“This government will set out a moderate aristocracy: it is at present impossible to foresee whether it will, in its operation, produce a monarchy, or a corrupt, tyrannical aristocracy.” This passage was “Forgotten Father” George Mason’s justification for refusing to sign the US Constitution, pulled from his memorandum titled “Objections to the Constitution of Government Formed by the Convention.” Mason published his critique in September 1787, a year before the ratification of the Constitution. Still, his objections eerily reflect the present state of the American government.
Mason begins by commenting on the structure of Congress, writing, “In the House of Representatives there is not the substance, but the shadow only of representation.” Mason maintains that there are not enough representatives to understand and authentically advocate for the interests of their constituents. In other words, Mason worried that the American population was too large and heterogeneous to function as a true republic. Compared to the Thirteen Colonies of Mason’s time, the modern-day United States is a behemoth; Mason’s writings raise a relevant question about how Congresspeople can represent the complexities within and between different American states and regions.
Professor of Sociology Neil Gross published a New York Times opinion piece asking, “Is the United States Too Big to Govern?” Quoting Montesquieu, Gross contends that “in a large republic […] the common good is sacrificed to a thousand considerations.” A Pew Research study corroborates Gross’ argument: Americans generally have very negative views of their elected officials, with just 36 percent of US adults believing that Congresspeople do a good job of advancing public interest. When 435 representatives govern a population of over 340 million people, Congresspeople must make compromises to keep the machine of government running, which Mason believes alienates many constituents.
Mason also argues against the power of the Presidential pardon: “The unrestrained power of granting pardons for treason, which may be sometimes exercised to screen from punishment those whom he had secretly instigated to commit the crime, and thereby prevent a discovery of his own guilt.” Mason’s criticism is like a forecast of the future January 6 insurrection. In December 2022, the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol released an 814-page report detailing its findings; Committee Chairman Representative Bennie Thompson (D-MS) stated that “Donald Trump lit that fire.” The report found that President Trump or his inner circle partook in “at least 200 apparent acts of public or private outreach, pressure or condemnation, targeting either State legislators or State or local election administrators, to overturn State election results.” One of the Committee’s recommendations was to bar Trump from holding future office. However, Trump’s affluence, fundraising prowess, and popular support helped him ascend to the US presidency for a second term in 2024. On his first day in office, President Trump issued a blanket pardon to all those convicted of partaking in the Capitol insurrection that he instigated, just as Mason feared.
Finally, Mason expresses trepidation at the excessive power granted to the Supreme Court, explaining that the Court “is so constructed and extended […] rendering law as tedious, intricate and expensive […] and enabling the rich to oppress and ruin the poor.” One example of this phenomenon is the infamous Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), which empowered wealthy individuals, corporations, and special interest groups to dominate federal elections through unrestricted campaign donations. Indeed, in the 2024 presidential race, super PACs funded by billionaires such as Elon Musk—the world’s richest person—played a significant role in meeting fundraising and voter outreach goals for President Trump. During the 2024 election, super PACs spent at least $2.7 billion, setting a new record. Super PAC donations have substantially reduced the impact of donations by small donors (those giving $200 or less), exemplifying how the sanctioning of unrestricted campaign spending by the Supreme Court has allowed “the rich to oppress and ruin the poor,” as Mason forewarned.
George Mason’s “Objections to the Constitution of Government” essay from over two centuries ago is strikingly prophetic: American discontent is at a historical high, and political scientists warn that American democracy is “backsliding.” Yet, the neglect of Mason’s problems with the Constitution at its ratification has enabled the rise of an oligarchy and a President who acts like and even depicts himself as a monarch. Mason’s article should urge people to reexamine the narrative of American exceptionalism; perhaps the United States was never the democratic utopia it claims to be.