States had all other powers. Major argument in convention was whether or not slaves counted as people while determining a state’s representation. The south would obviously have more votes, and threatened to secede if slaves weren’t counted. They agreed to the three-fifths clause, allowed 3/5 slaves to count as people. Constitution also forbade all citizens from returning escaped slaves to a different state.
The challenge was to create a strong central government without letting any one person, or group of people, get too much power. How did the Constitution Guard against Tyranny? “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” (James Madison, May. 1787). The Articles of Confederation wasn’t working for the fifty-five individuals at the Constitutional Convention on May of 1787 in Philadelphia.
antifederalists Opponents of the 1787 Constitution, they cast the document as antidemocratic, objected to the subordination of the states to the central government, and feared encroachment on individuals’ liberties in the absence of a bill of rights. (190) Articles of Confederation (1781) First American constitution that established the United States as a loose confederation of states under a weak national Congress, which was not granted the power to regulate commerce or collect taxes. The Articles were replaced by a more efficient Constitution in 1789. (179) Great Compromise (1787) Popular term for the measure which reconciled the New Jersey and Virginia plans at the constitutional convention, giving states proportional representation
Professor of history Gordon S. Wood views the struggle for a new constitution in 1787-1788 as a social conflict between upper-class Federalists who desired a stronger central government and the “humbler” Anti-Federalists who controlled the state assemblies. He says that the writers and supporters of the Constitution were Federalists and they believed that the Constitution was a fulfillment. Which basically means, that those Federalists didn’t see anything wrong with the Constitution. Antifederalists said the Constitution was a denial of the principles of 1776. They were saying that the Constitution was didn’t honor the liberty nor the self-government.
In the Articles of Confederation, the congress wanted to make voting on a state-by-state basis and proportional state taxes based only on land values. When it came to the decision as to what to do with the western lands, it was undetermined what actions to take. When the Congress sent out a copy of the Articles of Confederation for each state to review, they found it was not flawless but decided it was better to have a flawed plan rather than no formal national government. States such as New Jersey, Maryland, and Delaware refused to agree to the Articles until the other larger states “relinquished their western land claims.”(U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian, n.d.). Finally, New Jersey and Delaware signed off on the Articles and Maryland followed reluctantly after a British invasion on their land and New Jersey agreed to let go of their western land claims.
Johnson. He is the author of the book Historical beginnings… The Federal Reserve. Johnson looks at the argument between Hamilton and Jefferson. Hamilton wanted to vest power in congress to establish a central bank whereas Jefferson did not agree with this because the constitution did not require this. Hamilton argued that since congress has been given so many monetary and fiscal powers it would be practical to create a central bank to carry them out (3).
Of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton, and the Art of the Sale The Constitution of the United States of America is often called the American Experiment by political powers outside our borders. From the time it was drafted it has been scrutinized by enemies as well as allies, each with their own political agenda on what it means to them both individually and collectively. Through the drafting of the Constitution the founding Fathers established a federal government that had more power over their sovereign states but cleverly policed itself from any one organized group within that federal body from gaining ultimate authority over all. This was accomplished by developing three branches of government to counter balance: Legislative, Executive
Congress was not getting enough money from the states and need lots more. In 1786 they needed $2.5 million but only had $400,00.00 on hand. The states had bankrupt the nation. 3. Congress sought to allow the states to pay a 5%duty on imported goods.
When written, the United States Constitution did not provide for the development of a two-party system. Yet we, as the rebellious Americans that we are, managed to find a way around the Constitution. The two parties that emerged during the 1790s were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans. The Federalists, so aptly named, favored a strong centralized government as outlined in the Constitution. The Democratic-Republicans sought to limit federal control and preferred local power as the dominant force.
The Electoral College system is faulty and needs to be removed from the presidential voting system. “When they [the founding fathers] met in 1787 in Philadelphia, they were uncertain about how to pick a president. At the end of the summer, they arrived at a compromise – something of the best of the worst options; The Electoral College” (Watson n.p.). The founding fathers picked the Electoral College not because they liked the idea of it but because they could not think of a better option. The Electoral College system used for picking the President was not chosen as a primary topic in the constitution, as for instance the right to freedom of speech was, instead it was used for lack of a better solution.