The Constitution of 1876

The Constitution of 1876

Question 1

Describe the particular historical conditions under which the constitution of 1876 was drafted.

After Texas Democrats controlled the Congress in the year 1873, they decided that it had reached the right time to draft a Texas new constitution. The main intention was to offer restrictions to the state government and hand over power back to the people. The law declared that Texas was now free and independent and was only subject to the United States Constitution.

What were some of the main principles behind the constitution of 1876?

Some of the main principles of the 1876 constitution include;

• All free men possess equal rights
• The writ of habeas corpus could not be unduly delayed nor suspended
• Restriction of the state government and hand over power to the people in the following ways; i) Plural executive being created ii) movement of legislative sessions from annual to biennial meetings iii) a balanced budget being mandated iv) people electing state judges v) People voting on the ratifications of amendments.

-The constitutional article forbade the following;

-a) religious tests for office except for the acknowledgment of a Supreme being existence

– b) Imprisonment for debt

1. c) Unreasonable searches

– The constitution offered a guarantee to liberty of press and speech

– The accused right to obtain bail and be tried by a jury

– The citizens’ right to bear arms

The legislative article offered a detailed definition of the limitations and powers of the legislature. Additionally, the constitution mandated a poll tax and provided for precinct voting. However, that was not a prerequisite for voting. It offered grants for homesteads of 160 acres to family heads and eighty acres to the single men who were eighteen years and above. It also protected a forced debt or homestead forced sale. The provisions also declared railroads as a common carrier and forbade the consolidation of the railroads.

What are some of the most critical aspects of the constitution that reflect the political philosophy of its framers?

Most of the amendments of the constitution dealt with the judiciary, legislature, public education, and state finances. Those that relate to the legislature generally removed the limitations on legislative actions. The changes in the judiciary have been comprehensive to the extent of almost rewriting the whole article completely. Those alterations that relate to public education have also plucked out limitations permitting the public school system’s expansion.

The main political philosophy of the framers of the constitution of 1876 was to hand over power to the people. In the overall sense, the Constitution of 1876 offered compliance with public opinion by providing for the biennial sessions of the legislature, precinct voting, public officials’ low salaries, and a road-working system’s return. Other provisions include; officers’ popular election, locally controlled, segregated system of schooling, and a court system that is less expensive for both county and justice of peace courts. The constitution also provided prohibition of the voters’ registration and railroads’ bonds. The constitutional article was enough for rural people who were principally engaged in subsistence farming. However, that was not for the society that was urban, commercialized, and industrialized. Out of the 99 amendments that were submitted in 1928, only 43 had been adopted, but by 1980, voters had approved a total of 235 proposals.

Question 2

Describe the character of federal-state relations today.

For close to 200 years, the federal-state relationship has moved its shift more and more towards the side of national supremacy. Many observers today, however, have a strong belief that the power balance is starting to tilt or move back to the state over the last twenty years. The following presidents tried slowing down the national government growth under the new banner, thus, NEW FEDERALISM; Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and Gorge Bus. Richard Nixon declared the principle of reversing the power flow to the federal government back to states. There rose the DUAL FEDERALISM in which every government level dominated its sphere. Today, the proper balance between the state and national powers issue is still viable as it was in the year 1789. The rights of states have been controversial for the last 200 years. Americans again are divided over which laws should be federal and which ones should be reversed to the states.

How much influence does the federal government wield over the states?

In 1789, when the constitution granted the federal government the right for the collection of taxes, regulation of the interstate commerce, raising of an army, and the adjudication of legal disputes between states, the dispute over which is more powerful between the states and the federal government was settled. The federal power has always prevailed despite the attempt of the states or state alliances to nullify federal power (Cohen, Michael & Micah., 28). States have always served as pockets of innovation or resistance, and they attempt to weaken federal laws or to offer an advancement of new legislation that the federal government does not consider. The US Constitution does not provide a specific definition of the power of the state and federal governments in the early 19^th century.

What tools can it use to coerce state compliance with federal measures?

1. Spending Clause

The Congress would not be permitted to compel legislators of state or executive officials to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. Still, it could provide federal grants for purposes of encouraging states to participate in federal programs. The provision of federal funds to the nonfederal entities has been found to constitute an exercise of one of the enumerated powers of Congress. The Spending Clause provides power to Congress to lay and collect taxes.

1. Federal Grants

The federal government may offer grants to entities that are nonfederal to further national priorities. The programs of the federal government must be authorized by legislation establishing the terms and conditions for individual programs of grants.

What means do states have to resist federal initiatives?

States have political means to resist federal initiatives. That is because the US constitution establishes the supremacy clause that the federal government, including its decisions, laws, and constitution supersedes all the state governments and that the states are subordinate to the federal government. Also, in the Bill of Rights, the 10^th Amendment states that any powers that are not specified in the constitution state reserved. Thus it seems that the founders needed to preserve the union to force the states to only use political means for resolving federal disputes.

Question 3

History of Texas as a one-party state

Unlike the 13 original colonies, Texas never was a British colony. None of those who tried to subjugate Texas could succeed in maintaining authority over the diehard independent men and women of Texas. The Republican Party of today was founded in the year of 1854 by a group of abolitionists who were Mid-Westerners (Fernández-Sebastián, Javier, & José, 135) They were opposed to the Kansas-Nebraska Bill allowing slavery choice in the new Nebraska and Kansas territories. Texas had become a state in the year 1845 and was in the very middle of the controversy of slavery. Before the Civil War, most state leaders were Democrats. Thus, they supported the pro-slavery Confederacy. African Americans were a group of Texans who would consistently support the Texas Republican Party in the early years. As new issues arose and the Civil War memories subsided, the GOP started to grow stronger in Texas gradually. Since the history of Texas, the people of Texas have always entrusted Republicans with the stewardship of each statewide elected office and the Senate majorities.

Which party dominates Texas politics today, and what are the historical origins behind this dominance?

Today, the Republican Party is the dominant party in Texas. This is a recent development because, in the 1970s, Texans were least likely than the rest of the US states to support a Republican presidential candidate. The 1990s and the early 2000s that Republicans began holding the majority of Texan seats in the congressional delegation and the legislature of Texas. George W. Bush’s quest significantly contributed to an electoral position as a republican. In 1994, George W. Bush became the only second Governor of the Republican party since his landslide victory against Ann Richards, the popular Democrat incumbent. That year, Republicans a three-seat increase in the House of Texas as it gained yet another seat in the Senate. In the year 1997, Susan Weddington became the first woman to be the chair of a major state party in Texas. In November 1998, Republicans swept the statewide ballot. They forged inroads into the traditional Democratic constituencies.

What were some of the ramifications of a one-party rule?

After reconstruction, the state of Texas was ruled by Democrats for many decades. When Texas was still one-party ruled, the state was controlled entirely by liberal democrats and conservative ones too. Today, that trend has changed to include conservative Republicans V extremely conservative Republicans.  One of the main ramifications of one-party rule is in-house fighting. There was no space for welcoming divergent ideas. People in Texas had developed a very tight relationship within their party only. Thus, ideas outside their party ideologies were locked out merely because they were foreign. Concepts were never implemented based on their substance but based on the traditional affiliations with the Democratic Party. That robbed the state of competitive ideas and great leaders who would propel the state for greatness.

What caused the rise of a two-party system in Texas?

The event of 1952 with the clash between Democratic Governor Allan Shivers and Truman Administration over the Tidelands federal claim caused the rise of the two-party system in Texas. The strength of the Republicans increased during the late 1960s, mainly among the residents of the country club suburbs around Houston and Dallas. This trend was reflected primarily in the election of John Tower and Gorge H.W Bush in 1961 and 1966, respectively.

Work Cited

Ben Philpott, KUT, “One-party Rule has never been simple in Texas,” KUT 90.5, February 27, 2018, https://www.kut.org/post/one-part-rule-has-never-been-simple-texas

Cohen, Michael A., and Micah Zenko. Clear and Present Safety: The World Has Never Been Better and why that matters to Americans. Yale University Press, 2019.

Fernández-Sebastián, Javier, and José María Rosales. “A Conceptual History of Democracy in Spain since 1800.” Democracy in Modern Europe: A Conceptual History 5 (2018): 135.

Joe E. Ericson. Ernest W., ”Constitution of 1876”, TSHA Texas Historical Association, https://tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/mhc07

Webb, S. L. (2018). Two-Party Politics in the One-Party South: Alabama’s Hill Country, 1874–1920. University of Alabama Press.

William T. Pound, “Observation of the state-federal relationship,” NCSL, August 2010, https://www.ncsl.org/bookstore/state-legislatures-magazine/an-observation-of-the-state-federal-relationship.aspx