How about the U.S constitution, what factors were held to point out? What went on with the Articles of Confederation? Both classes had disagreements with the Articles of Confederation. Federalists say that the articles were weak and ineffective because the state governments was too weak to apply laws and ordered for a national government instead. We Anti-federalists however believed that the Articles of Confederation was a good plan and that there should not be a government more powerful than the state governments.
The Democratic-Republicans sought to limit federal control and preferred local power as the dominant force. Chiefly, the emergence of the American two-party system arose from strongly opposed political views, but also developed out of experience and a struggle for power. As previously stated, the main reason for the development of the party system in the United States, or any political party for that matter, is a difference in beliefs on how a government should be operated. The Federalists, formed by Alexander Hamilton – Washington’s Treasury Secretary – in 1794, favored federalism with government having the power to control commerce, tax, declare war, and make treaties among other powers.
Hamilton created his Federalist party to help promote his goals for the United States. Jefferson’s opposition party, the Republicans, “opposed Hamilton's urban, financial, industrial goals for the United States, and his promotion of extensive trade and friendly relations with Britain.” Their interpretation of the Constitution also was very different. Hamilton interpreted it very loosely and used the elastic clause to get what he wanted out of it, while Jefferson read and followed if very strictly. This is a reason Jefferson was against Hamilton’s plans. Thomas Jefferson didn’t like the idea of building a National Bank in the United States.
The controversial laws passed in 1798, otherwise known as the Alien and Sedition Acts, were enacted in response to the crises happening at the time. From these acts, the President gained the power to deport all aliens he viewed dangerous to the peace and safety of the U.S. The acts also allowed the restraint and removal in time of war of resident adult aliens of the hostile nation. Divisions in politics combined with distrust in other nations and domestic upheaval led the Federalists to pass these acts. The dispute over the Alien and Sedition Acts exposed bitter disagreements on a number of issues.
Brutus says in his essay that this power given to the federal government will take away all of the state government’s power to collect taxes and that the constitutions and treaties of the states will become null. Hamilton denies this by explaining that the structure of the proposed federal government will preserve the state constitutions. What Hamilton says about this seems to go against Article 6 of the Constitution, which says that the law of the Constitution will be supreme over the states. Brutus’ Essay V seems to say the same thing over and over again. Many of the things that he lists as problems to the nation are things that we love about our government today.
While Madison supported a strong central government, he also helped implement what are common separations of power and checks and balances. Originally a Federalist and author of many of the Federalist Papers along with colleagues such as John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, Madison was not only a scholar but a statesman that saw the dangers of a hard, ridged stance for federal government. Madison feared the likelihood of each state in the Confederacy having its own monetary systems and laws. He feared that bankruptcy from one state might seep to the next with a catastrophic result. He held a firm stance against treason and sedition.
He was against the Mexican War declared by American Government, as it was unjust to colonize other nations (United States itself was separated from British colonization through revolution). For this misdeed, he was imprisoned for a night. Although the crimes and the length of imprisonment of Thoreau and King were not same, both shared the same motive. Jacobus has pointed out that both Thoreau and King were willing to suffer for their views, especially with punitive laws denying civil rights to all citizens (King, 211). Socrates, a great philosopher in human history, also had followed the same path of breaking unjust laws.
He believed that the Constitution gave the federal government opportunities to do whatever was “necessary and proper” as in a national bank. Jefferson on the other hand was an anti-federalist. He believed in a “strict” interpretation of the Constitution. If the Constitution didn’t give abstract power on something, it was up
Horton accuses the governing body of frequently exploiting its power in having the Justice Department instigate repression among voters. Furthermore, the lawyers who were inspecting the unlawful actions of these political criminals were quietly discharged of their duty and the incriminating evidence was concealed. The Bush administration was also spying regularly on religious and political groups in the country, while it covertly introduced a tremendously illegal surveillance program that caused conflict among senior officials in the Justice Department. Horton attributes this illicit monitoring device as the reason behind the “War on Terror” because it misleadingly revealed all of intelligence’s information on Iraq to both
John Adams also believed that the federal government should have more power than the state government. He also believed in following the rules of the British. On the other hand, Thomas Jefferson believed in the rules of the French. He also believed in laissez-faire, which meant that the Government should stay limited and not have much power. Although i believe many things from both people, I would have to say my philosophy would be Jefferson’s philosophy because he believed every word of the Constitution.