ipl-logo

Constitutional Convention

697 Words3 Pages

What problems would a Federalist have had with the articles of confederation and constitutional convention? A federalist (someone who believes in coexisting and strong federal and state governments) (Morone and Kersh 59) wouldn’t have liked the articles. This is mostly due to its structure (Morone and Kersh 53). Mainly, states had more influence than the federal government ("Independence and the Articles of Confederation."). In one case, because of one state, a tax couldn’t be raised (Morone and Kersh 54). The United States couldn’t fight wars either (Morone and Kersh 54; "Independence and the Articles of Confederation."), and other countries could abuse it (Morone and Kersh 54). In the end, there was compromise (Morone and Kersh 61). Therefore, …show more content…

The people at the convention couldn’t agree how slaves should be counted in official population measurements (Morone and Kersh 65). Population measurements would be used for tax purposes, and number of congressmen (“The Three-Fifth Compromise”) . Some southern states had a high percentage of slaves (Morone and Kersh 65). If we take that into account, then it is no surprise that southern states wanted slaves to be counted as whole people. Eventually though, it was decided that slaves would be considered 3/5 of a free person for official population statistics (Morone and Kersh 65). The result of this was that slave states would have more representation (“The Three-Fifth Compromise”). The reason for this number, was due to the theory that slaves could provide 3/5 the wealth of someone who wasn’t a slave (Morone and Kersh …show more content…

Was the Iraq invasion constitutional? The permission for congress to declare war is in Article 1 Section 8 of the constitution (Morone and Kersh 68). The last time that a true declaration of war happened was in 1942 (Franke-Ruta), so congress has declared war since 1941. Although, it was close. As for the constitutionality of invading Iraq, I believe it was constitutional due to the “necessary and proper clause” (Morone and Kersh 69). This clause at the end of article 1 section 8 (Morone and Kersh 68) states that congress can “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States” (Morone and Kersh 69). Regarding Iraq, Congress “authorized force” (Franke-Ruta). Even though that doesn’t sound like declaring war to me, I believe that the clause I previously mentioned makes the invasion

Show More
Related

  • War Powers Reform Research Paper

    274 Words  | 2 Pages

    This limited the president from essentially “declaring” war by deploying troops at their own whim. With the War Powers Resolution the president must notify Congress within forty-eight hours that they have mobilized troops, after which the troops can stay deployed for sixty days without Congress’s authorization. The president is

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The War Powers Resolution

    1152 Words  | 5 Pages

    The constitution is quite vague and often needs defining. The War Powers act, while primarily insuring collective judgment, also provides a necessary definition for the war powers. The war powers are split between the two, and the only provision directly concerning the matter in Article II of the Constitution is that the president is the commander in chief of the armed forces. What does that entail? If the president could just freely use the troops with no respect for congressional authority, he would never find the need to seek a congressional war declaration, which would be entirely to his advantage and allow him to act unilaterally, which is definitely not how our framers intended our government to work.

    Read More

  • The Three-Fifths Compromise In 1787

    267 Words  | 2 Pages

    During the early years of America, agricultural demands drove most of the economy allowing the South to demanded political protection. One of the protective measures was the Three-Fifths Compromise in 1787. The South wanted to count the slaves toward its population allowing for more representation. At the Constitutional Convention, the delegates decided to count a slave as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of determining the population for how many seats each State would have in the House. This solidified Southern control over Politics for several years to come.

    Read More

  • The Great Compromise: Constitutional Convention In 1787

    735 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Great Compromise created a new issue concerning slaves and how they would be counted when figuring out a state’s population (Valentine). The Great Compromise required an exact count of the population to decide how many representatives each state would be allowed to have in the lower house. The Southerners wanted to include the slaves which make up about forty-three percent of their population. Doing that they would have many more representatives compared to the Northern states. Northern states had very few slaves, and they did not want the Southern states to gain the advantage of greater representation in the new government.

    Read More

  • Explain What Compromises Were Made At The Constitutional Convention

    705 Words  | 3 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Vs Constitution Dbq

    516 Words  | 3 Pages

    The structure and powers of the federal government changed under the Constitution as compared to the Articles of Confederation. Many people, known as the anti-Federalists, opposed these changes while on the contrary, many people, known as the Federalists, supported them. The framework and function of the federal government changed drastically under the Constitution. The federal government was much stronger under the Constitution because it was given the power to run the states under more unified control.

    Read More

  • What Are The Articles Of Confederation Unnaceptable

    138 Words  | 1 Pages

    There are quite a few people who argue that the Articles of Confederation are unacceptable for the United States, however there are people who question whether they are or are not unnaceptable. These people think that since there was no single leader to tell them what to do, since each state had one vote in congress, and since the congress was allowed to deal with westered lands, that the articles were acceptable. “[The articles of confederation] had no executive or judicial branch, the Confederation could not levy taxes, [and] all states had to agree before the Articles could be changed…” Regardless, the Articles of Confederation were unsuitable for the United States because there was no judicial or executive branches, all the states had

    Read More

  • The Primary Weaknesses Of The Articles Of Confederation

    226 Words  | 1 Pages

    The primary weakness of the Articles of Confederation is that each state retained all sovereignty over itself. Sovereignty is defined as ultimate authority over someone, something, or someplace. Although the National Government had enough power, it gave too much to the states. This lead to a plethora of problems that harmed the government of the United States under the Articles of Confederation. One example of this was the states did not have to pay the government taxes.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Strengths And Weaknesses

    512 Words  | 3 Pages

    Because of the numerous shortcomings of the Articles the convention that was held to modify the Articles wound up discarding the Articles of Confederation and starting from the very beginning once more. A weak Congress was one of the principle weaknesses of the Articles. “The Articles created a loose confederation of sovereign states and a weak central government, leaving most of the power with the state governments” (Library of Congress). The main issue with the Articles of Confederation was that it neglected to give power to the government. The new states needed to unite under one Constitution and form a sovereign central government.

    Read More

  • The Three Compromises Made In The Constitutional Convention

    1593 Words  | 7 Pages

    One of the compromises made in the Constitutional Convention is the three-fifths compromise. In this compromise, the southerners wanted to add slaves to the population of the state they lived in. If slaves were included in their state’s population, that state would be able to add more representatives in the House of Representatives. Northerners did not agree with that statement because slaves did not have the right to vote. After the delegates compromised, they agreed that only three-fifths of the slave’s population would be counted into the state’s population.

    Read More

  • The Great Sympromises And The Three-Fifths Compromise

    478 Words  | 2 Pages

    At this time, slaves were not counted as anything for taxes or population. The South proposes that their slaves should be counted as part of their total population. Northerners object to this, obviously, because they wanted to continue having more representation and voice than the South. The Constitutional Convention decided upon the Three-Fifths Compromise. This compromise stated that every five slaves would count for three people.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Dbq Essay

    585 Words  | 3 Pages

    Following the Revolutionary War, America had just gained independance from Great Britain and needed to form a new government. The Articles of Confederation were established as an attempt to create a government that was unlike Britain’s. Unfortunately, the Articles of Confederation had several weaknesses. When in the process of repairing those weaknesses, the Federalists and the Anti-federalists formed. The Articles of Confederation were very weak as well as useless to America and because of this, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists could not agree on a new type of government.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Constitution Essay

    494 Words  | 2 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • The Three-Fifths Compromise

    146 Words  | 1 Pages

    Eventually, the delegates compromised on the slavery issue as well. Slaves were declared to count as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of population counts. However, neither the word slavery nor slave was used in the Constitution. Rather, it refers to the Three-Fifths Compromise as applying to “all other persons. ”Still, it was apparent whom the Three-Fifths Compromise targeted, since it went a step further and addressed the issue of the African slave trade.

    Read More

  • Essay On War Powers Act

    479 Words  | 2 Pages

    The constitution attempts to evenly distribute powers between the executive and legislative branches of the federal government by providing the president or the commander-in-chief the power to control and supervise the military upon approval by congress, who have the power to declare war and to support the armed forces. The subject of debate regarding the act is whether the president has the authority to send military troops to war without congressional approval. The way the war powers act was written makes it difficult to decipher approximately how much power is the president privileged in the war-making process. According to the constitution congress have the powers to authorize war by formally granting letters that verify and confirm the

    Read More

More about Constitutional Convention

Open Document