One great way to deal with factions is by having a government that knows how to control and deal with their effects. Madison believes that a republic can do that job better than a democracy, because a democracy is a small society of people who can not admit there is a cure to factions. He believes that a large republic would work out well for the States, because a larger government causes less negative impacts on the people, even though all of the people won’t be known, the government won’t be too centralized and only focused on the
Both parties had America’s best interest at heart, however Hamilton and the Federalists’ ideas concerning the economy, interpretation of the Constitution, and the future of American society made them more fit for governing the United States. Hamilton’s understanding of a successful economy allowed him to make decisions that would benefit the country. As discussed in source one, Alexander Hamilton created a uniform currency and an economic plan that would assume state debts and make them federal debts. From there on, he created a national bank; in source three Hamilton states, “...[The Democratic Republicans] were determined to oppose the banking system, which would ruin the credit and honor of the Nation”, as he clearly has the nation’s best interest at heart. The Democratic Republican feared corruption, but they overlooked that their rights are protected in the Constitution and that their
This quote by Ted Yoho asserts the importance of the United States Constitution in establishing our beliefs. Even though this document made a great impact on our nation at the time of its writing, the path to ratification was not straight forward. In the summer of 1787, debate was waged in the newspapers, articles, and state conventions regarding the division of power among groups. The Federalists favored a strong national government and therefore, supported the Constitution. The opponents, however, named themselves the Anti-Federalists, and they argued that the new plan handed too much power to the central government.
Hence Federalists came up with the Bill of Rights as a way to get the Constitution ratified and for people to really see a needed change. The Bill Of Rights which lists specific prohibitions on governmental power, lead the Anti-Federalists to be less fearful of the new Constitution . This guaranteed that the people would still remain to have rights, but the strong central government that the country needed would have to be approved. The 1804 Map of the nation shows that even after the ratification of the United States Constitution there still continued to be “commotion” and dispute in the country. (Document 8) George Washington stated that the people should have a say in the nation and government and everything should not be left to the government to decide.
Also, Montesquieu’s idea of the separation of powers helped shape the government. It was put into place to keep one branch from becoming overpowered. Without these key concepts, our government would supposedly become or stay as an absolute monarch. In conclusion, The Enlightenment greatly impacted the American Government and Revolution because the ideas and concepts that were gained from the time period supported the new beginning of our nation’s prodigious
The power of the government was most equally distributed amongst the people, states and central government, decreasing the possibility of tyranny. A stable democracy with its inalienable rights also protected the citizens from losing their rights in the event of the formation fo a tyrannical government. However, the government increased the chances for a tyranny to occur through the elastic clause and Gerrymandering. While the Constitution did include stable democraces, inalienable rights and power divisions, all of which protect against tyranny, Gerrymandering and the Elastic Clause allow for tyranny to occur. The colonists created a system in which the government had limited power but enough to maintain the country while the states and the people received equally limited power as well.
The Federalists and The Anti-Federalists: Two different ideologies After the American Revolution, the United States had to face the war debt and challenges of constructing a new country. In an effort to create a system that solved these problems, they created the Constitution. In order to institute a new government under the Constitution, the ratification required the approval of nine states conventions. States that did not ratify the Constitution would not be considered as a part of the United States. The creation of the Constitution became a complicated process, especially between two political groups with different ideologies, who fought over the distribution of power.
The Judiciary today is more powerful than before, it has benefitted from the strong partnership with the Congress and the Executive. It is hard to enact laws that control Judiciary making it independent and powerful (Guarnieri et al. 2002) Recently the Supreme Court has given rulings that can effectively undermine the Congress and Executive, for example, a court challenged president Trump Executive orders on banning people from some Muslim countries from entering the USA. Today the Judiciary has more powers and cannot be described as a weak
It is perhaps opportunely that our government is able to push through boundaries and traditions to come up with resolutions and better policies/laws. All this time, the Philippine Economy has been deemed to have strong growth hindered by political uncertainties. This is so true. We have a potential to be great and yet we still move slow towards our development and sustainability. Our country has its own strengths and weaknesses that affect positively and/or negatively our over-all status.
Federalism is a topic one might be familiar as one of the advocacies of the current Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte. In all cases and in the most succinct way, a federal political system is a political system in which there is equality of status between its constituent levels of government (Law, 2013). It has been deemed magnificently controversial, looming both threats of empowered regionalism and division and promises of nationwide development and solidarity. Regardless of the sentiments (whether positive or negative) towards the political system, this paper aims to analyze the possibility of Philippine Federalism though the structural-functionalism approach. Federalism in the Philippines can theoretically empower the regions to strive
The national and state government both have power which the people can appoint to represent them. It imposes laws to keep corruption and illegal behavior from those that can hurt citizens. Under the constitution we have checks and balances. It distributes power onto the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative so no one is more powerful than the other. Our government has created laws to keep peace and order within its borders.
Even though George Washington made it a big point in his farewell address, about how political parties would cause problems, the beliefs about how our young new country should have been ran was very broad and different and so it was inevitable that the different parties would form. While the Federalists believed that the highly educated businessmen should represent the people and run the government, the Democrat-Republicans thought a very different opinion, that the country should use its citizens to make decisions about the nation 's government and to have equal
In document C, there is a very useful chart that shows one way that each of the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial) holds a little bit of power over the others. This is good because it means that no one part of government is above or below the others in terms of power, and there is always a way for one of them to be “checked” if they are becoming too tyrannical. For example, the President (executive) can veto Congressional legislation, but Congress (legislative) can impeach the President if necessary. Being able to “check” each other is one of the ways that the Constitution kept one group from having too much power. Another benefit of having the checks and balances system is that none of the three branches is so far apart from each that they have no power over the others, but they are far enough apart to prevent the power from accumulating.
The Articles of Confederation was one of the first official documents of the United States. From the beginning of the American Revolution, Congress felt the need for a stronger union and a government powerful enough to defeat Great Britain. During the early years of the war this desire became a belief that the new nation must have a constitutional order appropriate to its republican character. However, after a few short years the Articles were replaced by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Articles were a stepping stone which led to the Constitution however the Articles contained more weaknesses than strengths which forced the colonists to get rid of them and create a new document.
Final Exam Question 1 Back in 1787, the Constitutional Convention had to answer a very essential question that would determine the office of the presidency: Should the U.S. even have a president? The Founding Fathers feared executive power such as monarchies, yet they also knew that state governments weren’t strong enough to keep the republic afloat. They had to find a balance between a leader that was both strong and dependable, yet gave a healthy amount of power to the people. In the Constitution, the office of the presidency is vaguely mentioned, yet it mentions three types of powers given to the president: 1) Expressed Powers, which are explicitly granted from the Constitution itself 2) Delegated Powers, or powers granted by Congress, and 3) Inherent Powers, which are assumed by the president during times of crisis. The use of these powers determine if the president is going beyond the limits of the office.