Following the end of the American Revolution marked a new set of problems for the United States. As impending war debts were threatening to crush the new nation, America knew they needed to address the flaws of the Articles of Confederation through a Constitutional Convention. The United States Constitution of 1787 was created in hopes of developing a stronger and more effective governing body while still upholding America’s virtues of freedom. Unfortunately, with change, comes opposition, and many people feared that the Constitution would be oppressive and undermine the autonomy of the individual states through its strong central government. Because of this, the issues that sparked the greatest controversies during the ratification of the …show more content…
These principles would thwart any possibility of tyranny and ensure that no single branch could exercise complete control over the government (Carter, 2007). Despite this, many people still debated the amount of power the government should have over the nation. In a letter to Marquis Lafayette, George Washington argues that the amount of power the government has is just the right amount “to perform [the] functions of good government” (Document C) and that, said power would be so distributed across the three branches of government that it will never degenerate into an oppressive form of government. On the other hand, people like Elbridge Gerry believe the opposite. The anti-federalists feel as if the government will be too strong in general and as a result, be unable to provide an adequate representation and protection of the people’s rights. These disputes over governmental power attributed to much of the controversies and tension that was created leading up to the ratification of America’s …show more content…
This can be seen through varying responses to Alexander Hamilton’s financial plan. At the time, America had an enormous amount of debt to be paid, and so Hamilton advised that the creation of a National Bank is implicit in the Constitution and necessary to achieve fiscal matters – even if the Constitution did not give the federal government the specific powers. This form of growing power and oppression within the central government created a lot of opposition against the idea of a National Bank because it is exactly what the anti-federalists were trying to avoid. Similarly, the Alien Act and the Sedition Act are other cases where the government has abused its powers. Under the Federalist government, policies were created in hopes to dis-enfranchise the Republican party. This was done through the violation of the first amendment under the guise of “national security”. As a result, the Republicans had felt attacked and oppressed by the Federalists. This created in a large divide between the two political parties. Because of this, the controversies regarding power before the ratification of the Constitution were justified being that it had such a detrimental effect on the social cohesion within America during the Federalist
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.
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…..
After securing its independence from Britain, America was immediately faced with a crisis of how the budding country should be governed. The Articles of Confederation was the first effort to establish a democratic government in the US; however, this feeble attempt at a creating a stable government failed due to a lack of control over the states. Rather than a functioning authority in the nation, the Articles created a “firm league of friendship” between the states. To remedy this pathetic excuse for a ruling body, a Constitution was drafted, and rival sides emerged quickly on the main issues the new document was supposed to address. Two men that embodied this conflict were Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton, both passionate patriots who strongly believed that their proposed forms of government were in the best interests of the country, but they disagreed fundamentally on what that form of government should be.
The federalist papers was a series of newspaper essays that have become a classic of American political. James wants to redefine the term “Republic”. Power to govern must come from the govern’s citizens. James Madison starts the most popular federalist papers by saying that one of the strongest arguments is the fact that it establishes a government to be able to control the violence and damage caused by fractions which is a group of people who gather together to protect their political opinions and views. Factions will always be a issue to deal with because the citizens will always have different opinions, some own more land than others, and some are more wealthy than others.
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.(Document 3) Although George Washington was a Federalist many believed he showed a point of view that seemed to be Anti-Federalists. Many believed that The Bill of Rights needed to be changed and modified and a new document’s time to come into place.
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?
Throughout the history of any great nation, there can be found the clashing of political titans; the United States is no exception. During the pivotal years following the American Revolution, the Anti-Federalist and Federalist groups emerged to lay the political groundwork for what would one day become one of the greatest democratic republics the world has ever seen. These polar-opposite factions proved to be a source of great division amongst the citizens of the newly established country, especially during the arising constitutional debate. Various influential figures from both sides molded and refined the beginnings of the Constitution in order to quell the expectations and desires of the larger population. Though the process of ratification
The 1790s marked a time of rebirth for the American government. With first President George Washington at its helm, the decade brought into effect the many facets of the recently ratified Constitution as well as the institution of federal laws, banking policies, and taxes. As the country sought to establish itself as an organized world power, turmoil was ensuing in Europe with the eruption of the French Revolution, presenting the nascent United States with its first foreign dilemma. Within the borders, however, a much larger problem was brewing. Nearly every piece of legislation tested the balance between centralized government and individual freedom.
Each of these eighty-five essays contain ideas and themes that are expressed in the ratification of the Constitution as well as the modern American government. One of the
The Constitution “Give me liberty, or give me death!” (Patrick Henry) The introduction of the Constitution brought along a frenzied dispute between two parties of people known as the Federalists, and Anti-Federalists. Each of these parties had theories on whether or not they believed the Constitution should be ratified. The Federalists, a like James Madison, were the individuals who were for the ratification of the Constitution.
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.
The new constitution, a document granting the framework for a new democratic government, replacing the Articles of the Confederation. This new document gained approval from some of the citizens, but also raised questions and concerns from others. There was a constant back and forth between the two groups on whether or not the constitution should be ratified. This editorial provides historical background on the issue and expresses my opinion on which side I would’ve chosen.
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
The author of anti-federalist 17# was Robert Yates (not the serial killer), at the time he was a politician and judge also the oldest of his family. he lived in the state of New York and tried to run for governor. The document yates wrote was just about states that the anti-federalists did not desire a constitution as a result of they felt that it 'd offer the central government an excessive amount of power which it 'd remove all power from the states. "to raise and support armies at pleasure, in addition in peace as in war, and their management over the militia, tend not solely to a consolidation of the govt. , however the destruction of liberty..." a stronger central government would higher shield everybody and is additional for the good
Why was the Constitution a controversial document even as it was being written? Established in 1787 The Constitution was a controversial document because it was a document that could both solve the nation’s hardships and warped the Republican foundation. The Constitution on one hand would give the people a voice and the other would control the nation through a monarchy system. One of the controversies that arose from the creation of the Constitution was the question of management of commerce.