The argument of those who believe this way has many components. First, the Electoral College is felt to be an outdated system which is no longer necessary for our elections (The Electoral College). Opponents of the College admit that yes, at one point in time, the Electoral College was a necessary component in electing the President of the Union. However, technology has made it so that the information necessary to make informed decisions about voting is available to the majority of voters (The Electoral College). Voters today are more informed than they were back when the constitution was written and, because of that, placing the final vote in the hands of electors rather than the people is unnecessary.
Federalists, those who were in favor of a strong federal government, were in debates with Anti-Federalists, those who opposed the ideas of the Constitution. They believed the Constitution weakened the states too much, had no Bill of Rights, and thought the President could easily become a king. Delaware was the first state to ratify, with Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut quickly following. Massachusetts ratified, but still had a strong opposition, and only a major campaign by Constitution supporters won the ratification of the state. Maryland and South Carolina had ratified, which made 8 state ratification.
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. The Articles of Confederation only had 1 representative per state. This was a problem because the ratio of population to the 1 representative was unfair.
The members of the upper house would be elected by the lower house making the smaller states have little or no representation in the upper house at all. The New Jersey plan gave the plan for a federal rather than a national government giving the congress the power to tax and commerce. Even though the Virginia Plan remained a large part of the convention the states were looking for equal representation. They wanted the upper
First of all, the checks and balances guards against tyranny because if we don't stay in check someone might gain too much power. This is very bad because then if they have all the power they want they can do pretty much whatever they want. Many people would end up not agreeing to the laws they make this would basically guarantee a tyranny. The next reason is because checks keep a strong government. An example is without keeping check then the government wouldn't be as strong because of having multiple people with power there would only be one.
Thomas Jefferson’s and Alexander Hamilton’s viewpoints during the 1790’s and the 1800’s were very different but sort of similar. Jefferson wanted the government to be run by the people of the U.S. while Hamilton wanted the wealthy class to run it, Jefferson wanted strong state government, Hamilton wanted strong federal government. But one thing that stood out to the people was Hamilton wanted a loose/lenient interpretation of the constitution as Jefferson wanted a strict one. During the 1700’s-1800’s, despite the fact Philadelphia was the nation’s temporary capital, U.S. Congress met difficulties and fears that tested the strength of the Constitution and the republic it built. The nation had a few domestic issues of finance, taxation, and slavery that separated the delegates into unpleasant political groups which caused international relations disagreements and second thoughts.
The Articles of Confederation created a confederation in the United States. A confederation is a government in which the state government, not national, has dominant power. The leaders of the new nation feared that a strong, centralized government would lead to tyrannical monarchy like the British government. So the Founding Fathers established a confederation where there was no president nor Supreme court, and a Congress with limited power. But the existence of a weak congress led to an ineffective national government.
Federalists knew that another self-governing government would only lead to a weak system just like the Articles lead them to failure. Thomas R. Frazier said, “View these things, fellow citizens, and then say that we do not require a new, a protecting, and efficient federal government if you can.” (Doc #1) Frazier is stating that America is in great need of a federal government, that they need educated and knowledgeable people to lead their country. He also means that in order to maintain their freedom and independence they would need a government to protect their rights they fought for. Creating three branches to avoid congress from becoming too powerful and keep everything under control was a much better way than having just one branch like in the Articles of Confederation. Another federalist named Jonathan Elliot said , “ … it is the opinion of this Convention that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of the commonwealth.” (Doc #6) Elliot is stating that with few alterations, limiting the Constitutions power and allowing the states to make some decisions would change the Anti-Federalists mind and therefore they would create the Bill of rights to limit the
However, with the smaller states not possessing a big enough sway the Virginia plan was quickly thrown out. Replacing it would be the system used still to this day. Congress would be split into two separate groups the House and the Senate. The House would hold representatives based on a state 's population and the senate would let every state get the same amount of votes. This, more or less, accomplished the role of letting every state have fair and balanced representation.
After the American War of Independence, America and its citizens declared their independence from Great Britain. The America that emerged from the war was a nation based on shared national values as well as ideas and principles protected by national documents. Defeating the British meant that every American citizen would have a chance for political independence. Under this new-found freedom, America would create a system of government (American Democracy) that would put the political power in the hands of its citizen. Even though American Democracy claimed to be a system of government that would give political power to all its citizens, in the late 18th century and into the early 19th century, most blacks living in America were not recognized by law as citizens.
This, later know as the Great Compromise, was an idea by Roger Sherman from CT. At the time, this was called the CT Compromise, as they likely did not understand how big of a deal this would become. It was simply a combination of both the Virginia and New Jersey plans. It took the two houses from the Virginia plan, but they decided the Senate would be equal, pleasing the small states, and then House of Representatives would then be based off population, satisfying the larger states. This is so important because they created a government we would continue to use for hundreds of years to come, including
Patrick Henry was one of those famous powerful figures, patriots, who provided support for the antifederalists. Anti Federalists were in debt and they feared a strong central government who would make them pay-off their debts. They thought that it gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments, and there was no bill of rights, thus, they opposed the ratification of the constitution. As shown on Document G, even in a political system, with checks and balances, a certain branch can be too powerful, which can lead to tyranny of the common people. This document was directed towards the Federalist by the antifederalist to explain a possible problem of the checks and balances system, after the drafting of the constitution and awaiting approval.