the state level. The Articles emphasized that each state would retain its “sovereignty, freedom, and independence.” Any power not specifically given to Congress was reserved for the states. In addi tion, amendments required the unanimous consent of all 13 states, which in practice made amending the Articles nearly impossible.

The government created under the Articles consisted of only a congress, with members chosen by the states. Congress did have several key powers, at least on paper. It could declare war, negotiate with foreign countries, and establish a postal system. It could also settle disputes between states.

For the most part, however, the government created by the Articles of Confederation was a failure. It lacked the power to control trade among the states and could not intervene to settle disputes related to trade. It also could not collect taxes. This prevented Congress from raising money to support the Continental army and pay its war debts.

By 1786, many of the nation’s leaders recognized that the government formed under the Articles was not working. That fall, representatives from various states met at Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss trade issues. While there, they asked for a constitutional convention to meet the following year in Philadelphia.

The original purpose of the convention was to revise the Articles of Confederation. Once the delegates met, however, they decided to create an entirely new constitution. The table below lists some of the weaknesses of the Articles and explains how the new plan of government eventually resolved them.

Mending the Articles of Confederation

Weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation How the Constitution Resolved Them

Congress could not levy or collect taxes, leaving the government with a lack of funds.

Congress could not control trade among the states or with other countries.

Congress had only one house, and each state had only one vote in Congress, regardless of population.

Nine out of 13 states had to agree to pass a major law in Congress.

All 13 states had to agree to amend the Articles.

The government lacked an executive branch to enforce laws, a court system to settle legal disputes, or national armed forces.

Congress could not create a uniform currency. Money was issued by the states.

There was no way to enforce the laws passed by Congress. The states could, and did, ignore them.

The states were loosely joined in a “league of friendship.”

Congress has the power to levy taxes to support the government.

Congress has the power to control interstate trade and trade with foreign countries.

Congress has two houses, and representation in the House of Representatives is based on population.

Laws can be passed by a simple majority of members of Congress.

Amendments can be ratified by three-fourths of the states.

The government has a legislative branch, an executive branch, and a judicial branch. Congress has the power to raise and support an army and navy.

Congress has the sole power to issue money.

The Constitution and laws passed by Congress are the “supreme Law of the Land.”

The states are bound together in a permanent union.

The Constitutional Convention took place in this room in Independence Hall. The delegates closed the doors and windows to keep their meeting private.

2. Convening the Constitutional Convention

On May 25, 1787, the Constitutional Convention began. Delegates from all the states except Rhode Island came together at the Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia, which would later be known as Independence Hall. They met in the same room where the Declaration of Independence had been signed 11 years earlier.

The 55 delegates were prominent in American political life. Among them were governors, members of Congress, former soldiers, and men who had drafted state constitutions. Their average age was 42, and all of them were White men.

The delegates represented a wide range of personalities and experience. At age 81, Benjamin Franklin was the oldest member. The wisdom and wit of this writer, inventor, and diplomat enlivened the proceedings. George Washington lent dignity to the gathering, while his former military aide Alexander Hamilton brought intellectual brilliance. Other delegates, such as Roger Sherman of Connecticut, contributed legal and business experience. James Madison of Virginia was perhaps the best political thinker and the most prepared of all the delegates.

However, several key figures were not at the convention. Both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were in Europe serving as U.S. dip lomats. Upon reading over the delegates’ names, Jefferson described the convention as “an assembly of demigods.” Other leaders, such as Samuel Adams of Massachusetts and Patrick Henry of Virginia, were suspicious of efforts to strengthen the central government. They, too, did not attend.

During the convention, no one played a greater role than Madison. Although he was just 36 years old, he had already served in Congress and the Virginia legislature. He was a serious student of politics and democratic theory. As the meetings got underway, he took detailed notes of the discussions and worked tirelessly to promote the new plan. For his role in shaping the new framework, he is rightly called the Father of the Constitution.

3. Reaching a Compromise on Representation

The first thing the delegates did was to elect George Washington as the convention’s presiding officer. They also adopted rules of proce dure, including a vow of secrecy. Although it was extremely hot and humid in Philadelphia that summer, the delegates closed the doors and windows of their meeting room to keep the proceedings private. They knew that the public was curious about their discussions, and they did not want public pressure to affect their decisions.

Next, the Virginia delegates, who favored a strong national govern ment, introduced a plan for a new constitution. The Virginia Plan, written mainly by James Madison, was clearly designed to replace the Articles, not to revise them. It called for a government of three branches. The legislative branch would make the laws, the executive branch would carry out the laws, and the judicial branch would interpret the laws.

Under the Virginia Plan, the new government would have a two-house legislature. The Virginia Plan proposed that representation in both houses be based on the population of each state. This would give the more populous states more representatives, and thus more influence, than states with smaller populations.

The delegates discussed the details of the Virginia Plan. Some thought it gave too much power to the national government. Some opposed a two-house legislature. Additionally, the smaller states did not like their representation in Congress being tied only to population. The debate grew so heated at times that some delegates threatened to walk out.

Finally, Roger Sherman of Connecticut proposed a compromise designed to satisfy both sides. His plan called for a two-house legislature with a different form of representation in each house. In the Senate, states would have equal representation. In the House of Representatives, states would have representation based on their populations. Sherman’s plan, known as the Great Compromise, resolved the difficult issue of representation in Congress and allowed the convention to move forward.

This 1856 painting by Junius Brutus Stearns depicts the ongoings of the Constitutional Convention. As shown in the painting, George Washington presided during the meeting.

Large and Small, Enslaved and Free

The nation’s first census, taken in 1790, revealed great differences among the states. By 1790, some northern states had completely abolished slavery. In contrast, almost a third of Maryland’s population was enslaved. Differences in the size and makeup of state populations made compromises over representation essential if the nation were to remain united.

4. Compromises on Slavery and Commerce

Other issues also divided the delegates. Those from northern states differed sharply with those from southern states on questions of slavery and commerce. Many northern delegates wanted the new constitution to abolish slavery, but most southerners did not.

These differences also influenced representation and taxes. Because most enslaved people lived in the South, southern delegates wanted to count them when determining representation in the House of Representatives. Yet, they did not want to count enslaved people when determining each state’s share of taxes for the national government.

In contrast, delegates from the North wanted people who were enslaved to be counted for taxation, but not when determining representation. After much debate, the delegates compromised. For purposes of representation and taxation, each person who was enslaved was to be counted as three-fifths of a person.

The Three-Fifths Compromise helped hold the new nation together. However, by treating an enslaved person as less than a free person, this provision contradicted the basic ideal of equality in the Declaration of Independence. This contradiction between democratic ideals and the cruel existence of slavery would haunt the nation and eventually result in the Civil War.

Delegates from the North and South also argued over commerce. Northerners wanted to give Congress broad powers to control trade. Southerners worried that Congress might ban the international trade of enslaved people and heavily tax southern crop exports. Again, the delegates compromised. Congress would have the power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce. However, it could not tax exports, and it did not outlaw the international trade of enslaved people until 1808.

5. Creating the Executive Branch: One Head or Many?

Another major issue at the Constitutional Convention concerned the formation of the executive branch. Some delegates wanted a single executive to be the leader of the govern ment. Others were concerned that giving power to a single person might result in a monarchy or tyranny. Instead, they favored an executive committee made up of at least two members. In the end, however, the delegates voted for a single president who would be assisted by a vice president. They also decided that the president would serve a four-year term, and then another presidential election would be held.

The next issue was how to choose the presi dent. Some delegates thought Congress should do it, while others wanted popular elections. They finally decided on a compromise, and set up a special body called the Electoral College. This body would be made up of electors from each state who would cast votes to elect the president and vice president. Each state would have as many electors as the number of senators and representatives it sent to Congress. Adding the two senators to the number of electors from each state boosted the influence of small states and of those with large enslaved populations. (Usually, the electors cast their votes for the winner of the popular election, but they don’t have to.)

On September 17, 1787, after months of hard work, the Constitution was signed by 39 of the 42 delegates present. The document they signed that day began with these words:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

—Preamble to the Constitution, 1787

Now, it was up to the states to decide whether this plan of govern ment would indeed establish “a more perfect Union.” It would take nearly a year and a lot of debate in the states before the fate of the Constitution was decided.

This report shares the results of the South Carolina electors in the first U.S. presidential election. The Electoral College system is still in place today.

Federalists supporters of ratifying the U.S. Constitution. They favored the creation of a strong federal government that shared power with the states.

Anti-Federalists opponents of ratifying the U.S. Constitution. They favored the loose association of states established under the Articles of Confederation.

6. Ratifying the Constitution

The Constitution included a provision for ratification. To go into effect, the new plan of government would need to be ratified by at least 9 of the 13 states. Ratification was to take place at state conventions made up of delegates elected for this purpose. Success was by no means assured.

The pro-ratification effort was led by supporters of the Constitution who called themselves Federalists. They favored the creation of a strong federal government that shared power with the states. Their opponents were known as Anti-Federalists. These were people who preferred the loose association of states established under the Articles of Confederation. The battle between these two groups played out in the press, in state legislatures, and at the state ratifying conventions.

Anti-Federalists Attack the Constitution Anti-Federalists opposed the Constitution because they feared the federal government would have too much power. They worried that the Constitution did not sufficiently protect individual rights and freedoms. Anti-Federalists argued that the rights of the people needed to be listed in a bill of rights. Additionally, they worried that the government would impose burden some taxes and that the president would rule like a king. They disliked the idea of states giving up power to form a stronger nation. They did not want federal courts to overrule state courts.

Of the original 55 delegates, only 39 signed the Constitution on September 17, 1787. Thirteen delegates returned home before the conclusion of the convention, and three others refused to sign.

To make their opposition known, Anti-Federalists published their views in The Anti-Federalist Papers. Writing mostly under false names, such as Brutus and Cato, they outlined their fears about a strong national government leading to tyranny. They believed that the states, being smaller, were better able to represent the people’s rights and preserve democracy. As one wrote,

The laws and customs of the several states are, . . . very diverse, and in some opposite; each would be in favor of its own interests and customs, and. . . a legislature, formed of representatives from the respective parts, . . . but would be composed of such heterogeneous and discordant principles, as would constantly be contending with each other.

—Brutus, Anti-Federalist No. I, 1787

The Anti-Federalist movement was strongest in North Carolina, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. It initially included some of the leading figures of the American Revolution, including Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Patrick Henry, who wrote some of the essays. In Anti-Federalist minds, the Constitution repre sented a betrayal of the democratic idea that had motivated the American Revolution.

Federalists Defend the Constitution In the face of such criticism, the Federalists defended the Constitution. Three men led this campaign: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. All wrote under the name Publius. Hamilton and Madison had helped write the Constitution. Jay was a New York lawyer, diplomat, and political leader who had played a key role in the revolution.

Together, these men wrote a series of 85 essays known as The Federalist Papers. These essays were published over the course of several months and made a strong case for the new plan of govern ment. Some historians have called the publication of these papers one of the most powerful public relations campaigns in history.

The Federalist Papers’ authors explained the key features of the Constitution and tried to undercut Anti-Federalists’ claims. In The Federalist No. 10, for example, Madison addressed the Anti-Federalists’ charge that it would be impossible to make representative government work over a large territory like the United States. Madison argued that the size of the United States was actually an advantage in establishing a representative government. Because such a government would represent so many people, it would be less likely to fall under the influence of groups that want power for selfish reasons. The governments of small nations, he argued, were more prone to being taken over by small groups, because they find it easier to win over a smaller population than a larger one. As Madison wrote,

The fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, . . . the more easily will they . . . execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere [to a larger government], and you take in a greater variety of parties.

—James Madison, The Federalist No. 10, 1787

In The Federalist No. 51, Madison addressed the concern that a strong national government would lead to tyranny. He explained how the checks and balances built into the Constitution were designed to keep this from happening. “If angels were to govern,” he wrote, “neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” In a government of men, he argued, “ambition must be made to counteract ambition.”

It is impossible to know how many minds were changed by these essays. But over more than two centuries, they have provided invaluable insights into the thinking and intentions of the Constitution’s writers.

The Federalist Papers , first published in 1787, made a strong case for ratification of the Constitution. These essays, written by James Madison (top), Alexander Hamilton (middle), and John Jay (bottom) provide invaluable insight into the political thinking behind the Constitution.

After the Constitution was written, a long period followed in which citizens read and debated whether it should be ratified. In this illustration, Massachusetts announced that it had become the sixth state to ratify the Constitution.

The Constitution Goes into Effect By January 1788, Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey had ratified the Constitution. Georgia and Connecticut soon followed. However, Anti-Federalists had created a strong case against ratification in the minds of state legislators over a key issue: the lack of a bill of rights. After debating the issues and agreeing to propose amendments for a bill of rights, the Massachusetts delegates ratified the Constitution.

A number of other states ratified and likewise recommended amendments. By the summer of 1788, all but two states had ratified. The Constitution was now in effect. North Carolina would join the new union in 1789, and Rhode Island in 1790.

Meanwhile, Congress prepared to make way for the new govern ment. Elections were held for the Senate and House of Representatives. A date was set in February 1789 for the first presidential election.

The winner of that election, by unanimous vote in the Electoral College, was George Washington. The former general had previously retired to his home, Mount Vernon, in Virginia. But he answered the call to duty and made his way to New York City, the home of the first federal government. There, in Federal Hall on April 30, 1789, Washington, like every president since that day, repeated this solemn oath:

I do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

7. Adding the Bill of Rights

In his inaugural speech, President Washington called on Congress to move quickly to draft a bill of rights for the Constitution. The amendments, he said, should show “a reverence for the characteristic rights of freemen and a regard for public harmony.” In urging Congress to take on this task, Washington recognized that adopting a bill of rights was necessary to address public concerns that had been raised by Anti-Federalists.

Proposing a List of Rights

No one was more aware of this pledge than James Madison. He had made just such a promise while lobbying for ratification in his home state of Virginia. As a new member of the House of Representatives, Madison immediately set out to draft a bill of rights.

In 1789, Madison proposed a series of amendments to Congress. His list of rights drew from the many different proposals made at the state ratifying conventions. Madison also pulled ideas from other documents, including the Virginia Declaration of Rights, adopted in 1776, and the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written by Thomas Jefferson in 1779. The English Bill of Rights was a key influ ence as well.

Madison also drew from the writings of William Blackstone, an English lawyer and judge. In his famous work, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Blackstone wrote about “personal liberty” and the “rights of persons.” Among those rights, Blackstone argued, was “liberty of the press,” which he saw as “essential to the nature of a free state.” After much debate, Congress approved Madison’s proposed 12 amendments and passed them on to the states for ratification.

Ratifying the Bill of Rights Most states quickly ratified the Bill of Rights. By the summer of 1790, nine states had approved at least ten of the amendments. Shortly afterward, Vermont became the 14th state in the Union, which increased the number of states needed for ratification to 11. On December 15, 1791, Virginia became the 11th state to ratify the Bill of Rights.

Two of the proposed amendments, however, failed to win ratification in 1791. The first, dealing with the number of members of the House of Representatives, was never adopted. The other limited the ability of Congress to increase the salaries of its members. It was finally ratified two centuries later and became the Twenty-seventh Amendment.

Three of the original 13 states—Georgia, Massachusetts, and Connecticut—failed to ratify the Bill of Rights in 1791. All three finally voted for ratification in 1939, on the 150th anniversary of the Bill of Rights. By then, the Bill of Rights had become an integral part of the framework of American government.

LESSON SUMMARY

The Bill of Rights is on display at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. This exhibit also houses the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. These three important documents established the foundation for the U.S. government and are collectively known as the Charters of Freedom.

Forming the government for the United States was a process that took place throughout the young nation’s first years. Through debate, compromise, and a public relations campaign, the Constitution and Bill of Rights were framed, revised, and ratified.

Framing the Constitution Weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation led to the framing of a new constitution at a special convention in Philadelphia. This new document addressed flaws that existed under the Articles. It also created a strong central government, something the Federalists favored.

Compromises Reached at the Constitutional Convention Delegates to the convention debated over many issues. They created a two-house legislature to be fair to both big and small states. They also agreed to count an enslaved person as 3/5 of a person, to limit Congress’s power over trade, and to have a single chief executive.

Ratifying the Constitution By 1788, enough states had ratified the Constitution to make it the law of the land. A new government, with George Washington as president, began operations in 1789.

Adding the Bill of Rights To satisfy critics of the Constitution, James Madison drafted a series of amendments to protect individual rights and freedoms, which became known as the Bill of Rights.

End-of-Course Prep Guide

Return to the Student Learning Targets at the beginning of this lesson and review the “I can” statements. Use the checklist to decide which key ideas to focus on in this review guide. You can also learn more about these topics online using Reading and Notes, Lesson Games, Slideshows, and Video Activities.

The First Governing Documents

Explain how the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation led to the writing of the U.S. Constitution. (CG.1.7)

The Articles of Confederation was the first governing document of the United States. It didn't work very well, so the framers started over.

Issue in the Articles of Confederation Solution in the Constitution

Congress had no power to tax. Therefore, it couldn’t raise money for things the government needed to do.

Congress had no power to regulate trade. Therefore, states could tax goods coming from other states.

Congress had no power to enforce its laws. Therefore, states could pass laws that would override national laws, or just ignore them.

The national government lacked a national court system (judicial branch). Therefore, when federal laws were violated, there was no recourse.

→ Now, Congress has the power to tax.

→ Now, Congress has the power to regulate trade with other countries, between states, and with Indigenous people.

→ Now, the Constitution is above all other laws. This Constitu tion, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; . . . shall be the supreme Law of the Land; . . . — Article VI, paragraph 2

→ Now, the Constitution has created a judicial branch with a Supreme Court and the ability to add lower courts.

The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

— Article III, Section 1

The national government lacked central leadership (execu tive branch). Therefore, there was no one to give direction or to guide in emergencies.

There were no national armed forces. Therefore, the country couldn’t defend itself easily from an attack.

→ Now, the Constitution has set up an executive branch with the president as the chief executive.

→ Now, the Constitution gives Congress the power to establish a military.

To raise and support Armies . . . To provide and maintain a Navy — Article I, Section 8, Clause 12 and 13

Changes to the Articles required unanimous consent of the 13 states. Therefore, it would be very difficult to get all 13 states to agree on anything.

→ Now, the Constitution allows for amendments and describes the process.

The Congress . . . shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which . . . shall be valid . . . as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof

Article V

Two Views of Government

Compare the viewpoints of the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists regarding ratification of the U.S. Constitution and including a bill of rights. (CG.1.10)

The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists were groups of framers who had different viewpoints about the role of national government and therefore about the Constitution.

Federalists Anti-Federalists

View of the role of national government - They wanted a strong federal government that shared powers with the states. They believed that the system of checks and balances would keep the federal government from becoming too powerful.

View of the Constitution - They supported the Constitution. It had been written mainly by Federalists. They wrote The Federalist Papers to convince the public to support the Constitution.

Main proponents of the Constitution - Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay

Role in the Bill of Rights - James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights in response to the Anti-Federalists.

View of the role of national government - They preferred a loose association of states that had existed under the Articles of Confederation. They feared that a strong national government would become too powerful and thought that states could represent the people better.

View of the Constitution - They opposed the Constitution. They wrote The Anti-Federalist Papers to persuade people to support their opinion.

Main objectors to the Constitution - Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, John Hancock

Role in the Bill of Rights - The Anti-Federalists’ concerns that a strong federal government would lead to oppression of individual rights led to the creation of the first 10 amendments, known as the Bill of Rights.

If Men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and the next place, oblige it to control itself.

VIDEOS ONLINE

James Madison

After so recent a triumph over British despots, after such torrents of blood and treasure have been spent, after involving ourselves in the distresses of an arduous war, and incurring such a debt for the express purpose of asserting the rights of humanity; it is truly astonishing that a set of men among ourselves should have the effrontery to attempt the destruction of our liberties.

—The Anti-Federalist Papers

Sign in to access a Video Activity that explains the main ideas of the text with meaningful visuals.