The Rules of Compromise | Dr. Nicholas Cole | BRI’s Constitutional Conversations

0:00 right and and you’ve mentioned that a couple of times how the 18th century or how the framers have a generation of the founders of you’d compromise can you elaborate on that a little bit more please I think we need to think what they thought would be a fair and legitimate process for reaching

0:22 compromise and the very first thing they do at the convention is they set up a Rules Committee that sets the rules of debate and they abide by that then they don’t they don’t typically have many arguments about the rules it’s interesting we’ve we’ve we’ve done work subsequently on other convention

0:42 processes and and many other processes have far more arguing about rules and trying to use the rules of debate to manipulate outcomes one of the striking things about the Constitutional Convention is how little of that really goes on but they bind themselves into a very formal process of debate that they

1:05 that they they trust will give them an opportunity to air all of the points that they really feel need airing and although famously of course at different moments Hamilton walks out certain delegations say you know if we carry on down this line our instructions going to lead us

1:26 to have to walk out you know there can be threats like that but by and large I think what this generation thought was that if you did things properly if you treated the process of debate with sufficient respect and and if you followed the norms of parliamentary

1:49 style debate that that process would result in some kind of rational outcome that would be very much the best you could do and the the more I read these records the more struck I am with the willingness of of all of the participants really to engage with this

2:10 formal process then see it’s through to its its conclusion I think that’s that’s that’s if you like how they managed to reach compromises having started from positions that on the face of it simply can’t be reconciled you know if you think the states should be equally

2:31 represented in the national legislature or if you think a national government should be created that has a more direct relationship with the citizens of the United States those are at a certain level irreconcilable positions and take frankly weeks to work through the convention to reach a point of

2:52 compromise and I don’t think it could have been rushed I don’t think there was a I don’t think there was an easy you know let’s just take the plans we have in front of us see where the common points are and then you know find find the point in the middle of all the differences I think it was a process

3:13 that actually required time and many many opportunities to air different issues so that people were were sure that the document that resulted was really the most rational compromise that could possibly be reached