Civics In A Year
What do you really know about American government, the Constitution, and your rights as a citizen?
Civics in a Year is a fast-paced podcast series that delivers essential civic knowledge in just 10 minutes per episode. Over the course of a year, we’ll explore 250 key questions—from the founding documents and branches of government to civil liberties, elections, and public participation.
Rooted in the Civic Literacy Curriculum from the Center for American Civics at Arizona State University, this series is a collaborative project supported by the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership. Each episode is designed to spark curiosity, strengthen constitutional understanding, and encourage active citizenship.
Whether you're a student, educator, or lifelong learner, Civics in a Year will guide you through the building blocks of American democracy—one question at a time.
Civics In A Year
Constitutional Insights Through the Federalist Papers
The Federalist Papers stand as America's original political science—a blueprint for constitutional government that remains surprisingly relevant 240 years after its creation. In this enlightening conversation with Dr. Paul Carrese, we explore why these historical documents continue to shape our understanding of governance despite dramatic changes in American society.
What makes the Federalist Papers so enduring? As Dr. Carrese explains, the fundamental questions they address - federalism, separation of powers, the character needed for self-governance - remain at the heart of our political discourse. When courts interpret the Constitution, when states assert their rights against federal power, when we debate the proper role of the presidency, we're engaging with the same issues Publius explored centuries ago.
We uncover several overlooked dimensions of these seminal texts: their emphasis on civic virtue and the character necessary for republican government; their implicit model of statesmanship (with George Washington as the unspoken exemplar); their ambitious vision for American greatness; and their commitment to reasoned, civil debate. These aspects reveal why even bitter political rivals like Jefferson and Madison could agree that every University of Virginia student should read the Federalist.
The enduring relevance of these essays raises profound questions about our constitutional heritage. Is it a mere coincidence that America became the world's leading power based on the principles articulated in the Federalist? What wisdom from Publius might help us navigate today's political challenges? Join us as we explore how America's founding documents continue illuminating our path forward, and subscribe to our upcoming episode on the crucial constitutional debates between Federalists and Anti-Federalists.
Check Out the Civic Literacy Curriculum!
School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership
Welcome back everyone to Civics in the Year. Today we're talking about how we use the Federalist Papers to help us understand the Constitution.
Speaker 2:And with us we have Dr Paul Carice, dr Carice, our question27. We're 240 years after 1787. So I can understand some skepticism. Isn't there just too much that has changed in America and the world, from the world that Publius knew 240 years ago, world from the world that Publius knew 240 years ago. So you know how relevant can the Federalist Papers be, even to understand the Constitution 240 years later. I mean, just take the question of amendments. There are 27 amendments. There's been a civil war related to some of those. Then, beyond that we've we've had two world wars. So I I could see the skepticism. But in fact, even accounting for all the change in the world and the change brought about by let's, you know, put aside the first 10 amendments, which of course publius knew about. You know, certainly madison knew about madison's proposing the amendments in the House. So let's roll the first 10 into the original constitutional founding that Publius comprehends and understands, but the further 17, there's amendments toward inclusion, greater democracy, abolishing slavery and voting for Black men at any rate, and then women's suffrage and lowering the voting age later in the 20th century, then empowering the federal government. How can Publius help us understand these kinds of changes? Well, I don't think I'm just being overly fond of the Federalists and of Publius to say nearly all of these issues are within the four corners, within the orbit of the constitutionalism and I'll call it the political science that's in the Federalists.
Speaker 2:Take just the structural questions issues, federalism and separation of powers. Are we still debating those? Do we still need some original insights about the debates over them and what they might mean? You know the Federalist case looks good in lots of ways. We certainly have seen from the War of 1812 on to later international wars that we really did need a strong national government. We needed a strong military capability. When we didn't in the War of 1812, our national capital was invaded and burned right and then we learned from that went on. Have we seen the advantage of having a strong federal government to promote commerce among the states with foreign trading partners? I think generally yes. We've seen the advantage of the very large pluralistic federal republic, obviously famously defended in Federals 10, but don't forget Federals 9. I think we've seen the advantage of that.
Speaker 2:On the other hand, the anti-federalist arguments look pretty serious. There's a lot of foresight pressings there. Has the federal government grown so large that the spirit of self-government in the states and localities. Even in civil society, the spirit of self-government has suffered, has dwindled to some extent. Those are real. Everything I just mentioned those are real issues in 2025 in our political debate. I think they should be issues of serious academic, intellectual discussion as well.
Speaker 2:Let me just go on about federalism In 2025, under the second Trump administration. Aren't there governors in in democratic majority States rediscovering federalism, worried about limits on a president, a very active president, limits on the power of the federal government? Doesn't that happen when you know a situation is flipped? Democratic president, you know, red states, as we call them, republican-controlled states. So that set of issues, separation of powers I mean in my adult lifetime I'm nearly 60 years old, but paying attention since the 70s or the 80s to politics.
Speaker 2:It's always the case that the minority party in Washington DC is talking about separation of powers, how important it is Separation of powers. The House and Senate they always want the judiciary to be, you know, keeping a close eye on the executive branch. And they always want the administrative agencies you know to have, especially the independent ones like the Fed. We're talking about the Federal Reserve now and news at the moment. They want them to have, you know, independent power. So these are all reasons why the Federalists, literacy about knowledge of the Federalists and again I'll use the phrase the political science, the first political science of our country, of the Federalists, is still very relevant and the independent confirmation of this is that it's still the case that the Federalist is regularly and widely cited in federal appellate court opinions where they're really getting into constitutional interpretation, in the circuit courts and obviously in the US Supreme Court. It's still seen the Federalist as having the best insight on the original public meaning of the Constitution as a whole, particular clauses, particular clauses.
Speaker 2:And then I'll finally add right now that in 2025, late 2025, we're clearly in the America 250 commemoration period that officially begins in 2026, 250 years after 1776. And that's gaining some national attention and support seemingly with every passing week. And so there's significantists invokes the Declaration of Independence, invokes the principles of the revolution, either explicitly or strongly, alluding to the Declaration, the spirit of 1776, the spirit of the revolution as guiding its arguments for why this is. We need a stronger federal government, a stronger union, stronger government in the center of the union. They're invoking the Declaration. So that's a great question for us as we begin A250, which, again, as we talked about, I hope goes on for decades, as we'll begin it. What's the connection between Declaration and the Constitution, and the Federalist is there again. The Federalist is a great resource.
Speaker 1:So, dr Freese, what are some other dimensions of the Federalist Papers that we tend to overlook? Now, right, we're almost 200, I mean 240, 230 years later after they were written. So there might be themes or characteristics that we might find valuable in understanding our constitutional form of ordered liberty, how we might use the Constitution better, be a better citizen or have healthier politics.
Speaker 2:I'll mention four ideas about this, having just mentioned we tend to overlook the presence of the Declaration of Independence in the Federalists. But four additional points. One is the Federalists our first political science, our first account of the larger and more detailed meanings of the Constitution. How much we forget, overlook how much the Federalist talks about the character of a free people, and I'll call it the need for civic virtue. Does use the ideas about civic virtue explicitly, at least at one point, but generally the need for civic virtue in a self-governing people, the need for a commitment to liberty and to justice, the need for commitment to the rule of law in a republican form of government, not a democracy so that the interests and the passions of people are channeled through complex constitutional republican forms so as to better serve the long-term interests of the whole community, the public interest, and to protect minority rights and or everybody's, you know, individual rights that can't just be done through having the parchment, constitution and institutions.
Speaker 2:there has to be a spirit, a character in the people to realize the value of these institutional, constitutional forms, these principles, to to stick with them, channel, channel our energy and our interests and passions through the complex constitutional forms. Separation of powers at the federal level, but also federalism between the state, local level, and, one hand, national, federal level. That means, you know, it takes a certain character to have regard for offices that seem very far away. You know it takes a certain it takes a certain character to have regard for offices that seem very far away. You know federal judges seem very far away from us. Who you know who appointed these nine justices in court and it takes only five to get a majority. Who appointed them? You know demigods far away. I think. You know crucial constitutional questions, maybe overturning laws passed by the. You know the Congress and the president, but you know the Senate, the president as well. Have they? They seem like very remote figures in ways. Who gave them all this power? But the federalists, the political science of the federalist, makes an argument for this and then calls for a kind of constitutional character, a Republican civic character in a people. That's, of course, why we're doing what we're doing at the Center for American Civics and in the School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership. You know, this whole system doesn't run of itself. It requires a civic education and civic commitment. So that's one theme if you want to know where you know.
Speaker 2:The opening question in Federalist number one can free peoples form governments on the basis of reflection and choice, or are we destined to live under accident and force, meaning Republican, free governments fail, and that this might be the most interesting question in all the world Will the American federal republic, will America, succeed? Number 37, about the Republican spirit and the Republican character of America and of this proposed constitution to help improve American politics, american government. Number 55, explicitly, publius calls out the need for virtue in the citizenry. Yes, we want to rely on these institutional forms, separation of powers, auxiliary precautions, as number 51 says, but we need also virtue in the citizenry. And then, as I've just been alluding to the references to the high offices later in the federals, the defense of the Senate, the defense of the presidency, the defense of federal judiciary, those are places to look.
Speaker 2:And then the second point. So, second point related to it, we overlook the regard for statesmanship character in the leaders in particular, and especially, I think, this sort of implicit presence of George Washington as the model. Especially I think this sort of implicit presence of George Washington as the model, never cited by name, but come close to it at one point, saying enlightened statesman won't always be at the helm. So we need these complicated institutional mechanisms and checks, but wouldn't it be nice if enlightened statesman were at the helm more often? Is the implication there? So again, the defense of the senate, especially numbers 70 and 72, and the presidency, the senate. I would look to number 62 and 63, including by john jay on the, the important leadership statesmanship role there, number 70, 72, also in a way federal 78, a kind of judicial statesmanship, not activism, not political, but statesmanship for the rule of law and for constitutional rule.
Speaker 2:Now, not so much for the judiciary but certainly for the ideas of statesmanship in the executive and the Senate. Washington is the implicit model, never explicitly invoked. The closest would be the reference to enlightened statesmanship, enlightened statesman owners via the helm, the model for the presidency in 1772. And I'll mention you know it's no accident that George Washington knows about the Federalist and has the essays reprinted in Virginia Makes a private initiative, doesn't want his fingerprint seen on it but to help the Virginia ratification project. And then I'll mention one other sort of interesting historical note that you could say in a way, madison and Hamilton and Jay are all proteges of George Washington. They all knew him, they all worked with him and in a way the political science of the Federalists 85 essays is written with the model of Washington in mind and he's the president of the Constitutional Convention. So in a way the spirit is all throughout. He reprints them, washington reprints them to Virginia, and then in 1796, in the farewell address we could do a whole separate episode on this he pulls Publius back together. After there's been such a strong split between Madison and Hamilton, he has Hamilton in 1796 use Madison's draft from 1792. And then, when he likes what Hamilton has done, he eventually asks Hamilton to talk to John Jay about that nearly final draft. And so Washington has pulled together publicists Madison, hamilton, jay to write the prologue.
Speaker 2:So just a couple of other quick things that we overlook. A third point the ambition for American greatness in the Federalist. Again it begins with number one, maybe the most interesting question in the world Will this American experiment in self-government succeed? And it's a matter of philanthropy for Americans to think we need to make self-government succeed here so that the model can spread. Number 11, defense of a Navy. It's not only to protect us, federalist.
Speaker 2:Number 11 talks about vindicating the rights of mankind. If we are strong enough military power to be shaping a more moderate, decent kind of politics out there in the globe, the clear ambition for American greatness that comes across in the essays on the presidency, especially 70, 71, 72. So again, is it an accident this relates to your opening question what do you really still learn about the Constitution by studying the Federalists? Well, 230 years later, can we ask is it an accident that America became the single greatest power in the world on the basis of this political science laid out by the Federalists and the Constitution and the kind of character it calls for the people, the character it calls for statesmanship? It's clear, doing the math right, it's 160 years, from 1787, 1788 to the end of Second World War, 1945, late 1940s, when we're clearly one of the two greatest powers in the world maybe the greatest then and we're clearly the sole superpower by 1991. You know, just a little over 200 years. Is that accidental? Or maybe just put this explain how we laid the foundation for that and then state's been built on it.
Speaker 2:And then final, final point, and then I think we'll talk about this in a later episode we overlook the importance of moderation and debate, reasonable civil debate. That's right. In the Federalist they quote Anti-Federalist authors. You know they say some snarky things about Anti-Federalist authors, but they quote them and they're arguing with them. And in Federalist number one and Federalist number 85, publius Hamilton opens and closes by calling for moderation, for debate, reasonable civil disagreement about this. And I mentioned this in an earlier episode we did on the Anti-Federalists. We'll talk about it some more.
Speaker 2:There's a great scholar in the 20th century, herbert Storing, saying this debate between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists is indispensable for understanding America. You don't understand the Constitution. You don't understand the founding. The Federalists understand their Constitution. They're proposing better because they're going to meet the challenge of the Anti-Federalist arguments, some of which are excellent. And then Storing's larger point that the meaning of the Constitution comes out in the debate. The Federalists learn more about constitutional order we all do from the debate.
Speaker 2:So those are all some reasons to split Federalists and Jeffersonians, hamilton and Jefferson decades later in 1818, excuse me after both Jefferson and Madison have been president. They are leading the design of the University of Virginia and the curriculum of the University of Virginia. What do they place on the required reading list for all students at the University of Virginia in 1818, including it? You know the Declaration, okay. And then the greatness, the magnanimity of George Washington in 1796. You've got his farewell address? Okay. They also have the Federalist. Every University of Virginia student got to read the Federalist. Wish that were still the case today.
Speaker 2:But you know, even after the partisan split and you know, maybe Thomas Jefferson thought more of the essays were written by Madison than he actually understood Two-thirds of them were written by Hamilton. But it's Hamilton writing as Publius. You know, hamilton, madison and Jay. This is the political science of the founding of the Constitution. So Jefferson can join Madison in 1818 saying this is indispensable. This is the greatest commentary on free government and that echoes what Washington says in 1788, at the time they're being written. This is the greatest commentary on the principles of free government, as well as on our own constitutional order. So sorry, I got a little excited and went on a bit.
Speaker 1:I love that, though, and, listeners, we are going to yes, we are going to talk in our next episode about the debates and what they can mean for us today. So, dr Carice, thank you so much for your expertise, and I can't wait to talk about the debates after this.
Speaker 2:Okay, thanks Liz.
