Not long after the Constitutional Convention of 1787 had ended and the Constitution had been introduced to the American people for the ratification, there was a debate regarding those who supported the Constitution (Federalists) and those who opposed it (Anti-Federalists). Among those debates, one of the most central debates was whether to unite the thirteen states into a great nation or under the federal government. Perhaps, this question was the reason why some of the delegates kept their mouth shut in Philadelphia. Outstanding delegates such as James Madison and James Wilson had developed a plan that would renovate the American Union from loose independent states to a central nation that under the control of federal government but still …show more content…
It was no longer about states or abroad country, but rather a contract between all Americans under 1 nation. In a meantime, the Federalist Papers provided strong and rational justifications in that every decision should made by the Constitutional Convention, and also persuaded Americans that by arranging less power in people’s hands, the federal government could have a higher chance to protect people. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalist delegates argued that the government gave too much power to the federal government, while seizing too much power away from local and state governments. There were three kinds of Anti-Federalists. The first kind was mentioned by politicians Roger Sherman. and Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut. They appeared in the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia with an unpleasant manner toward the Virginia Plan and its new purpose to give more power to Congress and to reduce the states’ role in America system. These two delegates achieved considerable success in demonstrating this plan in the direction of federal principles. But in the end the powers of Congress are listed clearly, each state will be represented equally in the Senate and composed of Senators elected by the state legislatures, the president will be elected by a majority of the people and a majority of the
The main divisions at the Constitutional Convention were known as “The Virginia (Large States) Plan” and “The New Jersey (Small States) Plan.” The Virginia Plan was introduced by Governor Edmund Randolph of Virginia, on May 29, 1787, at the convention and was prepared by James Madison. Madison, who was a “member of the Continental Congress” (Howard, 2008, p. 12), had faith in the Virginia Plan and thought it would be the best proposal to enforce the laws and assist the government in collecting taxes from the people (Library of Virginia, n.d.). The Virginian delegates planned to “rid the country of the Articles of Confederation, develop two houses of Congress, enact a federal judiciary, give Congress the right to elect a president, and to allow Congress the right to veto the actions of the state” (Schultz, 2010, p. 125).
Compromises Made at the Constitutional Convention Under the Articles of Confederation the government was weak and had little success. Shay’s Rebellion led to the changing of the laws made on the government under the Articles of Confederation. It also led to a convention which introduced the idea of making a new form of government. In 1787 the Constitutional Convention awoke the ideas of making new compromises that the Founding Fathers had to face. Two of the most important compromises included the voting on president which was called the electoral college system and the decision making of how to ratify the Constitution.
Clive Ibrahim Sabrina Sanchez History 146 9 August 2015 From the speeches of Melancton Smith, Alexander Hamilton, And from Robert Livingston, they have some contrasting arguments and opinions on the Constitution. Since the debate occurred between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalist, they all had different opinions in three significant concerns, such as representation in congress, sources of corruption, and the constitution’s effect on the states. Melancton Smith represented the Anti-Federalists. He argued that the House of Representatives were not representative enough. He believed that the representatives should be the figure for the society, possess knowledge of their circumstances and their wants, sympathize in all their distresses,
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…..
Not so long after, problems arose with the governmental system and our founding fathers gathered and started considering different ideas to improve the governmental structure. Large and small states had different suggestions on what should be done to solve the problem. Yet, two things remained clear; Americans feared the British system and wanted nothing similar to it and, the Articles of Confederation had proved inefficient due to the restricted power of the federal government. Two main plans were the reason of debate, the battle was between the federalist and the antifederalist. The powers vested on the executive were a big part of the discussion and the arguments were sustained through a series of publications called the Federalist
A constitutional convention was held in May of 1787, when 55 delegates from 12 out of the 13 states met in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. In James Madison’s words, a tyrant is “a government with an absolute ruler like a king, or a dictator.” King George III was known as a tyrant. King George III was an unfit ruler who led the colonists to break away from Great Britain because of reasons including (but are not limited to) unruly taxes, lowering prices for Britain’s tea only, and putting soldiers at the Appalachian Mountains unnecessarily. After a failed attempt at government, a constitution needed to be created.
The Federalists of the convention were in favor of the ratification of the Constitution. They believed that the national government must be strong in order to function and to control uncooperative states, which could protect the rights of the people. They also believed that the Constitution and state government protected individual freedoms. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists opposed a strong central government, particularly a standing army. They believed it threatened state power along with the rights of the common people.
The result of this victory enabled the following event to transpire: the Constitutional Convention. In 1787, four years after the American Revolution ended, George Washington and fellow influential people met in Philadelphia. The before them was imperative to the newly independent nation’s success. The newly formed Government needed to replace the Articles of Confederation, which had been hastily put together after the American Revolution. There needed to be a permanent and binding document that would unify the states as opposed to individual state power.
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 brought politicians from different states together in order to create a more complex and centralized form of government. The Virginia Plan was brought forward by James Madison, a representative of Virginia, who wanted to create a more centralized and powerful national government, that would benefit the larger states if it was implemented. The main political dilemma was to construct a central government that would provide the necessary national goods without interfering or endangering the power of the states. Some of the issues discussed at the Convention that were brought forward by the representatives were congressional representation, the appointment of House seats, the national assumption of state debts, the regulation of tariffs and the presidential powers, which were later on incorporated in what is known today as the Constitution.
After a fiercely fought revolution, the newly independent American nation struggled to establish a concrete government amidst an influx of opposing ideologies. Loosely tied together by the Articles of Confederation, the thirteen sovereign states were far from united. As growing schisms in American society became apparent, an array of esteemed, prominent American men united in 1787 to form the basis of the United States government: the Constitution. Among the most eminent members of this convention were Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson. These men, held to an almost godly stature, defined the future of the nation; but were their intentions as honest as they seemed?
The central focus and purpose of the content I will teach in this learning segment is to demonstrate to my students how the Constitutional Convention shaped America into what it is today. Another central focus of this content is to discuss how much freedom and responsibility citizens should have. b. Given the central focus, describe how the standards and learning objectives within your learning segment address ϒ facts and concepts Key terms: Articles of Confederation, Shay’s Rebellion, Consitutional Convention, 3/5 Compromise, Virgina Plan, New Jersey Plan, The Great Compromise, Federalists, Anti-Federalists, and The Consitution.
INTRODUCTION Throughout the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 there were different disputes, mainly centered on the issues of slavery and tariffs. These disputes finally lead to a compromise reached by the delegates present. The northern economy was primarily centered around industrialization. In contrast, the southern economy was mostly agricultural, and widely relied on slaves, as they were the cheapest form of labor accessible.
The Federalist main argument was stated based off the opinion that the government would never have complete power over the citizens, but the citizens would also have a little more power and a say in the things that involve them. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists believed in limited powers specifically stated, they wanted strong state governments, and wanted a Bill of Rights added to the Constitution to protect the people from the government (Document 4). This was their point of view due to the fact that they believed that the individual states know and can act more based on their people that on federal government can. They focused their argument on the rights of the citizens. For the Federalists and Anti-Federalists to agree on a new government, they created a compromise that combined each of their ideas.
They felt the Constitution would create a system of federalism, a system in which the national government holds significant power, but the smaller political subdivisions also hold significant power. They felt the country needed a strong central government so that it didn’t fall apart. The Ant-Federalists were on the opposing side, they felt the Constitution granted the government too much power. They also felt there wasn’t enough protection of their right with an absent Bill of Rights. Another concern of the Anti-Federalists mainly came from the lower classes, from their standpoint they thought the wealthy class would be in main control and gain the most benefits from the ratification of this document.
DBQ Essay The United States Constitution is a document that or founding fathers made in order to replace the failing Articles of Confederation (A of C). Under the Constitution, the current government and states don’t have the problems they faced when the A of C was in action. The Constitution was created in 1788, and held an idea that the whole nation was nervous about. This idea was a strong national government, and the Federalist assured the people that this new government would work. The framers of the Constitution decided to give more power to the Federal government rather than the state governments because the A of C had many problems, there was a need for the layout of new government, rights, and laws, and there was a need for the Federal