Paper32

Ben Silverman Federalist Paper No. 32 Concerning the General Power of Taxation Thursday, January 3, 1788

** Summary ** Federalist Paper No. 32 focuses on the power of taxation. However it also articulates the battle between a strong central government and states' rights. Alexander Hamilton (Publius) demonstrates how there is no harm or damage in giving the Federal Government control over commerce. He accomplishes this by indicating that there would be a check and balance by the states and the people if their happened to be abusive power by the Federal Government.

Publius stated despite allowing the Federal Government the power over the money, the states should also have the right to tax their people with exception of taxation on imports and exports. He also states that whatever rights are not specifically granted to the Federal Government the states are able to retain. Publius displays the three ways in which the Federal Government has power over the states; 1) The Constitution gives the Federal Government exclusive power; 2) The Constitution grants the Federal Government rights and specifically tells the states they do not have the rights. 3) The Federal Government has the right and it would be contradictory and repugnant if the states also had the right. Publius then gives examples of each of these points to further highlight his arguments. ** Main Objective ** The main objective of this paper was to show the Federal Government had the highest authority, however the states would retain all rights not specifically granted to the Federal Government. Publius was able to argue for a strong central government while at the same time providing a compelling compromise to the Anti-Federalists. It also displays the three ways in which the Federal Government has the power over the states. ** Strongest Arguments ** The strongest arguments presented in Federalist Paper 32 were that the state governments would retain all rights of sovereignty unless exclusively delegated to the Federal Government. The three ways in which the Federal Government would be granted exclusive rights over the states are as follow: · When the Constitution gives the Federal Government exclusive power · When the Constitution grants the Federal Government rights and tells the states they do not have these rights. · If the Federal Government has the right and it would be contradictory if the states also had the right. Publius also states that the rights that are not specifically given to the Federal Government are given to the states. ** Opposing Arguments ** One of the Anti-Federalists arguments is that the Constitution will give the Federal Government to much power and the people aren't represented by it. During the time of the American Revolution the states were viewed as independent countries. As a result, the Anti-Federalists believed that the states should have the ultimate rights and the Federal Government should not be stronger than the states. Publius explains throughout this paper how the states and the people are granted many rights, but to maintain a civil society the Union must have the higher authority of power. Publius tries to convince the Anti-Federalists through his compromises that the states will still have specific rights even if the Constitution is ratified. ** Validity of the Arguments ** Publius does a great job of arguing for a strong Federal Government, but providing a compromise to ensure that states rights are protected. Publius was smart enough to include in his exclusive rights provisions, a Federal Government supremacy over the states when their respective rights were contradictory. This statement is subjective and broad enough to allow future arguments to support Federal Government supremacy. I believe that Publius convinced the Anti-Federalists that they were still going to be able retain significant authority even with the Constitution ratified. Publius made very good arguments and compromises throughout this paper such as how the states get all rights that are not specifically given to the Federal Government. Publius made such structural points there was little an Anti-Federalist could argue about. ** Do these issues exist today? ** The battle between the states right and a strong central government has been going on since the time of Alexander Hamilton through today. In fact, the Civil War was fought over state's rights. Ideas of gay marriage and gun laws are two conflicts between the states and the central government. On a more global scale, some argue that the United Nations should be a strong central government while others argue that each individual country should retain its own sovereignty. For instance some Americans would object to the fact that people in Iran or China could control the sovereignty of the people of the United States. This is similar to the people in 1776 of South Carolina being concerned about the people of the North such as New York controlling their fate.