If you cite Madison, perhaps you should agree with his opinion on the appointment of judges as well? Or his opinion on popular governments?
Hmmm. Odd question. Maybe you are trying to be ironic.
No, of course the Executive appointment of judges has not enabled a strong check on the Executive Branch. I think that’s fairly obvious from my previous post.
I’ve read more than a few of the Federalist Papers, notes from the convention (which I find are better sources for understanding the constitution) and many of the Anti-Federalist Papers. What I’ve found is that the problems with the constitution weren’t the objections of the Anti-Federalists that have turned out to be true but where the mechanisms promised by the Federalists didn’t work well enough. Madison and others thought that by appointing judges for life, then that would make them independent enough of the other branches.
They could have had the President appointed by the Legislature but decided not to because, they decided, the Legislature would tend to appoint weak executives. It turns out they may have not gone far enough with that thought. They did not think the Legislature would willingly delegate it’s authority to the Executive through the regulatory process we have today. The founders thought the Legislature would be more possessive of it’s power.
The courts should be more contemptuous of this innovation, laws through executive regulation, which goes against the spirit of the constitution. They aren’t though and I believe it’s because they are people who are sympathetic to the idea of Executive experts making decisions for the legislature. You know, kind of like themselves.
So here is my counter question to you, what natural rights exist that are not enumerated by the constitution? That is, what does the Ninth Amendment cover that isn’t covered elsewhere?