The constitution was the collective child of (9 of 13) STATES. Some of those states, like Virginia, only ratified this document by 53% a small majority, by representatives, not the people directly voting. 9:13 is 69% if that requirement of 69% was imposed on each state to ratify, this constitution would not exist. Not overwhelming popular at the time, but pushed hard by the likes of Hamilton; creator of, the bank of New York, a global bank.
Some of those, reluctant and suspicious of this new Centralized Power wanted more protections for the people that had fought and won their independence from another Central Power, the King; thus the Bill of Rights, after the ratification, "We must pass it first" Sound familiar?
Many did not believe it necessary to state the Rights possessed by the
…show more content…
It is now clear, the Central Power has sought to eliminate the Rights of the States as well as the Rights of the people, (a slow, almost imperceptible eroding) by claiming onto itself powers and authorities NEVER, granted within the constitution itself, or envisioned by those early founders and signers.
Those Rights, stated and unstated, in which there are many, are everything America stands for, and Americans Live and Die for; we Americans joined together by the agreed upon rules set forth within this constitution are the heart of the law and the light of the world. People of every nation, Once, looked to America with wide eyes and yearning desires to possess those Rights and Freedoms, they also, were willing to fight to protect those ideals or die defending them.
So, your question what do we do? What have we always done in the face of
The Constitution DBQ The Constitution of United States is regarded by many as an important document, for it gave the common people the power to form a government the way they want. Yet, despite all the benefits that it brought to the American people at the time, people also had some concerns about the Constitution such as: it is creating a Central government that is too powerful, only white men that owns property are allowed to vote, not everyone in the nation are treated equally, etc. When the Constitution was first being drafted, Representatives from each state hoped to add terms that would benefit their own states—this lead to a heated debate on how the Constitution should be formed.
Answer: Massachusetts farmers opposed the Constitution in light of the fact that they felt it ensured exchange more than horticulture, the Federalist Papers were distributed there to pick up backing for it. Virginia and New York would not ratify until the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution. In light of the opposition, John Hancock at the Massachusetts ratifying tradition suggested that a bill of rights be included as the first gathering of amendments to the Constitution. Ratification in Massachusetts and pretty much all whatever remains of the uncommitted states relied on upon the comprehension that receiving a bill of rights would be the new government's first request of business. There were the opposition which was made out of assorted
The preamble is an introduction to an amazing piece of history, two in particular pieces of history today. The one and only the Federal Constitution of the United States and The Nevada State Constitution, both made up of many similarities and also many differences. The State of Nevada decided to begin with the same sentence as the Federal Constitution of United States began with as well, leaving the majority of the sentence out then adding a unique sentence of 7their own leaving many people questioning if that was necessary but left it in anyway, people didn’t mind it over time. In September 17, 1787 the constitution was signed by 35 out of 55 delegates the rest that had not signed were due to their objection to slavery, but by 1788 everyone
The United States Constitution when first introduced was focused only on what powers the Federal Government would have. For many states who had just gained, their freedom from England there needed to be a guarantee that the newly formed government would not impose on people’s rights. The Bill of Rights was written for that purpose it was to apply to the federal government only. When different states started to pass laws that contradicted what the states had requested from the federal government when they added the Bill of Rights, which unfortunately prevented the federal Supreme Court from intervening in the states business.
Lectures Lecture 14 “Questions to Consider #1”: Why did the Anti Federalists object so strongly to the Preamble to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists objected so strongly to Preamble to the Constitution due to the fact the Preamble establishes powers for the three branches of government, states’ relations, mode of amendment, debts, national supremacy, oath of office, and amendment ratification. This group felts as though when the federalists wanting to create a strong central government would not be strong enough if the Preamble was not put into place. Lecture 14 states, “Anti-federalists suspicious of central power fought the new Constitution tenaciously…..
It took the convincing of the Anti-Federalists to explain how the Constitution gave too much power to the central government and did not state the rights and freedoms of the people, therefore lacking a Bill of Rights. The Federalists agreed to a Bill of Rights, and later the Constitution was ratified with nine out of thirteen votes on June 21 of 1788. Soon after the Constitution was ratified, the separation of powers was understood in the United States government. The separation of powers separated each branch of government.
After the Declaration of Independence in 1787, the Federal Government turned to the creation of the Constitution in which delegates from 13 states convened to make compromises on their beliefs for the betterment of a nation. Although the Bill of Rights was initially not a part of the Constitution, the Federalists thought that it was crucial to ensure ratification of the Constitution. This ratification was one of the main reasons why the Bill of Rights needed to be added. Federalists feared a strong, central government, and created a Bill of Rights in order to prevent government abuse. Others believed that a dominating Government could prohibit rights in the future, which would not necessarily be expressed in the Bill of Rights.
The Constitution of the United States was written in 1787, but there was a grapple for its ratification that went on until about two decades after the ratification. Members of Congress believed that the first government of the United States or the Articles of Confederation, needed to be adjusted while others did not want anything to change. After the Revolutionary War, the people did not want a strong central government, because it reminded them too much of what they were trying to escape from. Under the Articles, each state had their own laws, and the need for a new Constitution was desired by many. The Constitution of 1787 created huge debates, arguments and splits in the nation that lasted for several year after its ratification between people who
Abraham Lincoln, a former US president, had stated, “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” Using the book, 102 Minutes by Jim Dwyer and Kevin Flynn, Lincoln’s observation can be proven to be accurate. This is because, in 102 Minutes, a common theme of self-destruction is revealed from the 1993 bombing as well as during 9/11. Self-destruction can be very dangerous when one realizes that when a country, or in this case, a state, diminishes their laws and regulations because, “it is unimportant” and “more cost efficient.”
The structure of Congress was decided so that “Nine of thirteen states had to agree before a law could pass. If anyone wanted to amend the Articles to make the government more efficient, that took unanimous support. Many tried but weren’t able to secure all thirteen votes.” (iCivics packet). These harsh laws made it hard to pass any laws or make amendments to the Articles because it was near impossible to grasp the vast majority of votes.
This made them create the law that to pass any amendments, or to change any, it needed to have 2/3 of congress to vote on it and 3/4 of the states approval, unlike when they had the articles of confederation. The Articles of Confederation had to have all the states agree on an amendment. The only problem with this was that the states had different opinions and views, which resulted in nothing changing.
It could be argued that as the history of the United States has unfolded, the ratification of the Constitution was relatively successful. One might also argue that the Document Americans hold so sacred was ratified with the wrong intent in the first place. Nonetheless, the state representatives chosen to vote on the ratification had a substantial task in front of them. Had I been one of those representatives, I believe that I would have voted against the ratification of the Constitution due to the lack of rights left in the hands of individual states, the absence of term regulations for elected presidents, and the turn away from a truly republican governmental system. Based on the political climate of the late 1700s surrounding the state representatives
Abbie Okon 3/23/18 Grade 7 1. Key Terms 1. The economic depression of the 1780s affected farmers because they had trouble paying their taxes, resulting in the government seizing their land. 2. The judicial branch dealing with trials and upholding the Constitution.
The Constitution—the foundation of the American government—has been quintessential for the lives of the American people for over 200 years. Without this document America today would not have basic human rights, such as those stated in the Bill of Rights, which includes freedom of speech and religion. To some, the Constitution was an embodiment of the American Revolution, yet others believe that it was a betrayal of the Revolution. I personally believe that the Constitution did betray the Revolution because it did not live up to the ideals of the Revolution, and the views of the Anti-Federalists most closely embodied the “Spirit of ‘76.” During the midst of the American Revolution, authors and politicians of important documents, pamphlets, and slogans spread the basis for Revolutionary ideals and defined what is known as the “Spirit of ‘76”.
As reported by many history books, the Constitution required the approval of 9 out of 13 states to win ratification. The Federalists where the group that favored ratification. Mostly the Federalist were wealthy people. Many Americans who were not wealthy supported the Constitution was because they believed that the United States needed a new and stronger national government.