According to James Madison, factions are groups of people who gather together to protect and promote their special economic interests and political opinions. Given the nature of man, factions are inevitable. As long as men hold different opinions, have different amounts of wealth, and own different amounts of property, they will continue to fraternize with people who are most similar to them. These factions are at odds with each other, frequently work against the public interests, and can infringe upon the rights of others.

Both serious and trivial reasons account for the formation of factions but the most important source of faction is the unequal distribution of property. Men of greater ability and talent tend to possess more property than those of lesser ability, and since the first object of government is to protect and encourage ability, it follows that the rights of property owners must be protected.

The framers established a representative form of government, a government in which the many elect the few who govern. Pure or direct democracies (countries in which all the citizens participate directly in making the laws) cannot possibly control factious conflicts. This is because the strongest and largest faction dominates, and there is no way to protect weak factions against the actions of an obnoxious individual or a strong majority. Direct democracies cannot effectively protect personal and property rights and have always been characterized by conflict.

Madison felt that the Constitution establishes a government capable of controlling the violence and damage caused by factions. In large republics, factions will be numerous, but they will be weaker than in small, direct democracies where it is easier for factions to consolidate their strength. The likelihood that public office will be held by qualified men is greater in large countries because there will be a larger pool of possible representatives to be chosen by a greater number of citizens. This makes it more difficult for the candidates to deceive the people. Representative government is needed in large countries, not to protect the people from the tyranny of the few, but to guard against the rule of the mob.

One need only look at the platforms of the major political parties and then look at the voting results from the 2000 presidential election to see that the factions of special interest groups and political parties are driving the public policy…not class warfare. If you look at the election results map for Bush vs. Gore in the 2000 presidential election, the map would show the voting division within the popular vote was derived from the political machines which targeted certain economic areas; suburban/rural vs. urban centers of our country. The Electoral College, however, served its purpose by checking this voting division between these factions, i.e. acting as a failsafe, and reflected more accurately the people’s interests when choosing the President.

Madison felt that the public’s view would be "refined and enlarged…by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, …the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose.” As you can see, by establishing an electoral college, which consists of electors chosen by those elected to represent the people, the public’s view was more fairly represented in the Presidential election.

Madison was convinced that the class struggle would become moot in America by establishing a limited federal government that would make functional use of the vast size of the country and the existence of the states as active political organisms. He stated that if an extended republic was set up including a multiplicity of economic, geographic, social, religious, and sectional interests, these interests, by checking each other, would prevent American society from being divided into the clashing armies of the rich and the poor. His conjecture was that the size of the United Sates and its variety of interests could be made a guarantee of stability and justice under the new constitution. When Madison suggested this idea the accepted opinion among politicians was the opposite. Madison contemplated what was available in a republic to restrain an interested majority from unjust violations of the minority's rights. There were three possible motives. First, "prudent regard for their own good, as involved in the general . . . good" second, "respect for character" and finally, religious scruples. After examining each in its turn Madison concluded that they were but a frail bulwark against a ruthless party. The tenth Federalist reads,

     "A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex ad oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good."

The 2000 Presidential election stands qualified by the tests of time, the Constitution and our Founding Fathers.

Nancy Salvato is a middle school teacher in Illinois and an independent contractor for Prism Educational Consulting. She is the Educational Liaison to IL Sen. Ray Soden and she works with national and local organizations furthering the cause of Civic Education. She is a columnist for American Daily, The Common Voice, GOP-USA, OpinionEditorials and The New Media Journal.us. Her writing has been recognized by the US Secretary of Education. She has been published in The Washington Times, The Washington Dispatch, Iconoclast, Free Republic Network & Townhall.com., as well as other nationally and internationally published media outlets.