Ratifying The Constitution Essay

1809 Words8 Pages
The Constitution is an adequate democratic document, when the Constitution we have in place today is the subject of that sentence. By being adequate it is meant to serve its purpose, nothing more or less, in establishing a democratic form of government that is satisfactory to the people. The Constitution proves that statement true in the fact that we do not have citizens openly revolting in the street, calling out against it. However, in some streets there are voices starting to be heard, calling into question the democracy of the document. Some cause for concerns can be found in the first writing of the Constitution (the one that will soon be thoroughly discussed) and some lay in more recent Amendments. However, we must not forget that these voices can only be discussed out loud for all opinions to be made on it because of the foresight of those in our past that demanded such rights before approving the Constitution as the foundation of our new government. The Constitution that was written before the ratification debate was adequate in its democracy, but fell short of its goal of creating a government that incorporates all of the citizens views equally and effectively. The Constitution divides the power between the three government…show more content…
Or should I say the unlimited power that is given. The government has set limitations to what they could tax and how much, however two of these limits were open to interpretation: providing for common defense and general welfare. The government becomes its own judge and jury while establishing these criteria, because the budget for common defense is set by the government, as well as the standard for what the general welfare is. As the Constitution says all laws set by the government become "supreme law of the land". The language used in itself is that of a monarchy and did not sit well with
Open Document