Ability, Virtue, and Donald Trump:

What Alexander Hamilton Would Say about the 2016 Election

By David W. Rivera and Sharon Werning Rivera

Hamilton College, NY

December 15, 2016

Photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/hamiltoncollege/9597140857/

Alexander Hamilton has been enjoying a renaissance of late. The hit Broadway musical based on his life has elevated George Washington’s “right-hand man,” as one song dubs him, to a position of prominence in pop culture. Among scholars of the American Constitution, Hamilton has long been known for his arguments on behalf of the peculiar manner in which we Americans elect our president. Hamilton’s rationale for the existence of the Electoral College is startlingly relevant — even prescient — at the present moment in our nation’s history.

Hamilton’s core arguments are contained in The Federalist №68, entitled “The Mode of Electing the President.” “The process of election” via the Electoral College, he writes, “affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union.” A candidate for the presidency who is devoid of the “requisite qualifications,” Hamilton in essence is saying, might on occasion nonetheless win the trust of the voters on the basis of duplicitous populist appeals; democracy is not perfect. A strength of the proposed Constitution, however, is that the Electoral College would be able to block such an individual from becoming president and instead make sure that the post went to a candidate “pre-eminent for ability and virtue.”

As Hamilton predicted would occur from time to time, Donald Trump’s victory in this year’s presidential election was in no small part based on promises that he has no ability — and, in some cases, had no intention — to keep (“low intrigue”) and that reality-television star’s skills at stoking fear and inflaming passions (“the little arts of popularity”). More importantly, both during the campaign and since his election, Trump has demonstrated that he sorely lacks both the sound judgment (“ability”) and the willingness to put the interests of the polity and its citizens ahead of his own (“virtue”) that Hamilton regarded as prerequisites for serving as president. In light of these realities, it seems clear that Hamilton would join with the many voices who are calling on this year’s contingent of electors to fulfill their constitutional function in the manner that he envisaged.

Trump’s Lack of the Requisite Judgment

Although Trump has never before served in government or, indeed, held an elected office of any kind, such lack of experience in and of itself does not render him unqualified to serve as president. However, many of his statements and policy positions do signify that he lacks the qualifications of a person who can safely be entrusted with the vast powers of the presidency:

· During the campaign, Trump expressed a willingness to commit war crimes as president, such as the use of torture as well as killing the families of terrorists. At a campaign event in the spring, Trump stated: “Torture works. OK, folks? Believe me, it works. OK? And waterboarding is your minor form, but we should go much stronger than waterboarding.”

· Trump similarly expressed regret that the United States did not violate international law by seizing Iraq’s oil during its occupation of that country (even though such theft would have fanned the flames of anti-Americanism throughout the Middle East and served to attract millions of Muslims worldwide to the cause of violent jihad). “It used to be to the victor belong the spoils,” he lamented at the Commander-in-Chief forum this fall.

· Even though he is currently appointing numerous military officers to leading positions in his cabinet, Trump belittled our nation’s top generals by claiming that they had been “reduced to rubble,” and also declared that “I know more about ISIS than the generals do.”

· Statements such as these led fifty top national security experts from the Republican Party to sign a letter stating that Trump “is not qualified to be President and Commander-in-Chief. Indeed, we are convinced that he would be a dangerous President and would put at risk our country’s national security and well-being.”

· As if purposefully proving these experts correct, Trump has shown himself to be willing to disregard the reasoned judgments of the professional analysts serving in our nation’s intelligence agencies when doing so is politically expedient.

Trump’s Lack of Virtue

In addition to a deficit of judgment, Trump has also repeatedly manifested a selfish disregard for both many of his fellow citizens and the sanctity of our nation’s political institutions. A (partial) list of examples includes the following:

· Trump’s campaign for the presidency was riddled with misogynistic and borderline-racist statements, most notably (but not exclusively) directed against immigrants from Mexico. Such crude appeals have naturally led thousands of Americans to take to the streets to declare that Trump is “not my president.” Trump’s appointment of Steve Bannon, the controversial editor of a news service known for posting racially inflammatory and even white supremacist commentary, as his chief strategist all but guarantees that the alienation felt by these protestors will continue into the future.

· During the campaign Trump encouraged a foreign power, Russia, to hack into his opponent’s private email server for the purpose of revealing information that could be damaging to her campaign.

· As was revealed by the infamous Access Hollywood recording, Trump has openly bragged about committing sexual assault. It is worth recalling that allegations about sexual harassment committed by Justice Clarence Thomas that was purely verbal in nature were considered serious enough to place his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court in jeopardy.

· As a central part of his campaign, Trump all but promised to imprison his opponent for the presidency after becoming president. “Hillary Clinton has got to go to jail,” he declared at a rally in June. “Lock her up!” subsequently became a central motif of the Republican Party’s convention in July.

· During the third presidential debate, Trump flatly refused to commit to respecting the will of the voters in the event of his defeat in the presidential contest. Over the course of the subsequent weeks, he then proceeded to issue baseless and false claims that the electoral process was rigged against him (claims that are completely disproven by its outcome on November 8). Both of these actions reveal a lack of commitment on his part to democratic procedures and, moreover, serve to undermine faith in the core institutions of our polity.

Going Forward: Revitalizing a Core Function of the Electoral College

In light of these many reckless statements, lapses in judgment, and character flaws (as well as many others that could be cited) on the part of the president-elect, it seems clear that Alexander Hamilton would urge Republican members of the Electoral College to recall one of the original purposes of that institution. In particular, in line with the effort already underway by two self-described “Hamilton electors,” he would support working with Democrats to elect a “compromise candidate” consisting of a moderate Republican. In this regard, electors should give special consideration to individuals who already possess a stamp of approval from past Republican Party conventions (such as, for instance, Senator John McCain). Should that option not prove viable, the electors should also recall that the Framers of the Constitution, seemingly operating in a less partisan environment than exists today, originally created a system in which the runner-up for the presidency served as vice-president. Hence, they likely would look kindly on electors casting their votes for a much more qualified candidate from an opposing party.

Admittedly, either step would be unprecedented. Although there have been over 150 “faithless electors” in the past, their actions have never altered the outcome of a presidential contest. However, 2016 has already witnessed outcomes that are equally unprecedented. First, no candidate since 1876 has lost the popular vote by a margin as wide as this year’s (2.1%), yet won the presidency. And second, never before has the electorate — or, more accurately in this case, the Electoral College system — given the victory to an individual who possesses the character traits that were described above.

Moreover, since election day Trump has provided additional evidence of his glaring deficits in terms of both judgment (“ability”) and selflessness on behalf of the nation (“virtue”). First, confirming worries that his management of foreign affairs would make him a dangerous president, Trump recently violated the United States’ long-standing “One China” policy by taking a phone call from the President of Taiwan. Given that Trump’s national security team has not yet been fully formed, it is clear that this abrupt change in policy was not given the careful deliberation that it deserved. Second, Trump continues to make statements that serve to undermine faith in our nation’s democratic institutions, most recently by issuing baseless claims that “millions of people” voted illegally for his opponent. Third, Trump’s continuing use of Twitter to attack private citizens who criticize him has already led some to label him “cyberbully in chief.” And fourth, defying both past precedent and common sense, the entire Trump family has spent the last month intertwining business and policy-making and they clearly intend to continue to do so in the future. As a result of the violations of the Foreign Emoluments Clause of the Constitution that such a situation will unavoidably create, lawsuits — and perhaps even impeachment proceedings — are likely to be initiated against the future president in short order.

For this and the many reasons discussed above, the members of the Electoral College should heed Alexander Hamilton’s counsel and carefully consider whether the president-elect possesses the requisite ability and virtue to protect our constitutional order and safeguard the welfare of the republic. Indeed, after doing just that, one Republican elector has already announced that he will not cast his vote for Trump. The Framers of the Constitution would have expected no less.