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.
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.
Their main reason for that was that the creation of new states would decrease their power in congress. The Louisiana Purchase was not the only time Jefferson adopted the ideas of federalists about loose construction of the constitution. After he was reelected, war soon broke out in Europe between English and French. British needed more manpower and financial aid for the war soon began impressing American sailors and stealing their cargo. This made trade between the United States and Europe unsafe.
The Articles of Confederation were created as a new central government form after the American Revolution. The Articles still consisted of problems, specifically financial ones. Hamilton proposed a plan that would put U.S. finances on a stable foundation. He planned to lower national debt and strengthen the national credit because he believed that "a national debt was a national blessing". However, some people, such as Jefferson and small farmers opposed his ideas, because they believed in states' rights and a strict interpretation of the constitution, which led to the split of two different political parties.
Federalists, on the other hand, believed in broadly adhering to constitution, characterizing them as broad constructionists. This allowed the Federalists to make decisions that were not clearly supported by the constitution, ultimately giving the government more power than the constitution. While the Federalists and Republicans were thought as very diverse parties, their beliefs ended up crossing during the presidencies of Jefferson and Madison. Therefore, from 1801 to 1817 while the Federalists were considered to be broad constructionists and Republicans strict constructionists, they both went astray from their beliefs so each party could do what was best for themselves and, most importantly, the country. From 1801 to 1809, during the presidency of Jefferson, it was the first time that the Republicans and Federalists didn't abide by the ordinary ideals each group previously followed.
Without a strong central government, democracy was impossible thus America was propelling towards the gallows of failure. Roche asserts that only a functional governing body could effectively protect the earnestly fought for freedoms of the United States. ”When the Constitutionalists went forth to subvert the Confederation,
Yet, another reason why we, as a nation, alter the Constitution in our own ways, still allowing each part as an indication of mandate. Moreover, that is not written in The Constitution is the fact that Washington appointed cabinet members to help him run the
The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, favored a strong central government who had the power to tax, make treaties, control exports/imports, and declare war. On the other hand, The Republicans, led by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson, were for a limited central government, whose role was minor. In other words, The Republicans favored stronger local and state governments while the Federalists agreed more with the idea of a powerful central government. Democracy of America could not be agreed on; The Federalists didn’t want a whole lot of it, however, The Republicans were all for it. The Republicans wanted the power of the government/democracy to be in the direct hands of the people, the majority of the people who supported the Republicans were the poor/middle class workers and farmers.
The controversy of the argument was on the basis that, “there was an inherent connection between the states and the preservation of individual liberty, which is the end of any legitimate government.” Their own argument have invariably created a national government instead of a federal government. This is because “the federal form, which regards the Union as a confederacy of sovereign states, instead of which, they have framed a national government, which regards the Union as a consolidation of the states.” Anti-federalists were against constructing a new constitution and they agreed that without valid amendments the constitution would give the government too much power. This power would then lead to confusion according to the (Centinel 1787) “ The new constitution instead of being panacea or cure of every grievance so delusively represented by its advocated will be found upon examination like Pandora’s box replete with every
Washington, like most other Federalists during the French Revolution, wanted to keep out and have the country stay to itself. They believed that especially right after the revolution, America did not have a strong enough military force to contribute or put on the line, and also wanted to become closer with the British once again due to their strong trade market. While the Anti-Federalists, like Jefferson, wanted to have an active support of the French due to the Franco-American Treaty of 1778. Washington believed this was too large of a danger for the country though this seemed to further the separation between the Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian