The Pros And Cons Of The Constitution

780 Words2 Pages

The federalists, a group of individuals who believed in a strong central government, and the anti-federalists, a group who thought that more power should be given to the states and local governments, debated on issues regarding the constitution at the constitutional convention in 1787. The federalists believed that without a strong central government, the country could not properly enforce its laws or execute the country’s agenda. On the other side of the spectrum, the anti-federalists were wary about giving so much power to the national government. Two of the main focus points of the debate, that would eventually shape our current constitution and government, were how states would be represented in the national government, and whether a bill …show more content…

Madison states in Federalist paper 10, that if you increase the effects of factions, increasing competition, then there would be compromise and moderate leadership. Madison stated that this could be done through representation in congress. An issue that stemmed from this idea was how the states would be represented in the national government. Larger states wanted representation based on population, while smaller states wanted equal representation. Madison, who was from Virginia proposed the Virginia Plan, which gave states representation based on population, favoring larger states. There was also another plan proposed by William Paterson of New Jersey, which gave equal representation to each state. An issue that arose from the Virginia plan was who was to be considered a part of the population. Southern, rural states where most of the Anti-Federalist population resided did not have as many property owning white men as the northern states, to compensate for this, they wanted to include the slave population in the population that determined the number of seats they would have. The northern states argued that if they are considered property by law, then they should not be considered part of the voting population. The two sides eventually agreed on …show more content…

The Great Compromise gave congress two houses, the house of representatives, which gave representation based on population, and the senate, in which each state was given two representatives satisfying both groups. This conflict directly generated the separation of powers section of our current constitution, which is still in effect today. However, Madison’s theory that the more factions and representation in congress would lead to moderate leadership has not worked out perfectly. An example of this would be the shutdown that occurred in 2013, where differing interests in congress led to its temporary shutdown. Although both parties eventually compromised, the process was counterproductive. While the government shutdown illustrates a side effect of our modern congress, it also illustrates how our government still follows the constitution in a close

Open Document