As Charles Beard convincingly argues in Cigler and Loomis (1992), the Constitution of the United States is a document which institutionalizes the values and the power of an elite group which was the primary beneficiary of that document. Beard's argument, in fact, does not go far enough in highlighting the elite nature of the Framers of the Constitution. He argues that the elitist nature of that document is hidden in the document itself, but becomes clear in a thorough analysis of the communications which led to the Constitution itself. Indeed, the background documents do support the elitist theory with respect to the self-interest of the Framers, but the Constitution itself, with no such background material, blatantly reveals the elitist predilections of those Framers. The group which benefits from the Constitution is the group made up on individuals who are male, white, and propertied. Those who are not white, not male, and not propertied are left out in the cold. The disenfranchised, the poor, women and minorities may have had the freedom to stand on a soapbox and express their views, but those views were not likely to ever find their way into the workings of the government which was established by that Constitution, unless those views happened to coincide with the views of the rich white men who created that document. This elitist argument is supported by what is in the Constitution, such as in the system known as the Electoral College which ensures that those in power in the Congress will have the final say over who is President if the mass of voters happened to elect somebody disapproved by the elites. But even more importantly, the elitist argument is supported by what is not spelled out in the Constitution. Only white men were able to vote, and only white rich men were effectively able to hold office. What was not officially spelled out in this elitist framework was indirectly established through such exclusionary measures as po...