Anarchist420
Diamond Member
First of all, Madison wrote the Bill of Rights, and the Antifederalists were disappointed with it.
First of all, there were 2 ways in which the 10th Amendment could have meant more, yet the weakest possible option was chosen. It could have been the only Amendment in the bill of Rights, by making it the 2nd of the Articles of Confederation; failing that, it could've had the word "expressly" added so it would read "all powers not expressly delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states".
If he had chosen to use the 2nd of the Articles of Confederation, then basically, that would have made it much more difficult for the government to use the commerce, welfare, and necessary and proper clauses. It also would've made the states supreme, or at least equal to the federal government.
So, the fact that he didn't even put the word "expressly" as many demanded, is good evidence that he did endorse the living document view. While he did write that the Federal government's powers would be "few and enumerated" and that the States' powers would be numerous and indefinite, the fact that even Jefferson didn't believe the Bill of Rights to be radical enough also indicates that the true intentions of the Constitution were for a strong centralized government.
Further, when he was President, he had undeclared wars and finally, he signed into law the 2nd BUS which gave the government the power to issue fiat currency, which is prohibited by the letter, but not the spirit of the Constitution.
First of all, there were 2 ways in which the 10th Amendment could have meant more, yet the weakest possible option was chosen. It could have been the only Amendment in the bill of Rights, by making it the 2nd of the Articles of Confederation; failing that, it could've had the word "expressly" added so it would read "all powers not expressly delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states".
If he had chosen to use the 2nd of the Articles of Confederation, then basically, that would have made it much more difficult for the government to use the commerce, welfare, and necessary and proper clauses. It also would've made the states supreme, or at least equal to the federal government.
So, the fact that he didn't even put the word "expressly" as many demanded, is good evidence that he did endorse the living document view. While he did write that the Federal government's powers would be "few and enumerated" and that the States' powers would be numerous and indefinite, the fact that even Jefferson didn't believe the Bill of Rights to be radical enough also indicates that the true intentions of the Constitution were for a strong centralized government.
Further, when he was President, he had undeclared wars and finally, he signed into law the 2nd BUS which gave the government the power to issue fiat currency, which is prohibited by the letter, but not the spirit of the Constitution.
