The most significant argument presented in the Federalist paper number seventy involves giving the executive absolute power to make it strong and prevent any mischievous encroachment from both external and internal forces. It was presented by Alexander Hamilton on March 15, 1788. In his presentation, Hamilton emphasizes on the need to have an energetic executive over any other arm of government. To him, a vigorous executive defines the qualities of a good government. When absolute authority is vested in the executive, it will be able to carry out its functions properly. The analogy presented in the Federalist paper number seventy formed the basis of the present-day powerful executive in the United States.
It is common knowledge that an American president is the most powerful figure in the world. The paper outlines that anything contrary to a powerful executive that is led by a president is a recipe for a weak government. Hamilton explains in the second paragraph that people apply in their practical life what is written in theory. Therefore, a feeble executive means that the government will be weak, and as such the execution of functions will be bad. The question of whether there is a need for an energetic executive remains inconsequential as all well-wishers who are open-minded will agree that it is the only way the citizens can be served to the fullest. What is significant is to assess the constituents of the energy that should propel a strong executive to a level of becoming very vigorous. The process demands an evaluation of the degree to which the factors of energy can be joined to make sure that the republicans are safe.
The Federalist paper number seventy states that there are four qualities of a strong executive. They include harmony, time, satisfactory support, and proficient powers. Authority without power is useless. The safety of American people can be guaranteed if the executive relies on the service to humanity and having due responsibility that is accountable. Hamilton elaborates that the duty of checking the executive should be left to the legislature. In the distribution of power, the paper quotes the structure of Rome that was divided into two. Absolute power remained in Rome.
Rome could set the policy and agenda for its people while the second arm was left to the small distant institutions that helped in the running of the nation’s affairs. In the American case, the interests of the people will be brought through the legislature where the citizens’ own elected representatives would sit to deliberate on issues. Absolute power cannot be shared by two or more centers. If this happens then, unity will be destroyed because of the wrangles that would emerge. This could come from rivalry, competition, or normal human selfish interests. They may also be expressions of frustrations.
The eighth passage in the article explains why Hamilton feared for a nation whose executive was feeble. Political systems including parties were run in fear and were full divisive politics before the American Revolution. The founders of the nation of America hoped to strike unity of purpose across the entire U.S. They included Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Alexander Hamilton. They, however, did not find this an easy ride as only thirteen states were prepared to take part in the war of the revolution.
Different competing interests from different states and leaders led to this tough journey towards unity. The fight for a united country is what led to Abraham Lincoln declaring war on states such as California that had defied the call for unity. The president had to be powerful to meet the cause of unity. This is captured in the eighth passage when Hamilton salutes the ideology of New York and New Jersey posting the center of power to one solitary entity. This is the ingredient of enhancing unity according to Alexander Hamilton. The act of distributing executive power led to the collapse of Rome.
The emphasis on ensuring that power is vested on one spot is to avoid the pitfalls that are highlighted in passage eleven. The paper identifies that any engagements involving more than one person will likely experience the impact of differing opinions. The situation is very precarious if the different parties are entrusted with a public or state office because the outcome could cause animosity. This will make the authority weak and distract the plans of execution by the feuding parties. Delivery of service in such a case will be impractical as important government functions will be curtailed.
The reoccurrence of such actions could split the nation into factions that oppose each other and the consequences could be violent war. Eventually, the nation may be forced to split because the warring factions could be irreconcilable. The remedy that would avoid all these likely occurrences is to have a strong executive office with absolute powers and a big legislature to check the executive. Up to date, the U.S. has an imperial presidency. What the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans who were the founders of the nation of America fought to meet that is Unity through an energetic executive is now being enjoyed by all Americans.