The Pros And Cons Of A Republican Government

333 Words2 Pages

The founding fathers having a bad experience with monarchy wanted to give the people of the United States a say. The founders wanted a balance between complete freedom and extreme monarchy. The concept of a republican government was still fairly new at the time. By implementing a republican structure into the constitution, the founders were able to promote their republican ideals. Although Monarchy was out of the question, there was still the decision between direct democracy and republican. The idea of "majority rules" was flawed in the sense that it could easily become unbalanced. If one party was able to bring together enough votes to make it 51% to 49%, they would win. James Madison stated that if Rhode Island were to become its own confederacy that, "...the insecurity of rights under the popular form of government within such narrow limits would be displayed by such reiterated oppressions of factious majorities..." The government would be unjust and the majorities could be come factious. Instead of having majority rule, the 2/3 rule is stated in Article V. This allows …show more content…

There was a large idea of having the government separated with as little contact as possible between them. This largely translated into the constitution. Each of the different branches of government have their own section of the constitution. Within the different articles, the different guidelines of the government are stated. For example, in Article II, Section I, the ideas of allowing the people to vote on representatives and the president are stated. That is just one of many ways that the constitution promotes the republican ideals. With the constitution, the Founders were able to give the proper base for a thriving government. The republic ideals present within the Constitution promoted the government. The republican attitude set by the Founders created a republic that would be looked upon by

Open Document