AP Syllabus focus:
‘Federalist No. 70 defends a single, strong executive as essential for national security, steady administration of laws, protection of property, and the security of liberty.’
Federalist No. 70 (Hamilton) explains why the Constitution creates a single president with sufficient authority to act decisively. It argues that executive “energy” is compatible with republican government and necessary for effective governance.
Context: Why the Framers Wanted a Stronger Executive
Hamilton wrote Federalist No. 70 during the ratification debate to defend the Constitution’s design for the executive branch. Critics feared executive power would resemble monarchy; supporters argued that weak executives produce drift, confusion, and insecurity.
Hamilton’s core claim is that good government requires an executive that can act with speed, secrecy (when necessary), and decisiveness, especially under crisis conditions.
Core Claim: “Energy” Is a Requirement of Good Government
Energetic executive: An executive branch structured to act decisively and effectively, with the capacity to enforce laws, respond to emergencies, and provide clear leadership while remaining accountable under constitutional limits.
Hamilton links an energetic executive to five needs named in the syllabus focus: national security, steady administration of laws, protection of property, and the security of liberty. The logic is practical: if laws cannot be enforced consistently, rights and property become unstable, and liberty is less secure in real life.
The Four Ingredients of Executive Energy (Hamilton’s Framework)
Hamilton identifies design features that generate executive energy. These are not “extra” powers outside the Constitution; they are structural choices that make constitutional powers usable.
Unity
A single executive concentrates responsibility.
It increases accountability: the public can more easily attribute success or failure to one person, rather than a committee.
Duration
A term long enough to provide stability and follow-through.
Continuity supports steady administration because priorities and enforcement are less likely to change week to week.
Adequate provision for support
Sufficient salary and institutional support reduce incentives for corruption.
The goal is to protect property and public resources from self-dealing and factional bargaining.
Competent powers
Authority must be strong enough to execute the laws and meet threats.
“Competent” does not mean unlimited; it means power calibrated to the executive’s constitutional responsibilities, especially national security.
Why Unity Matters Most
Hamilton argues that a plural executive (sharing executive power among multiple leaders) invites:
This Civil War–era print from the Library of Congress presents a comprehensive visual “map” of the U.S. federal government, grouping officials and institutions into executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It provides a concrete way to see what Federalist No. 70 means by unity in the executive—one president at the apex—contrasted with the inherently plural structure of Congress and the separate judiciary. Source
Delay in emergencies because agreement is harder to reach.
Conflict and blame-shifting, weakening responsibility.
Reduced deterrence against misconduct because no single official clearly “owns” the outcome.
Unity is therefore presented as a republican safeguard: it strengthens democratic control by clarifying who is responsible.
Energy and Liberty Are Connected, Not Opposed
A major theme of Federalist No. 70 is that liberty is endangered not only by tyranny, but also by weak administration. Hamilton’s reasoning:
If government cannot enforce laws, private violence and instability can rise, threatening the security of liberty.
If the nation cannot respond quickly to external threats, citizens may accept more extreme measures later, also endangering liberty.
Protecting property depends on reliable enforcement; unstable enforcement undermines investment, contracts, and personal security.
Hamilton treats the Constitution’s broader framework—separated institutions, elections, and law—as the boundary that channels energy toward lawful ends.
This diagram summarizes the three-branch structure of the U.S. federal government (legislative, executive, and judicial). It helps clarify Hamilton’s claim that a single, energetic president can still be constrained because executive power operates within a broader constitutional system of separated institutions. Source
What Federalist No. 70 Supports (and What It Does Not)
Federalist No. 70 supports:
A single president rather than a committee.
Institutional capacity for decisive leadership, especially in national security.
Administrative steadiness in enforcing laws to secure rights and property.
It does not claim:
The president should be above the law.
Executive power should replace legislative decision-making.
Accountability should be weakened; Hamilton argues the opposite.
FAQ
Hamilton emphasised capacity for swift action, but framed it as a design principle rather than a blank cheque.
In practice, debates focus on whether emergency actions remain tied to constitutional or statutory authority.
Hamilton’s main move is to separate “unity” from “monarchy”.
A single executive, he argues, can still be republican if selected through lawful procedures and held accountable for outcomes.
Responsibility gets diffused: each member can claim the others caused the failure.
That diffusion can weaken elections as a punishment mechanism because voters cannot easily attribute credit or blame.
A common critique is that concentrating enforcement power in one office risks sliding towards domination, especially during security crises.
The worry is less about day-to-day governance and more about exceptional moments.
It is frequently cited as a foundational text for defending robust executive leadership and administrative control.
Opponents often counter-cite it to argue that “energy” must remain bounded by law and transparent accountability.
Practice Questions
(2 marks) Identify two reasons Hamilton gives in Federalist No. 70 for preferring a single executive rather than a plural executive.
1 mark: Identifies clearer accountability/blame can be assigned to one person.
1 mark: Identifies greater decisiveness/speed (especially in crises) and reduced internal conflict/delay.
(6 marks) Explain how Federalist No. 70 argues that an “energetic executive” helps secure liberty, and assess one potential risk of that argument in a republican system.
Up to 3 marks (explanation):
1 mark: Links executive energy to national security/rapid response.
1 mark: Links energy to steady administration/enforcement of laws.
1 mark: Links enforcement to protection of property/security of liberty.
Up to 3 marks (assessment):
1 mark: Identifies a plausible risk (e.g., concentration of power enabling abuse).
1 mark: Explains how that risk could arise despite elections (e.g., emergency justification, reduced deliberation).
1 mark: Offers a reasoned balancing point consistent with republicanism (e.g., accountability is clearer under unity, but requires vigilant checks).
