1. THE CONSTITUTION: A COHERENT PLAN OF GOVERNANCE OR POLITICAL SAUSAGE?
What was the process of writing the Constitution? (Why does it matter that a series of votes was taken)? : Robertson: “The constitution was largely an unanticipated by-product of politically expedient compromises rather than the produce of a single plan.”
How did the ordering of votes shape the content of the Constitution?
Did they stand above inter-personal politics?
Did the room matter?

2. WHO’S THE FATHER OF THE CONSTITUTION
WHO’S THE FATHER OF THE CONSTITUTION?: ROGER SHERMAN AS MUCH AS MADISON
The Virginia plan (no state role), the NJ plan (states control the fed govt), & the “state federalists” led by Connecticut’s Roger Sherman
A uni- or bi-cameral (Two -or one-body) legislature?
Proportional (by pop. or wealth?) or equal representation? (As an aside, what does PR look like in most modern democracies?)
Federal supremacy? What should the fed gov be able to do? Regulate all commerce? Veto st. laws contrary to natl. interest? Impose and regulate taxes? Do whatever is in the public good?
What selectorate should fill public offices? Senate elected by the House or state leg.s? Should the natl. leg. select the president /cabinet? Should the leg. elect the SC?
What veto points should there be in making policy?
Judicial review? (Madison: Exec + cong committee w/ a collective veto; 50% vote of both houses to override)

3. WHAT WERE THE BIG COMPROMISES?
What was the Great (Connecticut) Compromise?
Two houses of Congress with diff. apportionment schemes and constituencies
Indirectly (State leg) will elect a Senate w/ unique powers the House won’t have
Indirectly (State leg) will elect electoral college; House election (1 state = 1 vote) of the pres. when EC doesn’t work
St. leg. will have central role in the Supreme Court via the Senate
What future for slavery? What kind of representation?
Would there be Property qualifications to vote?
What kind of taxing power? No personal income tax?

4. WHY WAS THE DEBATE OVER RATIFICATION DIFFERENT THAN THE DEBATE IN PHILADELPHIA?

5. The Anti-Federalist argument:
States will lose sovereignty
Commercial and urban interests will force their will on everyone else
US is too large for representative governance; the people will be come disconnected from their government
The federal tax power equals total control
The Constitution has huge loopholes for leg. and executive power
Bill of Rights necessary

6. The Federalist argument:
Most governments and people aren’t virtuous, so government must focus heavily on preventing popular tyranny
Constitution will limit and divide federal government, so there’s no worry about a strong federal government
People are incapable of using direct elections to protect themselves; must have republicanism
Republicanism will allow the country to grow large while keeping the people sovereign

7. WAS THE BATTLE OVER RATIFICATION & THE BILL OF RIGHTS SUPPOSED TO BE THE LAST WORD?
Why is the Constitution’s Amendment process so difficult, but its convention provisions so easy?
Why did the Founders think we would change the Constitution frequently? Why didn’t we?
What big things have changed through Amendments?
The most impt. Structural changes? Direct election of Senators, indiv. taxes power, & the 14th Amend.
All inclusive voting: Af. Amer., women, youth
Two terms, VP on ticket
Levinson’s critique of the current Constitution:
Two votes for each state regardless of population
Judicial review and the SC selection process
Presidents elected without majority support
How the veto is now used… And then there’s the filibuster
Impeachment for criminal presidents, but stuck with moronic ones?
The long transition… parties lose elections but pass additional legislation for two months?