The Unfinished American Story – 6

We ended our last conversation with what may be one of the most important questions in this first chapter of the Unfinished American Story.

What does the Declaration of Independence ask of a people who claim the right to govern themselves?

I have spent much of my life thinking about that question. When I was young, my grandmother and I returned to it again and again. Looking back now, I realize she wasn’t really asking about the Declaration. She was asking about citizenship.

We had already concluded that rights and responsibilities travel together. A people who claim the right to govern themselves must also accept the responsibility to govern themselves wisely.

But what does that actually mean? Does it simply mean voting? Surely it includes voting. Does it mean obeying the law? Certainly. Does it mean paying taxes, serving on juries, or respecting the rights of others? Yes. But I have come to believe it asks still more of us.

Self-government requires self-discipline. It requires informed citizens. It requires curiosity. It requires the willingness to listen before judging. It requires the courage to speak when conscience demands it. It requires us to care not only about our own liberty, but also about whether our neighbors enjoy the same freedoms and opportunities that we claim for ourselves.

In other words, democracy is not simply a form of government. It is a way of living together.

My grandmother often reminded me that rights are easiest to defend when everyone agrees. The true test comes when we are called upon to defend the rights of people with whom we disagree. That, she believed, is where citizenship begins to mature.

Then she asked another question. “If all of that is true,” she said, “how do you suppose the founders intended to organize a government capable of protecting those rights?”

I remember looking back at the Declaration. It didn’t answer that question. It told us why governments exist. It told us where governments derive their authority. It told us what governments are supposed to accomplish.

But it did not tell us how such a government should actually work. For that, America still had work to do. Independence had been declared. A war still had to be fought. And even as that war continued, another question demanded an answer.

How could thirteen independent states govern themselves together while preserving the liberties for which they had just declared independence?

The first answer came in a document that many Americans rarely read today. It was called the Articles of Confederation.

My grandmother smiled. “Before we can understand why the Constitution became necessary,” she said, “we first have to understand why the Articles of Confederation were not enough.”

So let us continue our conversation by opening another chapter in the unfinished American story.

She waited for a moment before asking another question. “When the Declaration was signed, what exactly had been created?”

At first, I thought the answer was obvious. “The United States of America,” I replied.

She nodded. “Yes,” she said. “But what did those words actually mean in 1776?” I wasn’t sure. Looking back now, I realize why she asked the question.

We often imagine that the United States sprang into existence as the nation we know today the moment the Declaration of Independence was adopted. It did not. The Declaration proclaimed that thirteen British colonies were “Free and Independent States.”

That single phrase is worth reading carefully. States, Plural.

Each colony had declared itself independent not only from Great Britain but had also retained its own government, its own laws, its own identity, and many of its own interests. They had united in declaring independence, and they had fought together for that independence, but they had not yet created a truly national government capable of governing them as one people. In many respects, they remained thirteen separate republics joined by a common purpose.

My grandmother smiled again. “So,” she asked, “how do thirteen independent states become one nation?”

That proved to be one of the greatest political questions of the eighteenth century.

The Declaration had explained why the colonies should become independent. It had not explained how thirteen independent states could successfully govern themselves together. That question still needed an answer.

The first answer came in a document we seldom read today. It was called the Articles of Confederation.

My grandmother placed that document beside the Declaration on the table. “Before we decide whether the Article of Confederation succeeded or failed,” she said, “let’s give its authors the same courtesy we’ve given Jefferson. Let’s try to understand what they were trying to accomplish.”

Eventually, they realized that preserving liberty required something more than limiting power. It also required creating institutions capable of securing the rights the Declaration had proclaimed.

But before we join them there, I want to leave you with the same question my grandmother left with me.

“How do free people create a government strong enough to protect their liberty without becoming strong enough to endanger it?”

My grandmother and I looked down together at the Articles of Confederation she had spread in front of us next to the Declaration of Independence. “This one isn’t read nearly as often,” she said. “But if we want to understand the Constitution, we have to understand what came before it.”

She smiled. “Let’s see what they built.”

As we read through the Articles together, one thing quickly became apparent. The delegates who wrote them were trying to solve a very different problem than the delegates who would later write the Constitution.

They were not asking how to create a strong national government. They were asking how to prevent one. That distinction matters.

The Revolution had been fought against what many colonists believed was an overreaching central authority. They feared concentrated power. They worried that replacing one distant government with another would betray everything they had just fought to achieve. So they erred on the side of liberty. Or at least what they believed would best preserve it.

The Articles created a Congress where each state, regardless of size, had a single vote. They established a framework for cooperation among the states in matters of common concern. The states agreed to support one another in common defense and foreign affairs while retaining most of their own authority.

My grandmother looked up. “Does that sound reasonable?” It did to me. In many ways, it still does.

The states had fought together. Why shouldn’t they continue cooperating while governing themselves?

She nodded. “Now,” she said, “let’s see what they chose not to do.”

That question changed everything. The Articles gave Congress responsibility. But they often denied it the authority necessary to fulfill that responsibility.

Congress could request money from the states. It could not levy taxes to pay the nation’s debts. Congress could negotiate treaties. But it often lacked the power to ensure that individual states honored them. Congress could encourage cooperation among the states. But it could not regulate commerce between them.

There was no President to carry out national laws. There was no national judiciary to resolve disputes among the states or interpret national law consistently. Perhaps most importantly, changing the Articles themselves required the unanimous agreement of every state.

My grandmother stopped reading. “Can you begin to see the difficulties?”

I think I could. The national government had responsibilities. But it lacked many of the tools needed to carry them out.

It could ask. But it often could not require. It could recommend. However, it often could not enforce.

As the years passed, those omissions became increasingly difficult to ignore. The new nation struggled with debt. Trade disputes developed among the states. Foreign governments questioned whether agreements made with Congress would actually be honored. Economic unrest exposed weaknesses in the national government.

None of these problems meant that the ideals of the Declaration had failed. They meant something different. The ideals required institutions capable of protecting them.

That was the question now confronting the young United States.

The Declaration had proclaimed the nation’s ideals. The Articles of Confederation had revealed the difficulty of preserving them.

The founders now understood that if liberty was to survive, they would have to attempt something even more ambitious. They would have to build a government capable of securing the promises they had already made.

To do that, they would gather once more. This time, in Philadelphia.

Share

Leave a comment