More handpicked essays just for you.
The constitution vs articles of confederation
The constitution vs articles of confederation
Importance of the Bills of Rights
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The constitution vs articles of confederation
The American people had fought a costly war to loosen the grip of a tyrannical leader. The colonists, in their open letter to the king of England declared, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness (Jefferson 1776).” These three unalienable rights are broad and would need some defining if the American people were to stay free. That chance came in 1787 during the Philadelphia convention, which would become known as the Constitutional Convention. The Articles of Confederation weren’t serving the American people in an effective way, and something needed to be done to fix some of the major problems facing the nation. The convention decided the solution to most of these problems was a robust federal government, which would have immense powers and authority to handle the affairs of a nation that was growing rapidly. While this large federal government would solve many of the problems that the nation faced, it also presented new challenges and concerns. Many Americans, who would become known as the Antifederalists, worried that a new government would slowly take away their rights-especially one with a President, two houses of congress, and federal judges. With so many …show more content…
He introduced twelve amendments to Congress. The first two amendments dealt with the size and pay of Congress and slavery. The last ten would become known as the Bill of Rights. These amendments ensured their rights to assemble, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom to bear arms, freedom of fair trial, and civil and criminal legal rights. It also protected them against excessive bail and fines, quartering of soldiers, search and arrest, and provided for a strong state government (James Madison, 1789,
It was the mid-late 1700s, and America had finally achieved and received independence from Great Britain. Peace in America on the other hand, not so much. After gaining independence, the Articles of Confederation were made as a system of government for the United States, but gave very imbalanced power between federal and state levels. For example, on the federal level, the national government couldn't force a state to pay taxes. To try to amend the Articles, in 1787, a meeting made up of delegates representing the states was called up, but instead, what would be created is what we now know as the Constitution. But how exactly did this document remedy the flaws of the Articles, and prevent tyranny from unjust amounts and usage of power? The Constitution helped stop tyranny in government with a
After the Revolution, the country was left in an economic crisis and struggling for a cohesive path moving forward. The remaining financial obligations left some Founding Fathers searching for ways to create a stronger more centralized government to address concerns on a national level. The thought was that with a more centralized, concentrated governing body, the more efficient tensions and fiscal responsibilities could be addressed. With a central government manning these responsibilities, instead of the individual colonies, they would obtain consistent governing policies. However, as with many things in life, it was a difficult path with a lot of conflicting ideas and opponents. Much of the population was divided choosing either the
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.
After the American Revolution, America had earned it’s freedom from Britain. In order to govern this new country the Articles of Confederation was created. This document was flawed by the colonists fear of putting too much power into a central government. Knowing the document needed to be fixed a constitutional convention was called. The document created at this convention has been our constitution ever since. But even the Constitution was meet with criticism. One major concern when writing the constitution was how to protect the citizens rights. The Constitution did this through the preamble, the legislative process, the limit of presidential terms, the judicial branch, and the bill of rights.
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 prominent figures at the time, such as Jefferson, realized this; Jefferson states in his letter to Madison that “a bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inferences.” (Document E). The first part of Jefferson’s statement is plain and obvious: every decent government owes its people a Bill of Rights. The quote “rest on inferences”, however, means that a government, or rather any higher authority, should not attempt to guess what the people want. Instead, the government should represent the people, and ask them what they want. That is what common practices such as voting, and statements such as “no taxation without representation” embody. Nevertheless, in this letter Jefferson recognizes the Bill of Rights as a desideratum. Additionally, in Document C- Federalist Papers #38 - Madison reports that “A fourth concurs to the absolute necessity of a bill of rights, but contends that it ought to be declaratory, not of the personal rights of individuals, but of the rights reserved to the States in their political capacity.” That statement illustrates what exactly the American people were asking for. They did not call for complete abandonment of political interests in favor of social freedoms, they wanted the State as a whole to have a set of rights. Also, the statement includes the words “political capacity”, which is a reference to the aforementioned notion that politicians and political parties should be limited in their power and should not be more important that the people. Rather, politics and socialization should stand on equal ground. Lastly, Document H exhibits four amendments from the Bill of Rights. Examining the wording of these amendments reveals how they specifically targeted the complains of the people and rectified them. Amendment I
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
During the late 18th century the Antifederalists argued against the constitution on the grounds that it did not contain a bill of rights. They believed that without a list of personal freedoms, the new national government might abuse its powers and that the states would be immersed in an all too dominant and influential national government. The Antifederalists worried that the limits on direct voting and the long terms of the president and senators, supplied by the constitution, would create a population of elites and aristocrats, which in turn would eventually take away power from the people. They also feared that the president might become another monarch. In other words, the Antifederalists ultimately felt that the new Constitution was undemocratic.
The 1787 Constitutional Convention was paramount in unifying the states after the Revolutionary War. However, in order to do so, the convention had to compromise on many issues instead of addressing them with all due haste. This caused the convention to leave many issues unresolved. Most notably were the issues of slavery, race, secession, and states’ rights. Through the Civil War and the Reconstruction, these issues were resolved, and in the process the powers of the federal government were greatly expanded.
While the Federalists believe in a strong, central government, the Anti-Federalists believe in the shared power of state and national governments to maintain the rights of all Americans .The Anti-Federalist favored a confederated government were the state and national governments could share power ,protect citizen’s freedom ,and independence. The Anti-Federalists found many problems in the Constitution. Many were concerned the central government take was all individual rights. Anti-Federalist primarily consisted of farmers and tradesmen and was less likely to be a part of the wealthy elite than were members of their rival the Federalist. Many Anti-federalists were local politicians who feared losing power should the Constitution be ratified and argued that senators that served for too long and represented excessively large territories would cause senators to forget what their responsibilities were for that state. They argued that the Constitution would give the country an entirely new and unknown form of government and saw no reason in throwing out the current government. Instead, they believed that the Federalists had over-stated the current problems of the country and wanted improved characterization of power allowable to the states. They also maintained that the Framers of the Constitution had met as a discriminatory group under an order of secrecy and had violated the stipulations of the Articles of Confederation in the hopes for the for ratification of the Constitution. The Anti-Federalist were sure that the Constitution would take away the rights of the American citizens and fought hard to stop the ratification on the
The Constitution that was created had a strong central government and weaker state governments. Under the Constitution, Congress was given the power to levy taxes, regulate trade between the states, raise an army, control interstate commerce, and more. A three-branch government was established in which a judicial branch handled disputes in a federal court system, a President headed an executive branch, and a legislative branch. Conversely, the anti-federalists believed in weak central and strong state governments, as the way it was in The Articles of Confederation and believed in strict adherence to the writings of the constitution.
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...
The beginning of the Constitution provides a basis for one to question the righteousness of the Framers intentions. The Constitution starts by saying, “ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This was not a true statement. That phrase excluded black people, women, and men who lacked wealth. Government under the British did the same thing; all the power was made accessible to only the rich. The American Revolution was aimed at acquiring equal and fair representation in government for everyone. Next, the Constitution established a Supreme Court. The Supreme Court was a group of selected people who would make major legal decisions for the country. These people were not elected or chosen by the people, they were chosen by the government. This placed a form of power over the people of the United States that had been held by King George. The Supreme Court had the power to ma...
The Articles of Confederation was the first government of the United States. The Articles had created a very weak national government. At the time the Articles were approved, they had served the will of the people. Americans had just fought a war to get freedom from a great national authority--King George III (Patterson 34). But after this government was put to use, it was evident that it was not going to keep peace between the states. The conflicts got so frequent and malicious that George Washington wondered if the “United” States should be called a Union (Patterson 35). Shays’ Rebellion finally made it evident to the public that the government needed a change.