What do you think?
Rate this book
The Founding Fathers' Guide to the Constitution
What Does the Constitution Really Mean?
Are liberals right when they cite the “elastic” clauses of the Constitution to justify big government? Or are conservatives right when they cite the Constitution’s explicit limits on federal power? The answer lies in a more basic question: How did the founding generation intend for us to interpret and apply the Constitution? Professor Brion McClanahan, popular author of The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to the Founding Fathers, finds the answers by going directly to the source—to the Founding Fathers themselves, who debated all the relevant issues in their state constitutional conventions.
In The Founding Fathers’ Guide to the Constitution, you’ll discover:
How the Constitution was designed to protect rather than undermine the rights of States
Why Congress, not the executive branch, was meant to be the dominant branch of government—and why the Founders would have argued for impeaching many modern presidents for violating the Constitution
Why an expansive central government was the Founders’ biggest fear, and how the Constitution—and the Bill of Rights—was designed to guard against it
Why the founding generation would regard most of the current federal budget—including “stimulus packages”—as unconstitutional
Why the Founding Fathers would oppose attempts to “reform” the Electoral College
Why the Founding Fathers would be horrified at the enormous authority of the Supreme Court, and why the Founders intended Congress, not the Court, to interpret federal law
Authoritative, fascinating, and timely, The Founding Fathers’ Guide to the Constitution is the definitive layman’s guide to America’s most important—and often willfully misunderstood—historical document.
Are liberals right when they cite the “elastic” clauses of the Constitution to justify big government? Or are conservatives right when they cite the Constitution’s explicit limits on federal power? The answer lies in a more basic question: How did the founding generation intend for us to interpret and apply the Constitution? Professor Brion McClanahan, popular author of The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to the Founding Fathers, finds the answers by going directly to the source—to the Founding Fathers themselves, who debated all the relevant issues in their state constitutional conventions.
In The Founding Fathers’ Guide to the Constitution, you’ll discover:
How the Constitution was designed to protect rather than undermine the rights of States
Why Congress, not the executive branch, was meant to be the dominant branch of government—and why the Founders would have argued for impeaching many modern presidents for violating the Constitution
Why an expansive central government was the Founders’ biggest fear, and how the Constitution—and the Bill of Rights—was designed to guard against it
Why the founding generation would regard most of the current federal budget—including “stimulus packages”—as unconstitutional
Why the Founding Fathers would oppose attempts to “reform” the Electoral College
Why the Founding Fathers would be horrified at the enormous authority of the Supreme Court, and why the Founders intended Congress, not the Court, to interpret federal law
Authoritative, fascinating, and timely, The Founding Fathers’ Guide to the Constitution is the definitive layman’s guide to America’s most important—and often willfully misunderstood—historical document.
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2012
62 people are currently reading
569 people want to read
About the author
Brion T. McClanahan
18 books94 followersBrion McClanahan received a B.A. in History from Salisbury University in 1997 and an M.A. in History from the University of South Carolina in 1999. He finished his Ph.D. in History at the University of South Carolina in 2006, and had the privilege of being Clyde Wilson's last doctoral student. He is the author or co-author of four books, The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Founding Fathers, (Regnery, 2009), The Founding Fathers Guide to the Constitution (Regnery History, 2012), Forgotten Conservatives in American History (Pelican, 2012), and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Real American Heroes, (Regnery, 2012). He has written for TheDailyCaller.com, LewRockwell.com, TheTenthAmendmentCenter.com, Townhall.com, and HumanEvents.com. McClanahan is a faculty member at Tom Woods' Liberty Classroom, has appeared on dozens of radio talk shows, and has spoken across the Southeast on the Founding Fathers and the founding principles of the United States. If you would like to book Dr. McClanahan for a speaking appearance, please send him an email with all pertinent information.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews
June 23, 2022
Meh. Not great. I wish he would’ve broke down each piece of the constitution, not just certain parts. It also seems like he cherry picked what he liked and didn’t like as well as not giving every founding father equal weight
June 17, 2013
This is the fourth time I have sat down and read this book cover to cover in one sitting. I still learned something new.
Brion McClanahan is one of my favorite historians. As a teacher, I use this book in my lesson plans for my American Government classes. The analysis of each Article of the Constitution is in-depth and backed up not just by the Founders (the men who debated and wrote the Constitution) but also by the Ratifiers (the men who debated the finished product in each state and voted to accept the document as the new foundation of American government).
Every citizen of the United States should be required to read this book. It makes clear the intent of the Constitution and shows how far we, as a country, have drifted from the original intent of this document. The Founders & Ratifiers would be at best disappointed in current America. At worst, they would be horrified.
Additionally, McClanahan is very clear on what state's rights are, and what they are not. Implicit is the understanding by our Founders and Ratifiers that "nullification: is not an individual state right. There is no need for "nullification" if a law is not constitutionally made as it lacks the force of law. Also, implicit is that the states are empowered to move collective to stop unconstitutional actions of the "central" government (what we call the Federal or National government today). How this can be done, but isn't, is an interesting part of the book.
As an elected official (state senator) I carry a copy of this book with me at all times. I have highlighted and annotated notes from the sources which McClanahan uses. All of the sources should be read as well. A few of them are:
Catherine Drinker Bowen, Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention May to September 1787;
Jonathan Elliot, ed., The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787 (New York, NY: Burt Franklin Reprints, 1974);
Merrill Jensen, et. al., ed., The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (Madison, WI: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1976-2010)
The sources show the flaw in our judicial system. Instead of using the source documents to establish intent, lawyers and judges, use case law to determine intent. This leads to incorrect rulings which are compounded by more incorrect rulings based on the previous incorrect ruling. A search of the "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787" clearly shows what the intended meaning of terms like "General Welfare," and "Supremacy Clause," were then and still are today although our system doesn't follow the intent of the Constitution.
I recommend this book as a "must read." Warning: You will be surprised at what you learn and some of it may cause you concern at the lack of knowledge our elected officials have about our Constitution. Guaranteed you will be better able to understand contemporary issues and a stronger voter after you have read this book.
Brion McClanahan is one of my favorite historians. As a teacher, I use this book in my lesson plans for my American Government classes. The analysis of each Article of the Constitution is in-depth and backed up not just by the Founders (the men who debated and wrote the Constitution) but also by the Ratifiers (the men who debated the finished product in each state and voted to accept the document as the new foundation of American government).
Every citizen of the United States should be required to read this book. It makes clear the intent of the Constitution and shows how far we, as a country, have drifted from the original intent of this document. The Founders & Ratifiers would be at best disappointed in current America. At worst, they would be horrified.
Additionally, McClanahan is very clear on what state's rights are, and what they are not. Implicit is the understanding by our Founders and Ratifiers that "nullification: is not an individual state right. There is no need for "nullification" if a law is not constitutionally made as it lacks the force of law. Also, implicit is that the states are empowered to move collective to stop unconstitutional actions of the "central" government (what we call the Federal or National government today). How this can be done, but isn't, is an interesting part of the book.
As an elected official (state senator) I carry a copy of this book with me at all times. I have highlighted and annotated notes from the sources which McClanahan uses. All of the sources should be read as well. A few of them are:
Catherine Drinker Bowen, Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention May to September 1787;
Jonathan Elliot, ed., The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787 (New York, NY: Burt Franklin Reprints, 1974);
Merrill Jensen, et. al., ed., The Documentary History of the Ratification of the Constitution (Madison, WI: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1976-2010)
The sources show the flaw in our judicial system. Instead of using the source documents to establish intent, lawyers and judges, use case law to determine intent. This leads to incorrect rulings which are compounded by more incorrect rulings based on the previous incorrect ruling. A search of the "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787" clearly shows what the intended meaning of terms like "General Welfare," and "Supremacy Clause," were then and still are today although our system doesn't follow the intent of the Constitution.
I recommend this book as a "must read." Warning: You will be surprised at what you learn and some of it may cause you concern at the lack of knowledge our elected officials have about our Constitution. Guaranteed you will be better able to understand contemporary issues and a stronger voter after you have read this book.
August 19, 2020
I'm generally sympathetic to the view that the Constitution should be interpreted as the founding generation understood it. However, McClanahan's presentation left me asking, "If they meant it that way, why didn't they say it that way?" He presents the pro- and anti-Constitution arguments from the debates of the day, and the "anti" arguments presage all of the misinterpretations (and worse) of the Constitution that he rails against. It's a useful book for a study of key points of the Constitution as understood at the time, but inadvertently makes the case that the Constitution as written in 1787 (and the first 12 amendments) isn't as clear as he thinks it is. It also would have been useful if the full text of the Constitution were included, instead of just the specific portions he discusses.
February 23, 2013
A conservative statement on the Constitution as a non-living document. McClanahan thoroughly researches the Founders' writings to each other surrounding the adoption of the US Constitution. Madison writing to Jefferson? Fascinating stuff, really. McClanahan attempts to educate the reader in 'what the Founders intended.' What he inadvertently achieves is showing how the Founders could barely agree among themselves, let alone ever form such a mythical solitary position. It's analogous to reading an author's book, then going backward to read the author's letters to her mom. The letters do bring context, but what's published has to stand on its own. McClanahan ignores the reality that writing and decision-making are grey. 220 years after the fact? Even greyer.
In declaring modern policies as erroneous, McClanahan often uses the phrase 'does not follow the Constitution as ratified.' Conveniently though, he does not comment on the original stupidities that were ratified - 3/5 of a man, landowners as the only voting citizens, no term limits. This is great reading for preparing one's own counterpoint. McClanahan goes into great detail on state law vs national law, national vs federal, federal vs the judiciary. Was the judiciary not intended to interpret law? Was the executive meant to be an enforcer, not a figurehead? Read this book for a good look at McClanahan's opinion, then form your own.
In declaring modern policies as erroneous, McClanahan often uses the phrase 'does not follow the Constitution as ratified.' Conveniently though, he does not comment on the original stupidities that were ratified - 3/5 of a man, landowners as the only voting citizens, no term limits. This is great reading for preparing one's own counterpoint. McClanahan goes into great detail on state law vs national law, national vs federal, federal vs the judiciary. Was the judiciary not intended to interpret law? Was the executive meant to be an enforcer, not a figurehead? Read this book for a good look at McClanahan's opinion, then form your own.
January 31, 2017
Excellent! "The only hope lies in a better educated public. Americans do not need judges, lawyers, politicians, or ivory tower academics descending to provide answers to our constitutional questions. The founding fathers have already done that for us...we just need to read"
September 13, 2022
If there's anything Americans are ignorant of in 2022, it's the United States Constitution. For all the fuss about what's constitutional, and about constitutional rights, the average American probably doesn't know anything about the Constitution but the phrase "we the people."
Reading this book would dispel some of that ignorance. McClanahan not only quotes large portions of the Constitution entire, but he also quotes those who created the Constitution, and who spoke and wrote in the ratification debates. He shows what they meant by what they said - and what they meant is almost always completely different from what people today want the Constitution to mean.
The problem isn't just ignorance, though that is a problem. If more Americans knew what the Constitution actually says, we might not be in the sorry shape we're in. But those who make the decisions - presidents (or pretenders), Senators, Representatives, and judges - frequently don't care what the Constitution actually says, claiming that what it says and what it means is whatever they want to impose upon the citizens. And as long as that's the case, books like this one aren't going to have much of an impact - especially when our "education" system inculcates an ignorance of the Constitution (which I've already commented on) and a positive antipathy for knowledge and for straight thinking. The book is good. It's just that very few in the United States today have the mental equipment to benefit from it.
Reading this book would dispel some of that ignorance. McClanahan not only quotes large portions of the Constitution entire, but he also quotes those who created the Constitution, and who spoke and wrote in the ratification debates. He shows what they meant by what they said - and what they meant is almost always completely different from what people today want the Constitution to mean.
The problem isn't just ignorance, though that is a problem. If more Americans knew what the Constitution actually says, we might not be in the sorry shape we're in. But those who make the decisions - presidents (or pretenders), Senators, Representatives, and judges - frequently don't care what the Constitution actually says, claiming that what it says and what it means is whatever they want to impose upon the citizens. And as long as that's the case, books like this one aren't going to have much of an impact - especially when our "education" system inculcates an ignorance of the Constitution (which I've already commented on) and a positive antipathy for knowledge and for straight thinking. The book is good. It's just that very few in the United States today have the mental equipment to benefit from it.
November 17, 2025
This is an excellent overview of a document that is simple is essence but very exact in substance and organization. McClanahan’s coverage is scholarly but he manages to make his text accessible. If you want to know what the Founding Fathers thought about the articles and amendments to our Constitution, this is a great read. This book shows the principled brilliance of those who participated in crafting the Constitution but also reveals how far our nation has drifted from the intent of the Founders in many instances. The author ends his analysis by highlighting the importance of having normal citizens become more literate about our nation’s sacred charter in order to preserve and prolong our experiment in just and righteous self-rule.
July 28, 2017
Historian Kevin Gutzman calls his book the best single volume history of the Founders view on the Constitution. I heartily agree. McClanahan purposefully walks through the document, the original definitions, and the arguments that stemmed from the ratification conventions dealing with the Constitution.
One incredible plus is the first appendix located in the back of the book. They are a collection of founders's quotes regarding various constitutional subjects.
One incredible plus is the first appendix located in the back of the book. They are a collection of founders's quotes regarding various constitutional subjects.
January 3, 2020
Excellent book. If you want to understand the original intent of the constitution, do not just look to the Constitutional convention and what people like Madison or Hamilton thought, but look to the ratification conventions. What was the view sold to the states and what did the states that ratified the document understand it to mean. This book is a commentary on what the Constitution as ratified meant.
January 2, 2021
This is a great primer on originalism. McClanahan, as he always does, strikes the perfect balance between easy-to-read and scholastic rigor. This book is a section-by-section walk through the Constitution, and the author illuminates what the Framers were thinking at the time it was written along the way. I would highly recommend it for high school or jr. high teachers. If you’ve ever wondered, “What did they really mean by that?”, the answers lie within.
February 11, 2021
This is a pretty dry presentation, but I read it just after reading the actual text of the Constitution so I probably got more out of it than I might have otherwise. It's maybe the sort of book I should have read instead of listened to, as I know I'm not a big auditory learner. I did find the Founding Fathers' debates surrounding various articles of the Constitution interesting. Many of the controversies that undoubtedly would have come up today never entered their minds.
April 9, 2018
I think Tom Woods' review in TAC is about right. I wish the book were a bit punchier, but the information contained within it is solid. What exactly was ratified in 1787? What did the people promoting it and debating it say about various clauses? This book does a good job of getting to original authorial intent.
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
June 21, 2022
McClanahan gives a very detailed breakdown of each amendment to the constitution. With quotes from different founding fathers on debating on how the amendments should be ratified and how they should be broken down. Very interesting insight if you wanted to know the history of each amendment and how to understand it better.
Read
November 1, 2024I loved the historical quotes and disagreed with the author's analysis.
This book includes quotes and commentary written by the founding fathers on the various topics debated during the creation of our constitution. I found their actual words and points-of-view quite interesting. However, I drew entirely different/opposite conclusions than the author did from these same quotes.
This book includes quotes and commentary written by the founding fathers on the various topics debated during the creation of our constitution. I found their actual words and points-of-view quite interesting. However, I drew entirely different/opposite conclusions than the author did from these same quotes.
June 14, 2025
A wonderful volume to help understand what the founding fathers INTENDED for the Constitution.
The Appendix A proves that political arguments stay the same from 1787 to the present.
Add this to your U.S. Constitution or government library.
Encourage your high school and college students to read this volume.
The Appendix A proves that political arguments stay the same from 1787 to the present.
Add this to your U.S. Constitution or government library.
Encourage your high school and college students to read this volume.
April 29, 2021
The author interprets the U.S. Constitution based on what he believes was the intent of the writers and signers. Intent is determined based on arguments and discussions during the Constitutional Convention and ratification process.
June 1, 2024
Most citizens and many elected do not understand or know what the Constitution really is - many of the laws passed are indeed unconstitutional
We have allowed OUR government to infringe and to create policy that is not constitutional
We have allowed OUR government to infringe and to create policy that is not constitutional
November 24, 2017
How did the Founding Fathers intend for us to interpret the Constitution? A great question and one which this book ably addresses. Recommended.
November 3, 2018
republican bullcrap
November 21, 2019
A very instructional and informative look at the original Articles of the Constitution compared with letters, journals and articles written during the period of ratification.
October 7, 2020
So one-sided. Not a true, impartial educational book.
April 25, 2022
I loved getting the different perspectives of the men that framed the constitution. Enlightening in view of today's political machinations.
June 15, 2023
Conservative view.
October 26, 2024
Everyone should read this. It breaks down what the constitution should be according to the writers.
December 8, 2021
An extremely biased book. In multiple instances the author only shared views from founding fathers that agreed with his interpretation and kept the others out.
April 7, 2017
Attempting to find a book on the Constitution is pretty easy and you can find the history with whatever spin or angle you want. But attempting to find a book on the Ratification debates of the Constitution using primary sources is pretty much impossible. This is one of two main books I know that are commonly available. The fact that Dr. McClanahan is the author just adds the sugar on top.
Dr. McClanahan is fastly becoming one of my favorite historians. His perspective is a call back to the primary understanding on the Constitution and the power that lies within it is derived from the states. How does he get that understanding? By looking at the state ratification talks to show that the Constitution wasn't just passed by a federal, central government but was given power by the states and then the people.
To read this book should have a warning label on it. Because what we see today in all three branches and at the federal, state, and local levels is not even close to what was intended and was, frighteningly, what was talked about in fear quote after fear quote of the ratifiers. It's sad when Rhode Island comes out as being on the right side of history.
This books looks at all three branches of the federal government with respect to their enumerated powers and responsibilities in the Constitution. Then a look at the breadth and scope of the amendments. Finally, a collection of useful quotes that add to the heaping of coals on our heads. While Dr. McClanahan does a great job of organizing the structure of the material, I found it helpful to have the Constitution open to the part being discussed as it was needed to quickly check to make sure the interpretation made sense or what was being argued about could be seen in certain ways.
Most books like to taut that "This is the X you didn't learn about in school." This is pretty much the pinnacle of that claim. This is a fantastic book that gives primary source material to make its points. A very well done book and a great read too. Final Grade - A+
Dr. McClanahan is fastly becoming one of my favorite historians. His perspective is a call back to the primary understanding on the Constitution and the power that lies within it is derived from the states. How does he get that understanding? By looking at the state ratification talks to show that the Constitution wasn't just passed by a federal, central government but was given power by the states and then the people.
To read this book should have a warning label on it. Because what we see today in all three branches and at the federal, state, and local levels is not even close to what was intended and was, frighteningly, what was talked about in fear quote after fear quote of the ratifiers. It's sad when Rhode Island comes out as being on the right side of history.
This books looks at all three branches of the federal government with respect to their enumerated powers and responsibilities in the Constitution. Then a look at the breadth and scope of the amendments. Finally, a collection of useful quotes that add to the heaping of coals on our heads. While Dr. McClanahan does a great job of organizing the structure of the material, I found it helpful to have the Constitution open to the part being discussed as it was needed to quickly check to make sure the interpretation made sense or what was being argued about could be seen in certain ways.
Most books like to taut that "This is the X you didn't learn about in school." This is pretty much the pinnacle of that claim. This is a fantastic book that gives primary source material to make its points. A very well done book and a great read too. Final Grade - A+
November 8, 2014
This was an excellent book, showing the founders arguments in favor of the articles of constitution and the opponents fears, concerns and arguments against certain parts. Because each part of the constitution had to be defended and shown not to compromise state sovereignty or give to much power to the Federal government, the meaning of even the most vague sections are pretty clearly hammered out. If this was not so, certain states NEVER would have ratified it, yet American history has shown Congress, Judges and Presidents doing the very things that that the founders insisted never would be allowed. It is indeed painful to see what the Founders intended, considering the present state of things. It's horrible seeing judges legislating from the bench, presidents on the right and the left assuming powers which the constitution didn't give them, and how those who choose to ride rough trod on the constitution largely get away with it and often becomes heroes, Lincoln, Theodore, Wilson and FDR come to mind.
Considering some of the horrific things Federalist John Marshall and Hamilton did so soon after the ratification of the constitution, fulfilling some of the prophesies of anti-federalist like Patrick Henry, one is tempted to think that some of the more vague clauses in the Constitution were intentionally put there, to leave a small crack in the door. So Federalist after getting the people to consent, by subduing their fears and promises goodwill, could then come and swing the door open and claim more central power and the destroy state rights that they promised to protect. One has to hope that this is not the case.
Considering some of the horrific things Federalist John Marshall and Hamilton did so soon after the ratification of the constitution, fulfilling some of the prophesies of anti-federalist like Patrick Henry, one is tempted to think that some of the more vague clauses in the Constitution were intentionally put there, to leave a small crack in the door. So Federalist after getting the people to consent, by subduing their fears and promises goodwill, could then come and swing the door open and claim more central power and the destroy state rights that they promised to protect. One has to hope that this is not the case.
June 3, 2012
Plus 5 more....
This is one of those "must read" books. The books discusses the "original intent" of the founding fathers that ratified the Constitution. The book is well written and flows very smoothly. The books goes through the various sections of the Constitution and discusses the views of the proponents as well as those opposed. The book has quotes but also ties it into today's interpretation.
This book is very educational and you will glean much needed information from it. The scary part about this book is to see the leviathan that we have in D.C. and wonder well the hell did we go wrong? I recommend this book to anyone interested in what the "Central" government can, and most importantly CAN'T do. It discusses what the President's job description is, rather, should be as well as the congress and senate's. It also solidified my belief that one of the worst things ever done is the 17th Amendment. Short book chock-full information that is absolutely essential to our lives as Americans.
This is one of those "must read" books. The books discusses the "original intent" of the founding fathers that ratified the Constitution. The book is well written and flows very smoothly. The books goes through the various sections of the Constitution and discusses the views of the proponents as well as those opposed. The book has quotes but also ties it into today's interpretation.
This book is very educational and you will glean much needed information from it. The scary part about this book is to see the leviathan that we have in D.C. and wonder well the hell did we go wrong? I recommend this book to anyone interested in what the "Central" government can, and most importantly CAN'T do. It discusses what the President's job description is, rather, should be as well as the congress and senate's. It also solidified my belief that one of the worst things ever done is the 17th Amendment. Short book chock-full information that is absolutely essential to our lives as Americans.
February 11, 2012
Great as a resource but...
Published in 2012 by Regnery History
197 pages of text, 63 pages of appendices, end notes and an index.
I am torn when it comes to this book, which is the reason for the three star review. I will start with the positives:
-McClanahan gives a thorough, research-based look at the original arguments that went into the creation of the Constitution and is aiming right at the current debates about the proper roles of federal, state and local governments. This is a timely work and points out the obvious truth that our national government is busy doing things in 2012 that it was never designed to do and it has been doing those things for a long time despite the stated fears of many of the Founding Fathers that the government would eventually become bloated and intrusive...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2012/...
Published in 2012 by Regnery History
197 pages of text, 63 pages of appendices, end notes and an index.
I am torn when it comes to this book, which is the reason for the three star review. I will start with the positives:
-McClanahan gives a thorough, research-based look at the original arguments that went into the creation of the Constitution and is aiming right at the current debates about the proper roles of federal, state and local governments. This is a timely work and points out the obvious truth that our national government is busy doing things in 2012 that it was never designed to do and it has been doing those things for a long time despite the stated fears of many of the Founding Fathers that the government would eventually become bloated and intrusive...
Read more at: http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2012/...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews