by Timothy Baldwin, J.D.
While the States were considering ratifying the Constitution, James Madison describes a prophetic โgathering stormโ, doomsday scenario for the United States. However, his description was hypothetical and purportedly unlikely.ย Madison paints a picture of what the union would look like under healthy conditions and then contrasts that with terminal conditions that would destroy the union. His portrayal is fascinating and worth applying today.
In Federalist Paper 46, Madison discusses the happy and healthy situation where the Federal and State governments respect their constitutional boundaries. Madison says, โ[the federal government will] be disinclined to invade the rights of the individual States, or the prerogatives of their governmentsโ. Congress would be the โguardians of a common interestโ and would not make โimproper sacrificesโฆof local considerations, to the aggrandizement of the federal governmentโ.
Madison continues, โthe motives on the part of the States governments, to augment their prerogativesโฆwill be overruled by no reciprocal predispositions in the members [of Congress].โ In other words, the States will not want to intrude into federal authority because the Federal government will not intrude in State territory. In this โconstitutional idealโ, Madison sees everyone respecting the authority of the other.
Madison then shifts his discussion to the hypothetical โwhat ifโ. He says, โ[w]ere it admitted, however, that the Federal government may feel an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the [States] would still have the advantage in the means ofย defeating such encroachmentsโ (emphasis added). Such means of defeating the federal governmentโs encroachments included actions like, โoppositionโ, โrefusal to cooperateโ, โfrowns of the [State] executiveโ, โobstructionsโ, โsignals of general alarmโ, and โplans of resistanceโ.
Keep in mind, Madisonโs description of โresistanceโ was made in context of a healthy, working union where the constitution remained and the amiable bonds of union were intact. The result of such conflicts within Federalism would ultimately be resolved through diplomacy where the peopleโs weight determined the outcome.
Madison furthers his โwhat ifโ hypothetical by describing a federal government that pursued โambitious encroachmentsโ.ย Madison predicts such usurpations would result in the same response โas was produced by the dread of a foreign, yokeโโnamely, independence from the usurping government. However, Madison cannot fathom such an event taking place; he says, โ[b]ut what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity.โ Madison feels such actions would be advanced by madmen, not fellow patriots.
Still, Madison answers his own question (for the sake of appeasing his audience) when he describes the (implausible) circumstances ripe for this tyranny. Madison says, the โonly refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previouslyย accumulate a military force for the projects of ambitionโฆ[I]t [is not] necessary now toย disprove the reality of this dangerโ (emphasis added).
Madison finds it unimaginable that the federal government could and would accumulate a military force capable and for the purpose of subduing the people and States. Madison bases his conclusion on these presumptions:
โ(1) the people and theย States [will not] electโฆmen ready to betray both; (2)ย [there will be no] traitorsโฆ[to] uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; (3) the governments and the people of the States [will not] silently and patientlyย behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own headsโฆ(4) [and further] the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able toย repel the danger [through militias]โ (emphasis and numbers added).
So here we are in 2011. Our world is not James Madisonโs world. Are Madisonโs presumptions correct today? Is the U.S. military incapable of subduing the States? Do the people elect only patriots, and not traitors? Do the States have the capability of successfully protecting themselves against opposing military? Are the people capable of forecasting a gathering storm?
Reasonable persons would conclude, the U.S. military is more than capable of subduing the States; the people do elect traitors to office; and the States have no adequate means of defending themselves against opposing military forceโfrom whatever source. (If someone has evidence to the contrary, let us see it.)
Now that the National Defense Authorization Act is law (see my previous articles on NDAA,ย hereย andย here), Madisonโs โgathering stormโ scenario is more real than ever. So, how are the States to protect themselves from enemies domestic and foreign (as they have a constitutional duty to doโsee, Art. 1, Sec. 3)? Is this an inappropriate question? If so, let us see the reason.
It is a proven maxim that States have the duty and right to protect and sustain themselves. It is also a maxim that every government owes to its citizens protection (e.g. 49-1-201, Mont. Code Ann., โEvery person while within the jurisdiction of this state is entitled to its protectionโ; Art. 1, Sec. 10, USC). In spite of the Second Amendmentโs prescription that the States maintain a well-regulated militia to secure a โFree Stateโ and the State constitutions and laws requiring State militias to protect the Stateโs homeland, there is not one State that is capable of protecting the citizens from domestic or foreign invasion.
Will the โgathering stormโ result in an actual storm? God knows, and time will tell; but unless the people have the discretion and discernment to โbehold the gathering stormโ, it is unlikely the people will do anything about it until the storm of hail is smashing peopleโs heads in.
Tim Baldwin is aย published author,ย public speaker, and a candidate for Montana’s State House of Representatives (website here). Baldwin is the author ofย Freedom For A Change,ย Romans 13-The True Meaning of Submission, andย Political Discussions for People of Statesโall of which are available for purchase throughย Liberty Defense Leagueย andย Romans13Truth.