Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
U.s. constitution then and now
Bill of rights essay on the first amendment
Bill of rights discussion questions
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: U.s. constitution then and now
Deciding how America's government would work during the creation of the constitution, also decided the future of America and its decisions. Our government derives from the creation of the American government after the revolutionary war in 1787. To get all of the state’s to agree on the constitution many compromises had to be made. The delegates from the thirteen states met to change America. Our government today is based on the solutions and compromises made at the constitutional convention. One of the biggest compromises that set the stage for the rest of the constitution's success was made from different parts proposed by different sections of America. The Great Compromise would not have been successful, if America was not willing to use different viewpoints, create small compromises in between large ones, and combine thoughts to form something that all states would be happy with. The first compromise that the Great Compromise derived from was the Virginia plan, proposed by James Madison and Edmund Randolph. The Virginia plan said that the government would have three branches, the first being legislature that …show more content…
made the laws, the second was the executive who enforced the laws, and the third being the judiciary branch which interpreted the laws. They also proposed that there would be two houses that would hold the power of the taxes, regulating commerce, and making laws when states are unable. The houses would have representatives based on the state’s population or wealth. The second plan the Great Compromise derived from was the New Jersey plan. This plan was proposed by the smaller states after hearing the Virginia plan and noticing how little impact they had. This plan called for a legislature with only one house, and each house would only have one vote per state. It also gave the legislature the power to regulate trade and raise money by taxing foreign goods. Having the same number of votes per state benefited the north because they had more states, so they would get more votes in the proposed house. The compromise took the viewpoints of the Virginia who was the south and the New Jersey, which was the north and combined them. Both sides gave up some of what they proposed in their plans to create the compromise. They sacrificed some of what they wanted to make Americas government better and make it successful. The compromise also includes some small compromises that were an element of the Great Compromises success. One of those key compromises was about slavery, and through much debate, was the Three-Fifths compromise. Under this compromise, three- fifths of the slaves would be counted for taxes on the states and three-fifths would be counted as population. This compromise helped because it took a largely debated on the problem and momentarily solved it. The North and South both semi-agreed to this small compromise. They both got parts that they had asked for and both gave some parts up in order to agree. The success of such a big problem being dealt with was a big hurdle in the success of the Great compromise and further advance its progress. Small compromises improved problems greatly and steered the constitution in the direction of achievement. The great compromise did not help the constitution in the way of peoples’ rights.
The constitution was disliked because it did not include rights for the people. This could be a reason why the constitution is seen as unsuccessful. Not having rights was definitely an important point to be included in the Constitution. The Constitution was made to set up the government portion of America; therefore, it was The main focus of the convention. After the constitution was released, many people were angry I did not have their rights included. Then the Bill of Rights was created. In a way it is kind of a good thing that they wrote it afterwards. That allowed them to have more time with the people's rights and put all the information needed into the bill. The bill was also added to the constitution, making the “second draft” or the add on of the bill a
success. The compromise of slavery did not last or work very well, and it made the representation in the government difficult to count. Though during the Civil War, slavery became a very debated causing made their interpretation of slaves difficult, the amount of representatives in the house was based on population and slaves counted as three-fifths of that. But during the Civil War that was forgotten. This helped the representation because it made it more exact. Three-fifths made a lot of populations not whole because it depended on the amount of slaves. Not having slaves count made the populations in the representation exact. Though it did take a part of the population away it fixed the amount so it was whole. The only people who may have wanted more representation was the north. They already did not have slaves, so it didn't really matter either way for them and would not have benefited them. In conclusion, the Great Compromise may not have been such an accomplishment if the delegates were not willing to use and administer different proposals from different sections of the convention. Bargain on problems that would be included within the compromise and adjust its requirements. Combine their ideas together and sacrifice points to agree with one another. The Great Compromise, Constitutional Convention, Constitution, and American government were very successful and the government today is based off the working success that that government provided.
Many complaints focused on the lack of a bill of rights in the Constitution, stating the inalienable rights of an American citizen. In Thomas Jefferson’s Jefferson Writings (Doc. C), he states that no government is entitled to omit such an important part of a country’s makeup. The reason a constitution is made is to protect the rights the people fought for during the Revolution, not limit them. Another concern is the balance of power between social classes and the governmental branches, which was a big issue with the Articles of Confederation. Even with checks in place so no branch of government could become to powerful, there was always a risk. In the “Brutus” and “John DeWitt” papers (Doc. D) it states that this unbalance of power could lead, disastrously, to one group dominating over all others, most likely the aristocrats. Some people, such as Patrick Henry during his Speech to Virginia State Constitutional Ratification Convention (Doc. F) even became heatedly anti-federalist, stating that the Constitution endangered to sovereignty of the states entirely. But even with these various concerns and arguments, the Constitution was ratified by all thirteen states in
When the Founding Fathers got together at Philadelphia to draft the Constitution, they had many different views and opinions as to how to govern our country. At the convention, the founders fought over the issues of slavery, representation and the Congress’s powers. Their personal lives had influenced their ideas and some of the compromises made at the Constitutional Convention. The founders’ different personal experiences, economic backgrounds, and coming from states of different sizes, economy and needs, led to the creation of the Three-Fifths Compromise, The Great Compromise, and the Slave Trade Compromise.
The year of 1776 was a time of revolution, independence, and patriotism. American colonists had severed their umbilical cord to the Mother Country and declared themselves “Free and Independent States”.1 The chains of monarchy had been thrown off and a new government was formed. Shying away from a totalitarian government, the Second Continental Congress drafted a document called the Articles of Confederation which established a loose union of the states. It was an attempt at self-government that ended in failure. The Articles of Confederation had many defects which included a weak central government that lacked the power to tax, regulate trade, required equal representation and a unanimous vote to amend the Articles, and had only a legislative branch. As a result the United States lacked respect from foreign countries. These flaws were so severe that a new government had to be drafted and as a result the Constitution was born. This document remedied the weak points of the federal government and created one that was strong and fair, yet still governed by the people.
Throughout the American Revolution, the colonists were completely resentful towards their British 'king'. They yearned for their own government, and to finally set themselves apart from George III's rule and his legislation. When the Articles of Confederation were mandated, the expectation was to provide the colonies with a stable government. The Articles were then replaced by the Constitution, which had corresponding values. Essentially the document was written to salvage and improve the new government. The Constitution did many positive things for the nation, and was the perfect remedy for the failures of of the Articles. However, it is manifest that the authors of the document were not as honorable as they may have been assumed to be. How they drafted the document and the bias they have put into it is still greatly effects us. The Constitution is a counter-revolution because it contradicts the fails of the Articles, and is evident that some authors had more self-beneficial and narrow mindsets.
When the new Constitution was drafted, the ratification, the official approval by the people of the United States, sparked a national debate. People were shocked by the radical changes it proposed; they expected the convention to merely amend the Articles of Confederation. They were afraid of regressing back into a state under tyranny, a form of rule where a single or small group reigns with vast or absolute power. Americans had just fought for their freedom from the tyrannical rule of the king of England. All their efforts and revolutionary ideas would have gone to waste.
The Anti-Federalist Party, led by Patrick Henry, objected to the constitution. They objected to it for a few basic reasons. Mostly the Anti-Federalists thought that the Constitution created too strong a central government. They felt that the Constitution did not create a Federal government, but a single national government. They were afraid that the power of the states would be lost and that the people would lose their individual rights because a few individuals would take over. They proposed a “Bill of Rights”, to make sure the citizens were protected by the law. They believed that no Bill of Rights would be equal to no check on our government for the people.
The true ideas written in the U.S. Constitution will be debated for all of time. No one knows the exact connotation of the Framers' words, but in today's world they are interpreted as words of freedom and liberty. The argument over whether or not the Constitution is as liberating as it is perceived may never be solved. This historic document has some unfortunate undertones that give it a counter-revolutionary feel, but at the same time it is full of wisdom to keep the American Revolution alive. While no one will ever truly know which side of the Constitution to believe, it has done its' job very well up till now, and will for many years to come.
The most powerful tool an American citizen have is their power to vote. The ability to vote allows a citizen to be heard and allows them to make a change in the government. By, casting your vote you are electing a person to stand up for you and your values and speak on your behalf. This ability to vote came from the 15th amendment which states “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” The amendment was designed to protect the rights of the newly freed slaves after, the Civil War. Unfortunately, this amendment failed in different ways that lead to the oppression of minorities in America for almost 100
Some historical circumstances surrounding the issue of the ratification of the Constitution was weakness of the new government under the Articles of Confederation which led to the Constitutional Convention. Members of Congress believed that the Articles of Confederation, the first government of the United States, needed to be altered while others did not want change. This desired Constitution created a huge dispute and argument between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The people who supported the new Constitution, the Federalists, began to publish articles supporting ratification. As stated in document 2 John Jay (Federalist) had many arguments to support ratification of the Constitution. One argument John Jay used was, with the ratification of the Constitution, he says, “…Our people free, contented and united…” The Antifederalists had numerous arguments they used to oppose the ratification of the Constitution. The Antifederalists believed that a free republic wouldn’t be able to long exist over a country of the great extent of these states.
A constitution is the system of fundamental principles according to which a nation is governed. Our founding fathers created the US Constitution to set specific standards for our country. We must ask ourselves why our founding fathers created the Constitution in the first place. America revolted against the British due to their monarchy form of government. After the American Revolution, each of the original 13 colonies operated under its own rules of government. Most states were against any form of centralized rule from the government. They feared that what happened in England would happen again. They decided to write the Articles of Confederation, which was ratified in 1781. It was not effective and it led to many problems. The central government could not regulate commerce between states, deal with foreign governments or settle disputes. The country was falling apart at its seams. The central government could not provide assistance to the state because there wasn’t a central army. When they realized that the Articles of Confederation was not up to par, they held a convention, known as the Constitutional Convention of 1787. As a result of t...
James Madison, a delegate and one of the main supporters of a stronger national authority, had thought ahead and drew up the Virginia Plan before the convention in Philadelphia began. Thus, it became the first discussion of the committee (Roche 19).
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
The first proposals to this new plan were the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan. The Virginia Plan called for a separation of powers among the government’s three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. Some states proposed this idea and came up with the New Jersey Plan, which called for all of the states to have equal representation from Congress. In order to move forward from the deadlock of the two proposals, the Connecticut Compromise was enacted. This decided that legislature would be bicameral, which meant that there would be two houses: one would have equal representation and one would be based on state population. This unified the states under a federal system. To this day, there are three types of Fe...
The American Revolution stirred political unity and motivated the need for change in the nation. Because many Americans fought for a more balanced government in the Revolutionary War, they initially created a weak national government that hampered the country's growth and expansion. In the Letter from Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Mrs. Adams complained about the inadequacy of power that the American government had to regulate domestic affairs. The Articles of Confederation was created to be weak because many had feared a similar governing experience that they had just eliminated with Britain. The alliance of states united the 13 local governments but lacked power to deal with important issues or to regulate diplomatic affairs. Congress did not have the power to tax, regulate trade, or draft people for war. This put the American citizens at stake because States had the power to refuse requests for taxes and troops (Document G). The weakened national government could not do anything about uprisings or small-scale protests because it did not have the power to put together an army. The deficiencies of the confederation government inspired the drafting of the American Constitution. The document itself embodied the principle of a national government prepared to deal with the nation's problems. In James Madison's Federalist Paper, he persuades the American public to adopt the Constitution so that the government can protect humans from their nature and keep them out of conflicts.
The Great Compromise, is also referred to as, The Great Connecticut Compromise, was headed by Franklin. The Compromise was discussed in meeting by a committee, at the constitutional convention was held in 1787. This was to accomplish and settle the interests for both the small and large states. It had allowed the for one to lead in the senate and the other in the House by an arrangement, that each of the states would have two representatives in the Senate no matter what the size of the state. However, any provisions, were further granted based on the populace of the house (Wilson, Dilulio, Jr. and Bose, 23).