Nevertheless, protecting the rights of the people was the most important concern of America, which affected the choices of the nation. One view Americans had of the Constitution was that it would unify the nation. The Constitution proposed a strong federal government and that these people believed would protect the affairs of the nation, while still granting some power to state government. The people for this option also agreed with the system of government that the Constitution formed, which was a number of branches that used checks and balances to protect the government and the citizen from being controlled by one person. These officials would be “leaders of wisdom, experience, justice, and virtue” and would only be able to serve limited terms.
After the Constitution was written, the new born nation was immediately split into two political sides, the federalists and the anti-federalists, over the ratification. Federalists, southern planters or people that tended to hold interest in trade, advocated a strong executive. On the other hand, anti-federalists, back country people or people involved in business but not in the mercantile economy, opposed the ratification of the constitution. The two sides, after much debate, were able to come to a compromise after the Bill of Rights was included into the Constitution. When the new Constitution was drafted, the ratification, the official approval by the people of the United States, sparked a national debate.
When the founders of the United States of America got together to write the Constitution they anticipated certain issues that might occur between the Federal Government and the individual citizen. It was these concerns that caused them to include certain civil liberties in the Constitution. A civil liberty is an individual right protected by the Constitution against the powers of the government. (Sidlow and Henschen 2001, p. 470). After leaving the command of Britain, the citizens of the colonies were against big centralized government, so when it was decided that the Articles of Confederation wasn't sufficient, and that a Constitution would be drafted, it was also decided, mostly by those known as Anti-Federalist, that civil liberties must be included.
Law and recommendations could not be further enforced by Congress. Each state obtained its own form of a constitution, monetary system and method to enforce the laws. Each state committed strongly to the state laws and self interests rather than to the recommendations of Congress. America’s sense of unity began to plummet as regionalism pitted one state against another. For example, Rhode Island voted to reject Congress’s recommendation of an impost on imported goods because its leaders felt the idea objected the state’s constitution.
After winning their independence in the American Revolution, America's leaders were hesitant to create a strong centralized government in fear that it would only replace King George III's tyranny. As a result, the first constitution, the Articles of Confederation, gave the national government hardly any power over the states, and created chaos within the nation. Because of the Articles' inefficiency, a new document called the Constitution was drafted. The Constitution created a more centralized government with the separation of powers among executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The ratification of this new constitution created a debate among the federalists and the anti-federalists.
The idea of a governing body drawing its power directly from its constituents has been undermined by the corrupt nature of modern politics where politicians act out of self-interest. While the Constitution and later amendments had every intention of securing basic liberties, certain limitations later undermined the original intentions of the founding fathers to give power back to the people by placing the larger majority of power in the hands of the state. Federal limitations to certain amendments, known as federal mandates, have taken power away from the masses. To secure democracy and avoid further abuses of power by the judicial courts, an amendment should be made to the Constitution prohibiting the federal government from putting down mandates that directly interfere with the power given to the states by law. Federal politicians use desultory commands as leverage to ensure that the states comply with their wishes.
Hamilton, Madison, and Jay argued that limitations on governmental power were built into the Constitution with a series of checks and balances. The two different parties, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, interpreted the Constitution in a way to support the cause for ratification or rejection. The Federalists saw the new government in a way that would guarantee the rights of the governed. The Anti-Federalists saw it in such a manner that would make no such guarantee. While the Constitution was eventually passed, it was the Anti-Federalists who ensured that it would eventually contain a Bill of Rights to protect individuals, as such Federalists and supporters of the central government as Alexander Hamilton argued that a Bill of Rights was
But this document gave the central government no power of their own. Because of this, the states had many problems in international politics since they had just found freedom and did not have the respect of other countries. This caused a lot of thinking and it was decided that a document needed to be created to strengthen the central government and at the same time ensuring the safety of the states. So came to be the constitution. The constitution brought about a division between the American people.
Clinton’s Attack on The Constitution Not all American people were a fan of the Constitution. There were many flaws with the proposed Constitution that turned people off of the document. George Clinton was one of the people who disliked the Constitution immensely. Clinton wrote a paper, under a pseudonym, entitled “An Attack on the Proposed Federal Constitution”, in which he further explained his beliefs. Clinton, dubbed an “antifederalist”, believed the country would fail with one government controlling all of the power.
Madison explains how having multiple branches protects the people by stating, "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of another part" (Madison, The Federalist, No.52. R84). Madison states that by having separate parts of the government, one part can fight against the corruption of another. Having the government be separated into parts can also keep the entire government from being corrupted instead of just a fraction of it. Madison 's paper states that having the government be separated into parts can protect the liberties of the