Premium Essay


In: Historical Events

Submitted By baw1236
Words 396
Pages 2
The government is made up of two groups: federalists and anti- federalists. When the time comes to ratification the two groups usually have two very different opinions. Being an Anti- Federalist myself doesn’t mean that I am against the federation. It means that I don’t think we should have a strong central government.
“…affirm that bills of rights… are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution but would even be dangerous.” This quote is completely one sided and is very biased. What it’s saying is that the bill of rights is something to be “scared”. It is very up front with its statement in thinking it’s not worthy enough for the Constitution.
“It is in vain to oppose constitutional barriers to the impulse of self-preservation. It is worse than in vain; because it plants in the Constitution itself necessary usurpations of power, every precedent of which is a germ of unnecessary and multiplied repetitions.” This quote says that it’s pretty much pointless to oppose constitutional barriers to being selfish and only about itself. It is actually a lot worse than that because it is like saying that the Constitution is taking power or rights from you by legal force. It talks about how it’s like a germ and it spreads like the flue almost.
I strongly disagree with the first quote because I believe that the Bill of Rights is very necessary and that we actually need it! I think this because it increases the protection for individual rights. Many wouldn’t have approved of the Constitution if it weren’t for the Bill of Rights to be promised! I don’t necessarily agree with the second quote as well. I believe that everyone has an opinion and should be able to express it as freely as they wish. If people think that the Constitution is one sided and only stands for itself then so be it!
With power comes with great responsibilities. Having too much makes people go crazy…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Confederation and Constitution

...articulate men used newspapers, pamphlets, and public meetings to debate ratification of the Constitution. Those known as Antifederalists opposed the Constitution for a variety of reasons. One frequent objection was that the Constitution gave too much power to the central government at the expense of the states and that a representative government could not manage a republic this large. The most serious criticism was that the Constitutional Convention had failed to adopt a bill of rights proposed by George Mason. The Antifederalist expressed their concerns in several published newspaper essays under the pen name Cato. Those who favored ratification, the Federalists, fought back, convinced that rejection of the Constitution would result in anarchy and civil strife. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay responded to Clinton under the pen name Publius. The supermajority requirement and the potential for ratification by constitutional conventions indicate that the people were to have a more direct role in amendment and, therefore, that the Constitution was a compact of both the people and the states as entities. These points were noted by James Madison in The Federalist No. 39. Madison asserted that the Constitution was founded on the assent of the people. This ratification by states came from the supreme authority of each state, the people. The Antifederalist argued that the Constitution gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state......

Words: 1610 - Pages: 7

Premium Essay

The U.S. Constitution: the First of Its Kind

...states, whose ideas of representation sharply contrasted. Many other compromises defined the convention: the Electoral College was a compromise between direct and indirect presidential election, and the Three-Fifths Compromise effectively represented the nation’s view of slavery (and prevented an eventual collapse of the convention due to debate over the humanity of slavery). By September 17, 1787, the first draft of the Constitution was finalized, signed, and sent out to be ratified by the states. A major problem that echoed the notion of compromise soon arose as the first draft was sent out to the states. American people began to side with either Federalists or Antifederalists, who lobbied against each other over whether this Constitution was worthy of ratification. The greatest weapon that the Antifederalists held was the lack of a bill of rights stating the rights and freedoms that an American citizen were to have. And thus another compromise was hammered out by the drafters of the Constitution: a promise to amend the Constitution to include what we now call our Bill of Rights. With this, many of the states ratified the Constitution and allowed its adoption by June 21, 1788. And so, save a handful of amendments to occur later in history, the United States now had a formidable government created by a Constitution actually worthy of the new republic. In it, our forefathers structured a straightforward explanation of the three branches of our government, the powers......

Words: 1254 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Arguments and Opposition to the Constitution

...escape the practice of having a single leader. However, it was generally admitted that the Articles of Confederation were a failure because the people had too much voice. The national government could not impose or collect taxes, and they could not forcibly uphold the law to any state. The problem that needed to be overcome was whether the separate states would cast aside their provinciality and become a single body under the federal structure. Those supporting the ratification of the constitution called themselves Federalists, and those against it became known as Antifederalists. Federalists promoted the notion of a strong central government that could keep a national military, place tariffs and tax the people, and uphold laws. They believed their new constitution would strengthen the country and solve its existing problems, readying the nation in case of hostilities against stronger countries. Antifederalists believed that the new constitution would induce a tyrannical government. They argued that the nation had just escaped the unfair rule of England, and did not need a highly centralized government that ignored the needs and took away the freedom of the people. They would not agree to ratify such a proposal unless a Bill of Rights was crafted to limit Congress’s powers and protect the rights of the citizens. Those in favor of the Constitution proposal argued that there must be a prime leader to run things smoothly. They agreed that the leader would not hold too much......

Words: 985 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Texas Govt Ch 2

...Chapter 2 Chapter 2 begins with the description of The Tea Part’s efforts to limit government activity through the use of the constitution. Tea Party members believe that federally funded programs like social security and Medicaid are unconstitutional because they are not permitted by the Constitution. Opponents argued that the Constitution was created to a strong central government. The book gives us this example to illustrate a similar argument between the Federalist and the Antifederalist over the documents ratification as well as many other disputes. The book acknowledges how enduring the constitution has been due to the way it was written. It is extremely general in its language for adaptation and changes. The historical context of the Constitution The book states the first time many colonist questioned British rule was the Stamp Act of 1765. The king imposed tax on many publications and legal documents to help pay for the French and Indian War (1754-1763) claiming that colonists were benefitting from British protection so the tax was fair. Colonist argued otherwise saying that they had no representation in legislation in the British Parliament. After political solutions failed the Continental Congress declared independence from Britain on July 4, 1776. The heavy task of creating a lasting republic was difficult. Post- Revolution the founder’s first attempt limited the government too much in the Articles of Confederation. A small group of leaders agreed......

Words: 888 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay


...The Anti Federalists The Supporters of the Proposed Constitution Called Themselves Federalists They favored the creation of a strong federal government that shared power with the states federalist’s policies, emphasized commercial and diplomatic harmony with Britain, domestic order and stability and a strong national government under powerful executive and judicial branches. Their new solutions were a significant change of political beliefs in that period. Federalist paper 10 is thought of as the most famous and important federalist paper. Madison wrote about the problems with factions and interest groups. A common fear for the new government was that small groups or factions would compromise the integrity and stability of the government. Madison suggests a plan for a democracy that allows a vote per person, but also states the use of a republic, where citizens vote for delegates to make decisions for them. This is our modern day Congress, representative democracy. “A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischief’s of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” They see this as a way to protect from minority factions taking over the government but also as......

Words: 571 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Public Relation Timeline

...timeline below, then seek more information from the text and the web to fill in the blanks and explanations. Early American Period -Founding of the Republic -Use of public opinion, managed communications and persuasion   Early American Experience -Sam Adams – Committees of Correspondence to distribute the news -Staged Events – Boston Tea Party -Thomas Paine – wrote persuasive pamphlets   The Federalists Papers -Letters to newspapers 1787-88 by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay -Pressure group PR campaign to gain acceptance for the Constitution -Used accurate facts and sound ideas -“History’s finest public relations job.” –Allen Nevins   Antifederalists -Letters in newspapers criticizing new constitution, urging against ratification -Concession for Bill of Rights -Negative name -Antifederalists went away -Federalists became a party.   Early PR Men in America – 1800s -John Beckley for Thomas Jefferson -Amos Kendall for Andrew Jackson. Kendall was first press secretary -Mathew St. Clair for Davy Crockett   Robber Barons and the Muckrakers -Adversarial PR & Press Relations -Press Agentry:  Provocative act to get publicity and draw attention toward an idea or grievance (P.R. Barnum, 1830s) -First corporate PR department established by George Westinghouse -First publicity agency: The Publicity Bureau, Boston, 1900   The Father of PR -Ivy Ledbetter Lee -Declaration of Principles -  first code of ethics -Supply prompt and......

Words: 500 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Confederation and Constitution

...lack of income the national government collected, the new nation was unable to defend its borders from British and Spanish abuse because it could not pay for an army when the states would not contribute the necessary funds. The country would not get rich as a whole because states controlled all interstate commerce. States coined their own money and regulated its supply, so values of currency varied from state to state.  Many of the delegates were in favor of the Articles of Confederation. These delegates were called Antifederalists. They believed that a strong central government was a threat to American liberties and rights. Usually they were states' rights advocates, backcountry farmers, poor farmers, the ill-educated and illiterate, debtors, and paper-money advocates. In general, the poorer classes of society. Most of the Antifederalists thought that the Constitution required a bill of rights. State governments already had bills of rights but the antifederalists were afraid that they might be overridden by the Constitution. On the opposing side, there were the Federalists. Federalists were supporters of the Constitution that desired a strong central government. Federalists felt that the Articles of Confederation were weak and ineffective. They felt that National government would protect the rights of the people.  While their inexperienced ideas at creating a new republican government were practiced, the articles proved to be very weak. George Washington called for a......

Words: 1427 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

2.03 the Anti Federalists

...the solution to a better government. Of course a central power that would have checks and balances, there would not be any advantages of taking over the government. Many debates are being made, the antifederalists say the constitution is bringing a central government with too much power. “And are by this clause invested with the power of making all laws, proper and necessary, for carrying all these into execution; and they may so exercise this power as entirely to annihilate all the state governments, and reduce this country to one single government.“ But even though the constitution gives a certain amount of power to the central government it still created a method of checks and balances to prevent a future dictatorship. Also it is known all the troubles that the country went through by giving supreme power to the states. And the constitution still makes clear the states rights. “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” In the constitution the government has power but not enough, it is seen that the governed will have the right to accept or not a governement. Another issue discussed was that the Antifederalists believed that it was necessary to have a certain writes written. ¨We shall add a bill of rights through the amendment process.¨ “As long as we can preserve our unalienable rights, we are in......

Words: 639 - Pages: 3

Free Essay

The Federalist Papers

...Harjinder Kaur   USSO 10100  Prof. Gillooly  03/06/2015  The Significance of the Federalist Papers  The Federalist Papers, is a compilation of 85 articles, advocating the ratification of the  proposed Constitution of the United States. These series of articles were published by Alexander  Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay between October 1787 and May 1788. The overall  intention of the Federalist Papers was to explain the advantages of the proposed Constitution  over the prevailing Articles of Confederation. The Federalist Papers impacted the ratification of  the Constitution by making some of their most important objections, including the significance  of having a Constitution, acknowledging to the disagreements made by the Antifederalists, and  defending conflicting arguments made against the attributes of the executive and judicial branch  as specified in the proposed Constitution.   Before the ratification of the Constitution, the central government under the Articles of  Confederations was very weak and in jeopardy of falling apart. Alexander Hamilton, James  Madison, and John Jay, who were Federalists believed as well that the Articles of Confederation  was too weak to maintain a powerful central government and needed to be restored by the U.S  Constitution. The fundamental goal of the U.S constitution was to secure the rights of the U.S  citizens and for the federal government to strive for the common good of the individuals. The  Federalist Papers illustrates how ...

Words: 1423 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay


...monetary policies make economic struggles and national weakness. They prefer to have central banking central financial policies. Contract to Federalists, anti- Federalists who oppose the development of a strong federal government and the Constitution ratified in 1788 wanted to remain in the hands of the state and local levels. They felt that states were free agents that should manage their income and spend their money as they saw fitly. Although less well organized than the federal, they also have an impressive group of leaders who are particularly prominent in state politics. Was the Constitution in danger of NOT being ratified?  Yes, the constitution was in danger of not being ratified. The strongest objections raised by the Antifederalists, however, the main problem is the lack of protection for individual liberties in the Constitution. The debate raged for months. Nine states had ratified the Constitution, ensuring it will be in effect for the nine states. However, the main countries including the Virginia and New York were not approved. Its was very difficult in ratifying Constitution. What might our country have been like without the Ant-Federalist additions to our Constitution? If without the Anti- Federalist additions there is no “ Bill of Rights. We are under the government controlling and we can’t have our voice. We will not have freedom. Constitution. (n.d.). Retrieved February 12, 2015, from......

Words: 277 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay


...would not support the government with the necessary revenue it would need to operate. The government found it increasingly difficult to pay off debts that had been accumulating since the revolution. Congress became largely ignored by the states because of its inabilities to carry out its duties. When George Washington called for a convention in late May of 1787, delegates from eleven of the thirteen states attended. The congressional delegates were comprised of what were called Federalists and Antifederalists. Federalists felt that the Articles of Confederation were weak and ineffective. They supported the need for a strong central government and a new Constitution. The Antifederalist, however, favored the Articles of Confederation and believed a strong central government would pose a threat to America’s liberties and rights. These were often the poorer class of society including poor, uneducated and or illiterate working-class farmers and laborers. The Antifederalists felt the need for a bill of rights to be added to the Constitution for fear that the states would have their bills of rights overridden. Although the initial intent of the convention was to review and update the Articles of Confederation, the decision was made to create a new constitution that better addressed the concerns the Articles overlooked. Out of this convention the U.S. Constitution was born. They decided on a government that consisted of three branches: The Legislative (Congress),......

Words: 1305 - Pages: 6

Premium Essay

Federalist or Antifederalist

...Choose whether to argue as a Federalist or as an Anti-Federalist. Review the lesson to make sure you understand their main points. Using quotes from the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers, write an opinion article for a newspaper, or create a speech podcast to convince people in your state to agree with your position. Include the following in your speech or article: teens shaking hands after playing a game of tennis © 2012 Polka Dot/Thinkstock introductory paragraph that clearly states your position as a Federalist or Anti-Federalist at least two paragraphs describing differences between the Federalist and Anti-Federalist points of view. Use at least two quotes from each of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers. If you would like to explore more of the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers to find your own quotes, these sites will be helpful. Federalist Papers American Studies at the University of Virginia The Avalon Project at Yale Law School The Law Center at the University of Oklahoma Anti-Federalist Papers Document Library by Teaching American History at least one paragraph to explain why you disagree with the opposing stance. For example, if you have chosen to argue as a Federalist, you will explain why you disagree with the Anti-Federalist position, using quotes from the documents to support your argument. strong concluding paragraph that summarizes your argument and encourage others to support you Your argument should be......

Words: 382 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay


...British Navy lock Boston Harbor * England put sanctions on the colonists * 4,000 troops to block Harbor - Georgia sent delegates to get together to send a message about colonial grievances. 1st Continental Congress (1774): - People who went to this were the elites. - Asking kind if colonists could have more control * Adopted statement for rights and principles * Colonial rights to petition kind and assembly * Wanted jury trials by peers * Freedom form a standing Army * Wanted the colonists to select representatives to levy taxes. 2nd Continental Congress (1775): -War had started * Declaration of Independence * Articles of Confederation Federalists: wanted consolidation and State Antifederalists: wanted to keep the system the way it was. To pass amendments: * Unanimous consent------ 9 colonies out of 13 * State legislatures ------ Constitutional Conventions...

Words: 339 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

World War 1 Short Essay

...take away from them. Anti-federalists published their own series of essays, under such pen names as Brutus, to discourage ratification. The Federalists' efforts and goals were built upon expanding this national commitment and awareness. But the Antifederalists even in defeat contributed enormously to the type of national government created through ratification (THE . References Bloom, S. (1986). The Charters of Freedom. Retrieved September 28, 2015.Site: (2009). The U.S. Constitution. retrieved 09/10/2015, from Web Site: The Avalon Project Documents in Law, History, and Diplomacy. (2008). retrieved 09/10/2015, from Yale School of Law Web Site: The Constitution. (n.d) retrieved 09/10/2015, from National Constitution Center Web Site: The University of Chicago (2000). The Founder's Constitution. retrieved 09/10/2015, from University of Chicago Press Web Site: The Antifederalists' Victory in Defeat. (2008). retrieved 09/15/2015, from Web Site:

Words: 853 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

2.03 Federalist vs Antifederalist

...If you were to ask me whether I sided with the anti-federalist or the federalist, you might be surprised at what I would say. Maybe not for the reasons you think. In my opinion, I side with the federalist. I’m all for order and I don’t like change so much but to make a country better you need to change some things. Things will constantly be changing and that is fine. A strong central government is very important. The federalist wanted to see a change to improve the country as a whole whereas the anti-federalist wanted to keep the monarchy ways. The anti-federalist and federalist had different views as to how a country should be ran. Both did have ideas to help the country and make it better. Federalist wanted a central federal government, a central bank, and an army. They cared about the governed and not just the ones who govern. In federalist paper no. 39 it says “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from and inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppression by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claims for their government and honorable title of republic.” Not only did the federalist care about giving too much power to the important people, they also wanted to have control of the government. It states this in federalist paper no. 59: “It is evident that each department should have a will of its own and......

Words: 545 - Pages: 3