The Original Compromise

What the Constitution's Framers Were Really Thinking

David Brian Robertson

Draws from little-used sources to provide a much fuller account of the debates in the Constitutional Convention of 1787
In contrast to narrative accounts, the book's thematic organization provides readers with a richer understanding of the the Founders' actual thought processes as they debated the great issues of their day
Robertson's argument about the prevalence of horse-trading and naked interest group politics sheds light on a central issue of our own era: the pervasive sense that US governmental system is dysfunctional

The Original Compromise

What the Constitution's Framers Were Really Thinking

David Brian Robertson

Description

The eighty-five famous essays by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay—known collectively as the Federalist Papers—comprise the lens through which we typically view the ideas behind the U.S. Constitution. But we are wrong to do so, writes David Brian Robertson, if we really want to know what the Founders were thinking.

In this provocative new account of the framing of the Constitution, Robertson observes that the Federalist Papers represented only one side in a fierce argument that was settled by compromise—in fact, multiple compromises. Drawing on numerous primary sources, Robertson unravels the highly political dynamics that shaped the document. Hamilton and Madison, who hailed from two of the larger states, pursued an ambitious vision of a robust government with broad power. Leaders from smaller states envisioned only a few added powers, sufficient to correct the disastrous weakness of the Articles of Confederation, but not so strong as to threaten the governing systems within their own states. The two sides battled for three arduous months; the Constitution emerged piece by piece, the product of an evolving web of agreements. Robertson examines each contentious debate, including arguments over the balance between the federal government and the states, slavery, war and peace, and much more. In nearly every case, a fractious, piecemeal, and very political process prevailed. In this way, the convention produced a government of separate institutions, each with the will and ability to defend its independence. Majorities would rule, but the Constitution made it very difficult to assemble majorities large enough to let the government act.

Brilliantly argued and deeply researched, this book will change the way we think of "original intent." With a bracing willingness to challenge old pieties, Robertson rescues the political realities that created the government we know today.

The Original Compromise

What the Constitution's Framers Were Really Thinking

David Brian Robertson

Principal Speakers at the Convention
Abbreviations
1. Introduction
Part 1: The Illness and the Cure
2. The Setting
3. The Remedy
4. Controlling Republican Politics: The Main Challenge
5. Broad Nationalism: The Politics of Virginia's Plan
6. Narrow Nationalism: The Virginia Plan's Opponents
Part 2: The Politics of Building Government Institutions
7. Selecting U.S. Representatives
8. Selecting U.S. Senators
9. Congressional Independence
10. Selecting the President
11. Presidential Independence and Isolation
12. The Courts and a Bill of Rights
Part 3: The Politics of Government Power
13. Federalism
14. Slavery
15. Economic Authority
16. National Security and Foreign Policy Authority
17. The End Game
18. Conclusion: A Republic If You Can Keep It
Appendix 1: Chronological Sequence of Constitutional Convention Decisions
Appendix 2: The United States Constitution and accompanying documents from the Constitutional Convention

The Original Compromise

What the Constitution's Framers Were Really Thinking

David Brian Robertson

Author Information

David Brian Robertson, University of Missouri Curators Teaching Professor and Professor of Political Science, University of Missouri, St. Louis

David Brian Robertson is Curator's Distinguished Teaching Professor of Political Science at the University of Missouri, St. Louis. He is the author of The Constitution and America's Destiny and Federalism and the Making of America.

The Original Compromise

What the Constitution's Framers Were Really Thinking

David Brian Robertson

Reviews and Awards

"The Original Compromise combines profound scholarship with remarkably accessible writing to make more clear than ever before just how and why the Constitution emerged in the form that it did. Robertson is attentive to the framers' ideas and their intertwined interests, and he traces persuasively the initiatives, negotiations, and compromises that led to their imperfect but enduring achievement." - Rogers M. Smith, Christopher H. Browne Distinguished Professor of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania

"By systematically considering the political process that produced the Constitution, this immensely useful and beautifully realized study reveals the many compromises that made the government of the United States possible. So doing, it deepens understanding of key themes in American political development, and thoughtfully explains why ambiguities about constitutional meaning continue to animate contemporary disputes." - Ira Katznelson, Ruggles Professor of Political Science and History, Columbia University

"The Philadelphia Convention may have been 'an assembly of demigods,' as Thomas Jefferson later suggested. But the Constitution was still written one word at a time. By letting the delegates speak for themselves, Robertson shows us that genius works in pieces, that creation is a stormy voyage of discovery, and that human frailty is a necessary virtue." - Richard F. Bensel, Professor of Government, Cornell University

"...Robertson draws chiefly from the records of the convention debates to portray the reasoning of the delegates and the progression of agreements and compromises... Recommended." - CHOICE

The Original Compromise

What the Constitution's Framers Were Really Thinking

David Brian Robertson

From Our Blog

Gridlock and The Federalist

By David Brian Robertson In the The Federalist, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay offer us urgent lessons for coping with the kind of gridlock that grips American government today. They were defending a plan intended to replace a failing national government. The proposed Constitution aimed to break a government stalemate that threatened the survival of the infant American republic.

Posted on October 27, 2013

Read the blog post