When James Madison was elected to the Continental Congress in 1779, not yet thirty years old and a graduate of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton), he was introduced to the Scottish Enlightenment as religious freedom and ‘liberty of conscience’ ultimately became the world’s treasured First Amendment, he was stepping into a career as the American Revolution’s most brilliant legislator.
As the 250th Birth of the Declaration of Independence is fast approaching, the Second Continental Congress on July 4th 1776 proclaimed the thirteen colonies separate from Great Britain. As Congress stalemates today into a lesser version of its former self, it would be a good time to explore whether any recognition exists that reflects Madison’s original ethics or intent of his principles.
Blessed with a conscientious gift of creative political insights with a deep intuitive legal and parliamentary understanding of how the Federal Government and its Congress fit together, Madison became author of the proposed Bill of Rights amendments to the Constitution as well as twenty nine essays in The Federalist Papers written to support ratification of the Constitution; earning him the legacy “Father of the Constitution.”
In what may be regarded as archaic eighteenth century lingo, Number 10 immediately garnered attention becoming the ‘most famous’ of all, as Madison identified ‘direct democracy’ preferable to a system of “majority tyranny’ that would be created by ‘factions’ of partisanship. “Factions” were that curious species that evolved into political parties coalescing around different visions of government.
The first ‘factions’ began after 1787 with the Federalist (Alexander Hamilton) who supported a strong Federal Government contrary to the anti Federalist (Madison and Jefferson) who supported a more agrarian, state’s right focus.
Madison’s solution was to design a government structure that balanced competing interests into one well-constructed large, diverse Republic where no single ‘faction’ could dominate or dilute the influence of any one group.
Madison’s premonition that unchecked ‘factions’ would evolve into major political parties to control and dominate political thought for the entire country would undermine national unity, erode the collective mind and lead to political and social instability – which has led to the chaos seen in today’s political turmoil.
How does today’s functionally illiterate Congress with its lopsided votes, its unquestioning acquiescence to a foreign government compare its performance over the last 250 years?
There is no doubt that Congressional performance and even its once informed public committee structure peaked decades ago into a Constitutional decline as to be unrecognizable and bereft of public data as if they are mere players on a stage or spectators on the sidelines.
The question remains how would Madison observe the current 119th Session of Congress today with its offensive loyalty to a foreign country, its history of lopsided votes indicative of no serious debate, its appalling lack of love of country, a lighthearted disregard for its legislative authority to serve the public interest, stretched to pay a foreign country’s benefits no longer representative of the moral high ground and infected by a biased media landscape.
The American Empire is about to expire with the US as just another country struggling to remain economically viable.
*****
On June 4, the US House of Representatives ‘debated’ and adopted the Ukrainian Support Act (HR 2913) which was approved on a 226-115 vote with 18 Republicans voting Aye and one Democrat voting Nay.
The bill was introduced in April, 2025 and while the House may not be the speediest legislative process in the world, HR 2913 did not make it to the House Floor until 6-4-2026.
With the House leadership and Presidential failure to endorse the bill, HR 2913 did not find its way to the House floor via the usual committee process.
In fact, HR 2913 with $1.8 Billion new military aid (with $8 billion in loans) did not receive a traditional Foreign Affairs Committee hearing of its content, did not receive a committee vote and yet was hustled for a House floor vote on June 4.
Its main sponsor, Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) was forced to pursue a Discharge Petition which required 218 Members to sign. The signatures represent a significant requirement to bypass the usual Committee procedure on its way to the House floor for consideration.
While Discharge petitions are not frivolous and are generally saved for a pertinent specificity such as the Discharge Petition that Rep. Tom Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna used to force a House floor vote on the Epstein file, HR 2913 has not proven to be of significant statutory standard to warrant a Discharge.
Maybe it was just a slow day and those 218 House members who signed the Discharge had nothing else on their calendar.
Monitoring the late afternoon floor debate, the public becomes aware that no urgency existed for a Discharge petition other than to support an $8 billion loan escalation of the Ukraine war as NATO and the EU are being drawn into the conflict to intensify the war.
Rep. Meeks told the House that the bill should have gone through to enactment on ‘regular order’ but instead has been blocked due to flawed elements in the bill with Discharge as “the only option left.’
During Floor consideration, multiple House Members repeated the bill’s failings as being “outdated,” “already adopted,” “drafting errors” and “duplicative language”. There was mention that the bill would also constrain the President’s ability to negotiate a settlement with Ukraine.
At least one Member opposed the bill due to its flaws sufficient enough to warrant opposition including “flawed, poorly written sanctions policy” no longer applicable having been changed since the bill was first introduced in 2025.
There were also SWIFT elements no longer applicable with erroneous reference to Iran in the legislation as its policy had changed over last 14 months.
One House Member mentioned the bill is “riddled with problems” as it has “no credibility” and “not sure … if the world should see this bill” but HR 2913 was being offered as if it is totally relevant, as if it had been dredged up from a year old file, dusted off and offered as if it would benefit NATO or military industrial corporate donors who will benefit from passage.
One Member reminded American public that every dollar allocated will be spent in the USA confirming that Congressional donors would benefit.
In other words, HR 2913 was a scam of a bill to benefit those who would otherwise not benefit from NATO, military industry donors and other benefactors.
A review of the floor debate on June 4 also reveals the intensity of anti Russian sentiment on the House floor as well as the profound unfamiliarity exhibited to thoroughly misunderstand the roots of the Ukraine war.
Just to reiterate, Russian President Gorbachev had received assurance from US Secretary of State James Baker in 1990 during reunification of Germany conference that NATO would not be allowed any eastward expansion to the Russian border.
To date, the US Congress has allocated $182 Billion to Ukraine, with $84 Billion spent and another $140 Billion pending. In spite of a $40 Trillion debt, HR 2913 added another $8 Billion to the Ukraine war including new sanctions against Russia.
In other words, while the Military Industrial Complex has presumably not yet collected all of its Ukraine gravy, the House of Representatives cares less about drawing down the country’s debt than they do about giving away more money to their donors, adding another $8 Billion to fight a war that is problematic.
The bottom line however, is how and why the sponsors of HR 2913 and its 218 Discharge signers would endorse the effort to present an obviously flawed and inappropriate legislation to Congress for final approval.
Let’s just take one guess on how James Madison would respond to such legislative flim-flam.