|
Of course, you say, the Constitution caused the
Civil War. By recognizing and institutionalizing slavery, the war was
inevitable. But this is not the only reason that the Constitution caused the
Civil War. There was another, perhaps more important, reason that the founding
fathers caused our particular sectional strife. This reason is the electoral
college.
The presidency is key to analyzing the impact
of the Constitution on the war. The founding fathers envisioned voters
electing the best candidates as president and vice president. A quick look at
the first few elections reveals their intent. The first administration had
George Washington as President and John Adams as Vice President. When Adams
was elected President, Thomas Jefferson served as Vice President, even though
he was from the rival party. The framers would indeed be shocked to see how we
elect our presidents today.
The presidency changed with Andrew Jackson.
He portrayed himself as the people's representative, appealing directly to
them for support. The president became the symbolic center of the federal
government, as it is still seen today. As a result, the presidency became the
focus of partisanship and political parties placed much emphasis on
controlling the office. Thus, the method of choosing a president gained great
importance. It is here that the framers choice of the electoral college
becomes vital.
Concerned about the effect of popular
pressure upon the executive, the founding fathers chose to insulate the
president from the people. Unfortunately, this played a direct role in the
coming of the Civil War. In the first handful of presidential elections, votes
were cast not for the presidential candidates, but for slates of party
electors pledged to a candidate. In the nineteenth century, however, parties
abandoned choosing presidential electors by congressional district and
replaced it with granting all of a state's electoral votes to the candidate
who won the popular vote. This system permitted bloc voting by state.
Two consequences resulted from bloc voting.
First was to amplify the importance of the most populous states, which, of
course, controlled the most electoral votes. The second was greater in impact
and caused the Civil War. It permitted sectional parties. With support
confined to the North, the Republican party could not have won a presidential
contest based on the popular vote. In 1860, Abraham Lincoln won with less than
forty percent of the vote. However, since his support was concentrated in the
North, with its majority of electoral votes, he won. As the recipient of all
the electoral votes of each state he won, Lincoln swept ninety-eight percent
of the North's electoral votes while winning only fifty-four percent of the
vote in these states. The Republican party could only win under an approach
where the winner took all of a state's electoral votes.
The rise of the sectional Republican party
led to the war. When national politics were controlled by two truly national
parties, it was nearly impossible for the political gridlock that led to the
war to occur. With a constituency drawn from both North and South, a party was
forced into compromise and sectional accord. Even when the slavery issue rose
to the fore, the two party system was able to deflect its impact. The Missouri
Compromise, the Compromise of 1850, and the Kansas-Nebraska Act are examples
of the system at work.
For the system to work properly, though, both
parties must be accepted as legitimate. A truly sectional party, however,
finds it difficult to gain such legitimacy. Since its support is limited to a
certain geographic area or particular issue, the opposition finds it difficult
to treat it as a legitimate contender. The Free Soil and Know Nothing parties
are proof of this. In 1860, Southerners refused to give the Republican party
this standing. From their perspective, Lincoln's election was more than one
party assuming power from another, a temporary setback that could be
overturned in the next election. As a party whose sole purpose was the
elimination of slavery, in the South's eyes, the Republican success was a
turning point. Slavery would be ended, the Southern way of life destroyed.
Returning a Democrat to power in 1864 could not put back into place that which
had been destroyed. This was different than, say, repealing a tariff that had
been put in place. The nation could not be returned to the status quo that
stood prior to 1860. Faced with such a situation, the choice for Southerners
was clear. If the South remained in the Union, it faced the end of its way of
life. To save the society they had built, Southerners could not remain in the
Union. Secession seemed the only way out.
It is no great leap to claim that the
creation of the Republican party, a truly sectional party in its first years,
was the crucial link in the chain of events leading to the Civil War. The
success of the party was a direct outcome of the electoral college. Since this
system allowed a candidate who won a state to receive all of its electoral
votes, it permitted the scenario that resulted in Lincoln's victory. The
founding fathers were truly visionaries. They created a system that has not
only survived, but adapted well for over two hundred years. They were not
perfect, however. They could not foresee every possibility or consequence of
their creation. Nor should they be expected to. The conclusion is clear,
though, the Constitution caused the Civil War. |
|
