...The differences between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists are apparent and complex. The Federalist Party most famously included: Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Their overall vision was to create a strong, central government. Moreover, they were against the Bill of Rights, favored the Constitution, and supported the urban areas. They felt that a stronger national government and the ratification of the Constitution would help relieve the tensions following the American Revolution and would help properly manage the debt. Hamilton guaranteed the delegates that the Constitution would create a perfect balance between liberty and power. Anti-Federalists who opposed the ratification insisted that the Constitution would focus more on the latter. The benefits of Federalism include a protection against tyranny, since the power is divided between the national government...
Words: 572 - Pages: 3
...There are similarities and differences between Thomas Paine’s Common Sense and the Federalist and Anti-Federalist controversy. The Federalist and Anti-Federalist controversy explores the views of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. The Federalists supported the Constitution, and they wanted the Constitution to become law or ratified. Moreover, the Federalists wanted and believed in a strong, central government. The Federalists consisted of Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. On the other side, there were opponents of the Constitution (the Anti-Federalists). The Anti-Federalists thought the Constitution would give the government too much power and control; there was no Bill of Rights to protect the people and their rights from...
Words: 1199 - Pages: 5
...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 created...
Words: 382 - Pages: 2
...As a federalist, a strong centralized government is necessary for America to function altogether as one. With the need for a new government, the best way to finish is how you start, and that’s with a government centralized with control of check and balances limiting one rule power and tyranny. According to federalist paper No. 1, ““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”. Ratifying the Constitution at hand is certainly beneficial to this nation as a whole and not just beneficial to certain individual states. With congress being the main branch of public voice for the people, “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” What’s best for the people’s will voices through congress. The main difference between Anti-federalists is their want for state governments to be strong as oppose for central governments. Brutus l writes, “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.“ Arguing that point from the federalist, power should be divided because in Federalist paper No. 39 “It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society...
Words: 556 - Pages: 3
...helpful to complete this Activity on Argument Writing before you begin. Steps 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...
Words: 430 - Pages: 2
...sovereignty constitutionally divided between the constituent political units including provinces and states and a central governing authority. The system of federalism is based on the democratic institutions and rules which shares the authority of governing among state/provincial and national governments, and establishing system that is termed as a federation. The proponents of federation are often called federalists (Turner, 2004.pp.105-153). The term anti-federalism defines a movement that is against the establishment of a powerful U.S. federal government and which further went against the approval of the Constitution of 1787. More authority was offered to the state governments in last constitution which is named as the Articles of Confederation. That constitution was led by Patrick Henry of Virginia, it made Anti-Federalists concerned about the position of president and about a novelty that has the possibility to change into a monarchy (Siemers, 2004.pp.213-245). The establishment of the Constitution involved detailed discussions and cooperation, and it was observed at its completion that there were still some delegates who did not seem to be satisfied with it. The main task of setting up the concerns of Confederate government had not accomplished yet; it was the responsibility for each state to approve or authorize the Constitution. People were actually divided into two different groups, known as the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Both of them had a worth examining...
Words: 929 - Pages: 4
...The Anti-Federalists were against the ratification of the constitution. The only reason the Anti-Federalists agreed to help ratify the constitution was because of the Bill of Rights and without the Bill of Rights the Constitution would not have been ratified. Ranging from political nobilities like James Winthrop in Massachusetts, to Melancton Smith of New York, and Patrick Henry and George Mason of Virginia, these Antifederalist were joined by a large number of ordinary Americans particularly commoner farmers who predominated rural America. In spite of the diversity that characterized the Anti-federalist opposition, they did share a solid core view of American politics. They believed that the greatest threat to the future of the United States lay in the government's potential to become corrupt and seize more and more power until its tyranny like rule completely dominated the people. Having just succeeded in rejecting what they saw as the tyranny of British power, certain threats were seen as a very crucial part of political life. The differences between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists are vast and at times complex. The Anti-Federalists opposed the ratification of the US Constitution, but they never organized efficiently across all thirteen states, and had to fight the ratification at every state convention. Their great success was in forcing the first Congress under the new Constitution to establish a Bill of Rights, to ensure the liberties the Anti-Federalists...
Words: 1075 - Pages: 5
...The Articles of Confederation was the first type of operating system that the United States operated under. It first took effect in 1781 and then was replaced by what is the Constitution known today. The U.S. Constitution took effect in 1788. The Constitution shifted a lot of decisions, laws, and military authorization from the state level to the federal level, thus making every state have similarities. There were many simulations and differences between the two doctrines that ruled America. However there were more differences between the two then there are similarities. The major similarities between the two was that they were both written by the same people, just at different times. Both doctrines state that one state cannot enter into war by itself, the central government is in charge of the value of the money, term limits to the...
Words: 1550 - Pages: 7
...concerning the structure of America's new government. Differences in these ideas caused people to separate and take sides, leading to the formation of Political Parties, each with their own unique set of opinions and beliefs. Political parties that formed in the United States got their start in Washington's Cabinet. Thomas Jefferson, the Secretary of State, and Alexander Hamilton, the Secretary of the Treasury, began the divisions that would produce two separate parties with disagreements over presidential affairs. Hamilton designed a five step financial plan that he believed would help the new country recover from the economic crisis it was now in as a result of the Revolution. Jefferson disliked almost every aspect of this plan and encouraged Washington against it. Throughout their time as members of Washington's Cabinet, similar conflicts were frequent. The personal feud between Jefferson and Hamilton became evident to the public, causing dissent and segregation among the population....
Words: 592 - Pages: 3
...1807-Britian and France imposed trade restriction in order to weaken each other’s economies. Resulting in testing the Americas Neutrality and hurting their trading. Jefferson passed this document restricting neutral trade to the U.S. docs Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists (1780). Stronger central government, state representation from states each 2 representatives, no Bill of Rights, Articles of Confederation useless, because states had more power, wanted larger public, and they believed in large farming and industrialization,.. antif federalist, wanted state rights, wanted add the House of Represeantives, Bill of Rights, they thought the aritcles needed to be ratified not taken away completely, smaller public, believed Americas future is small farming Federalists vs. Democratic-Republicans (1790s) – Hamiltonians (known as federalist party) vs. the Jeffersonians (Democratic Party) Differences between Federalist stances (1780s) vs. Federalist Party stances (1790s)- Federalist of 1780-Stronger central government, state representation from states each 2 representatives, no Bill of Rights, Articles of Confederation useless, because states had more power, wanted larger public, and they believed in large farming and industrialization.. Federalist Party Stances of (1790)- Led by Alexander Hamilton strong central government led by the wealthy and industry, emphasis on manufacturing ,trading, and shipping.. loose interpretation...
Words: 2158 - Pages: 9
...Branches of Government Branches of Government The United States of America is run by our country’s Constitution. After the American Revolution, the newly named Americans realized the need for government and law. Our Constitution, once put into place, establishes three branches of government. It is important for all of Americans to understand why the founding fathers decided on three branches of government. It is also important to know what obstacles the division of power present for enactment of important legislation and how conflict has been characterized between supporters of a strong federal government and the supporters of state rights both in the past and now. The U.S. Constitution was written in 1787 by James Madison. This is considered the main law of the land. Any laws made for the country must agree with the Constitution. James Madison is the father of the constitution. Madison was the one that came up with the conspire that one branch could not have complete control. “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether on or a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-pronounced to very definition of tranny” (Spaeth & Segal 1999). This is when our three branches were born. In the Executive Branch we have our President, vice president, and all of the cabinet. Our president is allowed to make or laws, pass, or veto them. The legislative Branch has 435 representatives and 100 senators forming a party of 535 members...
Words: 1616 - Pages: 7
...United States Constitution are the historical documents that have been the building blocks of democracy that America is known for today. The Articles of Confederation are in many way an extension of what makes up the United States Constitution. In 1777, there wear a combination of thirteen states that came together to mold a type of government document that the United States could determine as “central” style of government. These states included New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. By late 1787, the Articles of Confederation were replaced by a more complete United States Constitution. There are several differences and similarities that lead to this American government transformation. The origination of the Articles of Confederation were a dynamic that was set into place in order to safeguard the union of states from any foreign control. It was a time in which the newly born states were yearning to be a set of sovereign states but stay independent from British colony control. Thus, the Articles of Confederation were originated. There were several important aspects of the Articles of Confederation that helped the United States reach a somewhat government goal. In the articles, states were allowed to collect taxes from its citizens in order to further the development and provide the necessities of that state. Each individual state was permitted...
Words: 1524 - Pages: 7
...Federalist built the United States for America in to what the American people experience today and their main goal was to see America governed by the people and become a model for countries around the globe. American federalism is defined by the United States Constitution as a “fundamental aspect of American government, whereby the states are not merely regional representatives of the federal government, but are granted independent power and responsibilities” (USA, Constitution). However this definition is constantly changing and took a long bumpy road to get where it is today. The United States constitution was drafted on September 17th, 1787 and ratified on June 21st, 1788. The United States became a sovereign nation on July 4th, 1776 at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, but they needed a Constitution. The Articles of Confederation were drafted on November 7th, 1777 and ratified on March 1st, 1781. This document was signed by the thirteen original colonies that made up the United States of America and served as its first constitution. After becoming sovereign nation it became clear to many that the Articles of Confederation would not be able to hold a nation together. Under the Article of Confederation there was a unicameral legislative that provided no separation of power. The central government appeared to be too weak because under the Articles of Confederation most of the power was retained by the states. Congress had no power to tax therefore, they were unable...
Words: 1879 - Pages: 8
...This clearly demonstrates the people being able to institute new governments when government becomes destructive, as stated in the second paragraph of the document. Originally, the Articles of Confederation were created so that the states would have more power than the national government, reaffirming Jefferson’s Anti-Federalist beliefs in a country with minimal governmental influence. Unfortunately, this government was too weak to flourish as it was almost impossible to change the articles as well as each state only having one vote, rather than being based on the population of the state. The Articles’ Congress also had little to no power as they were only able to declare war, create treaties and were unable to collect taxes. The Constitution of 1789 was ratified after the failure of the Articles, giving more power to the states and adhering to the Declaration of Independence through its creation of a Judicial branch, and the Bill of Rights and allowed for more rights for the American people than was ever seen prior to the Declaration’s signing. Almost all the...
Words: 928 - Pages: 4
...UNIT 3 PRACTICE Follow-up Questions for Congressional Hearing • What was the original purpose for calling a meeting in Philadelphia in 1787? Why was the purpose changed? By whose authority was it changed? • In what ways were the delegates representative of the American people? IN what ways were they not representative? • Should the topics being debated at the Philadelphia Convention have been reported to the public? Why or why not? • Explain the difference between equal representation and proportional representation. Which plan did the states with large populations support? Why? • What position would you take on the issue of equal and proportional representation if it were raised today? Why? • What important differences of opinion existed...
Words: 1037 - Pages: 5
