Customer Reviews

The Founding Fathers Guide to the Constitution

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This is it! This is the book I've been hoping for years that somebody would write. Reading, and sorting through the debates, writings, ideas and opinions that formed the United States Constitution is a daunting task. But, it is the only way that one can discern precisely what the founders had in mind when they framed, and then enacted, our governing system. Dr. McClanahan cuts through all of the nonsense forwarded daily by elected representatives, incongruous Supreme Court Rulings, left-wing television pundits and right-wing radio talk show hosts with regards to the Constitution and what the Founders intended upon ratification of the document.

From familiar subjects such as "General Welfare", Federal "Supremacy" and "Necessary and Proper" to seemingly tenuous subjects, such as Article I, Section Four's delegation of power to control elections, new light is shed on virtually all areas of the Constitution. Additionally, it puts the Bill of Rights in proper context, as well as in proper order of importance (from the Founder's perspective). The arguments of both proponents and opponents of the Constitution are given so that the true meaning of the powers delegated (as well as many which were voted down, and why) may be discerned in proper context, and as the founders intended.

Drawing heavily from the Philadelphia Convention, the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, the State Ratifying Conventions, and various other writings by the Founders, this is neither a "right-wing", nor "left-wing" treatise of the Constitution- it is instead a contextual dissection of the powers delegated by that document. It is substantiated, not by the writer's opinion, but by the words of the Founders themselves.

With painstaking detail, Professor McClanahan has provided a book that both the scholar, as well as the casual historian, can draw from. It is thoroughly researched, well documented and well written so that anyone can understand it. I'll be reading it multiple times. Anyone who is interested in understanding our governing system, or who intends to participate in the voting process at some point in the future, should do the same. Five Stars!

What does the Constitution mean for us today? What did it mean for those who drafted and ratified it? Is the answer to those questions the same? Can they be? Should they be? The Constitution is the foundation-stone of our American political system, "the supreme Law of the Land" as the document styles itself in Article VI, Clause 2. As such, one might expect American citizens to have a good knowledge of the form of government outlined in the Constitution, particularly those who, as elected officials, take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. As is well-known, this is not the case. Most Americans, even those who consider themselves good, patriotic citizens have never read the thing in whole or in part and have perhaps only the vaguest idea of how it came to be and why.

Even among those with some familiarity with the Constitution there is disagreement with regard to the previous questions. Some claim that the system of government drafted in Philadelphia in 1787 is simply inadequate for a modern, diverse, nation of 300 million people. We can't be bound by the strictures of a document written so long ago. Others claim that it is simply impossible to know what the Founding Fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution. The language is vague and antiquated, they claim, and even the Founding generation argued among themselves about what the Constitution meant. How can we, over 200 years later, hope to see more clearly what they could not? At best, what the Constitution then provides us is a flexible, "living document" that can be adapted to the needs and desires of the present.

Before accepting such opinions, however, an effort should be made to actually try to understand what what the Framers and Ratifiers of the Constitution thought it meant, to test the assumption that its words and meaning are too opaque or that those men of that time didn't have a unifying, coherent vision. Could such views be the result of a dearth of intellectual energy or, more cynically, could they originate in the political inconvenience that a careful study of history can present? There is no better place to start this effort than this superb book by Brion McClanahan. In clear, direct prose accessible to anyone, McClanahan gives us the Constitution as the Framers and Ratifiers knew it, and it is important, indeed essential, that this explication of the Founding Fathers' Constitution include the Ratifiers along with the Framers of the Philadelphia Convention. After all, in some instances they were the same. It is truly remarkable how thorough, detailed, and heated, the ratification debates were. Those who supported the Constitution were forced to defend it, and in the process, explain it to often quite skeptical, even hostile, contemporaries. Taken together, we gain a clear idea of how the Constitution was viewed in 1787-1788, of what that generation of Americans believed it meant, what it requires and what it limits. McClanahan makes extensive and effective use of the Founders own words to explain the intention and meaning of each part of the Constitution. Although the Founders could differ widely in politics, the inescapable conclusion is that with respect to the blood and marrow operation of the document there was a significant harmony.

There have been many good books written about the historical origins of and the political theory underpinning the Constitution, but none of them achieves quite what McClanahan has done here. Here we have a clear, direct and well-written account of what the Founders thought about the inner-workings, the political mechanics, of that to which we hear so much praise but see so little fealty. In that, this book is exactly what its title says: a highly valuable guide for any American who takes his or her citizenship seriously. For most of them, McClanahan's book will be refreshing, exciting and perhaps even surprising. What they do with that knowledge is an important question, of course, but after reading this book its impossible to accept the notion that the Founders' understanding of the Constitution can't be known. It can, by reading this book, a rarity these days, one that respects the reader and leaves them knowing more than they did upon picking it up. Is is strongly recommended.

One of the measures of a great book is how much clarity it brings to sticky subjects. The sticky subject in this case affects many: how much power and reach does the central government rightfully have?

Should the Constitution be loosely interpreted, existing as an elastic "living document" where new powers are added freely? Or should it be strictly interpreted, existing as a "limiting document" whereby the powers given are limited to those expressly defined?

Leap frogging over 220+ years of punditry and political posturing, Dr. McClanahan's fascinating The Founding Father's Guide To The Constitution goes directly to original interpretations made by those who proposed and voted the new form of government into being. It was here, after all, that proponents and opponents grappled with the same issues of how the sparsely worded document should be interpreted.

By revealing these arguments that won the day and earned the Constitution its ratification we find great clarity of intent.

It's at this moment of the Constitution's path toward ratification that McClanahan submerges us -- where we experience the debates surrounding the document's handful of provisions. In their own words we see proponents of the Constitution interpret the new nation's proposed powers while overcoming opponents' interpretations to win agreement and win ratification.

Did the "Necessary and Proper" clause, for example, create an "elastic power" that gave free reign to expand the central government's reach? Or was it simply a means to strictly execute the powers outlined in the previous clauses of the document?

Only one of these interpretations assured States and enabled the Constitution's ratification.

In their own words we see the kind of government the framers and ratifiers agree to create.

It's pretty fascinating and a bit awe inspiring.

I admit to being moved while reading this book (with the benefit of two centuries of hindsight) at the prescience and integrity of those involved. By being submerged in these debates at the moment of its birth, you can't help feeling a Constitution other than the one created could very well have resulted... and perhaps failed like the Articles of Confederation before it.

I remember seeing a quote from TV talking head Joy Behar: "Do you think this Constitution-loving is getting out of hand?" The Founding Father's Guide To The Constitution is a book that hard-hearted folks like Joy might find within it something to love.

I sure did.

With scholarly clarity and effective simplicity, Brion McClanahan has compiled the essential resource for providing an understanding of the "original intent" of the Constitution.

I own several books on the Constitution, each covering much of the same material. Depending on the perspective or commentary needed, I turn to one over the others in conducting research for a column I'm writing or conversation I'm having. McClanahan's book is going to the top of that pile.

The Constitution has been so greatly misinterpreted so as to infer meaning that never existed at the time it was proposed, debated, and adopted by the founding generation. Restoring its guarantees of our rights and making it relevant once more requires that those who defend it truly understand the particulars of what it says and means. McClanahan's book will prove extremely valuable in that endeavor.

I highly recommend this book -- for any patriot, activist, or student, it is a must have!

This is truly a great resource. It's a great collection of material referenced back to the Constitution and what the arguments were really about. Instead of merely handing out pocket Constitutions people should also buy this book for those truly interested in the meaning and concerns of our founders. It's clear and concise but has a wealth of information footnoted to the original source.

"The Founding Father's Guide To The Constitution" is a well written, well researched, look at the original intentions of the founding fathers in each decision they had to make as to what to include in the Constitution, the wording of the document and much more. It quotes the founders themselves on term limits for the congress, judiciary and presidency, whether to have one president or three or not have one at all, whether to have one legislative branch or two and how it should be structured. It gives the founders views on judicial review and jury nullification. States rights were important to all the founders and how to protect them while preserving the union was much discussed. It quotes the founders on the troubling clauses of the Constitution, namely The General Welfare Clause, The Necessary and Proper Clause and The Commerce Clause. It discusses whether the founders meant for the document to be elastic and living or restrictive and limiting. There was much debate and considerable disagreement on these important matters among the authors of the Constitution. They had just come out from under the heavy handed rule of the British monarchy and were all concerned about abuse of power on the part of the federal government. While the founders disagreed on many issues, they were men with moral values that made our nation the great nation that it has been. As present experience has well taught us, the document is only as good as those who interpret and administer it. That is why it is so crucial to understand the intentions of the fathers in writing it. As it is a most excellent presentation of the reasoning of the founders in writing the Constitution as they did, I highly recommend it.

This is a well sourced book that debunks the myth, subscribed to by some, that the Founders intent is difficult if not impossible to discern. It is written in an easy to read style. A definite must read if you want to understand the US Constitution.

This is a perfectly fantastic book, especially in this current election cycle. The most thought-provoking sections dealt with the role of the President as viewed by the Founding Fathers, because Dr. McClanahan makes it crystal clear that we have drastically departed from that ideal here in the 21st Century. This book has made me re-evaluate my criteria for an effective President, which will have a direct impact on how I vote this year.

when you can learn much more about the Constitution in this 236-page handbook on the thoughts and arguments surrounding the ratification of one of our important founding documents. Mr. McClanahan's book frames the arguments for and against ratification by quoting from numerous attendees of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787.

Members of the convention, such as Patrick Henry, believed that the new constitution would mean that the liberties in the new nation would be put in great jeopardy while the Federalists headed by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton sought to assure the convention that such worries were unfounded. Madison famously stated in Federalist No. 45 that the new document provides the central (general) government with few and defined powers while the state governments could govern pretty much as they pleased save with certain limitations like not declating war or printing money.

The book provides enough information to refute the notion that such clauses as the "general welfare clause" and the "supremacy clause" were unlimited in scope; in reality they were defined, enumerated powers listed in Article 1, Section 8. Nearly every section of the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, is explained in basic detail. What I found new in my reading is that the formation of new states from other states must be approved by the legislatures of the affected states (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1). With this in mind, one can conclude that the formation of West Virginia was obtained in an unconstitutional manner. However, as we know today, the letter of the Constitution has been ignored in one form or another since its ratification beginning with the passage of the Sedition Acts. The author reminds us of the folly of not following the letter of the law with the result being the massive expansion of federal powers and the depredation of our liberties, something that Patrick Henry warned us about.

The book provides solid documentary evidence by quoting liberally from the orignal state conventions that debated the ratification. An important book that can be read by the layman who wants to know more about our constitution and save $100,000 by not going to law school.

Please read this book, buy an extra copy and pass it around to your friends. Everyone NEEDS to read this. This book makes our Constitution and Government so easy to understand. And sadly, so easy to see in detail where our government has turned a full 180 degrees away from its Constitution.