Which of the following was NOT an argument against Madison's Federal Negative?

• A. It was the best way to combat tyranny of majority at the state level
• B. It was a complete violation of state sovereignty
• C. Large states could crush the smaller ones through their control of Congress
• D. Federal government was vulnerable to excess.

Answer: (A)

This question tests your ability to tell which criticisms were raised against Madison’s federal negative and which were actually favored by supporters. The federal negative would let the national government veto state laws, serving as a check on state legislatures and helping to prevent policies driven by transient majorities within individual states.

The statement that it was the best way to combat tyranny of the majority at the state level is a positive justification for adopting the federal negative, not a critique. In other words, it’s an argument in favor, not against, the mechanism. Critics of the federal negative instead stressed that it would invade state sovereignty, concentrate power in the national government, and let larger states dominate smaller ones in Congress, along with the risk that the federal government could overstep its constitutional powers.