...were democratic statesmen in which created a constitution that supports not only our nation but as well as the people. He says that the Philadelphia Convention where a nationalist reform caucus that created a compromise that was acceptable to the people and helped increase national interest. He also notes that under the articles of confederation the founding fathers where able to get every state to appoint delegates to Philadelphia, the central government under the articles were component states in which that the members of congress were chosen by state legislatures in all but Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Hampshire. James Madison drafted the Virginia Plan in which consisted of a bicameral legislature. Each state would be represented by the number of inhabitants which means that states with a large population would have more representatives than smaller states. Smaller states opposed this plan and eventually proposed their own plan. The New Jersey plan proposed a single chamber in which each state, no matter what the population size is would have only one vote so that way it would be fair for smaller states. With these two plans both...
Words: 760 - Pages: 4
...you had been there, would you have sided with the colonial elite or with the radicals? Why? If I was there, I would have helped the radicals, I believe that everyone should be equal, and also during that time British is invading lots of different countries and claimed lots of colonies. I think that as United States is such a big piece of land, it will be better off creating its own culture as there are so many difference between the two and if they want to hold onto the US, they should have treated the people equally. 4. Describe the ways in which the framers limited the national government’s power under the Constitution. The framers limited the government power by creating a federal structure, the framers also create a system of checks and balances so the actions of one branch can be blocked by another, the national government’s power was also limited by dividing it’s functions among three branches. 5. Why might the framers have placed such limits on the government they had just created? This is to prevent the oppressive government that they experience when they are under the control of...
Words: 501 - Pages: 3
...Federalism Prof. Rogelio Garcia Political Science 3517 Federalism With the discontent from Britain’s policies and wanting to find a balance form of government, the Framers of the American Constitution decided on a new federal form of government, and created The Articles of Confederation. Under the Articles of Confederation (1781-1788), it provided the states to retain sovereignty and more power than the central government. Congress had no power to levy taxes or regulate interstate commerce. Areas assigned to the central government were difficult to legislate, as they had to be approved by nine of the thirteen states. States had the power to veto changes made by Congress. States taxed each other’s goods and even negotiated their own trade agreement with other nations (Government by the People pg.13) and unnamed democracies were on the rise in some states (“Pennsylvania’s’ Constitution”) (Prof. Garcia). Biased popular assemblies were against the privileged and believed that wealth undermined equal rights. Since the Articles of Confederation were weak and flawed to successfully govern the new United States; a new federal form of government of federalism was adopted that recognized the idea that people had basic rights that the government must protect along with separation of powers to avoid the conflicts between the states and the national government. The framework included the following: freedom of religion, speech, and the press, as well as the right to trial by jury and...
Words: 1347 - Pages: 6
...How Was The Greatest Constitution and Government Formed George Washington Political Science 201 Professor X August 24, 2012 Introduction The Greatest Constitution and Democracy on earth, these are my heartfelt feelings concerning the country that I live in. Why do I feel this way, because of the freedoms that we naturally have as citizens of the United State. Freedoms that are sometimes ignorantly ignored by the average citizen instead of being cherished and utilized. U.S. citizens have rights thanks to the original Bill of Rights, for example the right to free speech and the right to bear arms. The framers of the U.S. Constitution which is the basic structure of the American system of government. The U.S. Constitution is a written constitution, "it is the world's oldest written constitution still in force, drawn up in 1787, ratified in 1788 and inaugurated in 1789" (Powell, 2015, p. 687). Our constitution was developed to be a working document, meaning the framers created a document that can be edited and corrected through the political processes put in place that merit changing or amending by using our three branches of government, the executive, legislative and judicial. The Constitution The U.S. Constitution has several strengths and weaknesses that definitely make for it to be the keystone of our political system and the pillar for democracies throughout the world. A major strength to our Constitution is that it makes for a strong Central government with checks...
Words: 1852 - Pages: 8
...Introduction In 1787 our forefathers came together and wrote our country’s constitution. They created a structure of government that really exist yet. The U.S is divided into three branches: legislative, judicial, and executive branches. This was done for the purpose of checks and balances. The branches have the power to check one another hence having a balance in power so the no branch is more powerful than another. Operating idea of federalism and constitutionalism, states could govern themselves, to a certain extent, and the national government would have the right to govern the states and nation as well. Ultimately the framers would divide powers amongst the three branches. No other democracies around the world use this approach. Many believe our three branches of government is the strength of the United States government. America’s forefathers divided the government into the legislative, judicial, and executive branches When the framers were developing the constitution, they wanted to establish a government where the freedoms of the people would not be susceptible. The framers used the principles defined by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Thomas Hobbes came up with the idea of social contract where individuals gave up certain rights in order for protection. Hobbes knew the people would need to give up some freedoms and follow a leader who would supply safety. John Locke believed that all individuals were entitled to his or her absolute rights and that social contracts...
Words: 402 - Pages: 2
...Justice Thurgood Marshall makes a better claim about the omission of women and black slaves from the Constitution because he shows that they were intentionally left out, in order to keep the power within the white males. The necessity of amendments exemplifies that the Constitution was inadequate in providing rights for people of all races and genders. Although Goldwin makes a case stating that this omission paves the way for the expansion of the protection of rights of individuals regardless of their race or gender, we have reached the development of equality that we have today because of all the people that fought for equal rights, not because of the Constitution. Marshall believes that the omission of women and black slaves from the Constitution was intentional because the Founding Fathers knew that slavery was a main source of wealth for their nation and wanted American to advance economically. Also, the Dred Scott decision exhibited the true beliefs of the government were to intentionally omit black slaves from the Constitution because they were considered property. In addition, the three fifth’s compromise, counting three slaves for every...
Words: 1284 - Pages: 6
...Madison[1] INTRODUCTION A written constitution is a reminder that governments can be unreasonable and unjust. By guaranteeing that "[a] well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed," the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides the citizens a means of protection against the unjust excesses of government.[2] The Framers placed this guarantee in the Bill of Rights because they considered the right to keep and bear arms peculiarly important and also uniquely vulnerable to infringement. The Amendment's command protects individuals against even popular conceptions of the public good. In addition to this protection within the United States Constitution,[3] the constitutions of forty-three states guarantee the right to keep and bear arms.[4] Despite the constitutional authority for this right, legislators and judges have consistently attempted to devalue it. Methods such as giving misleading labels to select firearms like "assault weapons"[5] or "Saturday Night Specials"[6] have been used to justify incremental disarmament.[7] American jurisprudence has deliberately devalued the right to keep and bear arms by disingenuously interpreting the right so as to effect a gradual change in American culture. To this end, for example, the Seventh Circuit has already upheld a civilian handgun ban by dismissing an historical analysis of the Constitution: "The debate surrounding the...
Words: 7782 - Pages: 32
...There are two methods of proposing an amendment to the Constitution as provided by Article V of the Constitution. The first method of amending the constitution requires a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and in the House of Representatives. The second method of amending the constitution requires two-thirds of the state legislatures to request that Congress call a national amendment convention, then the Congress must call one. After this process, the convention may then propose the amendments to the states for ratification. There are also two methods of ratifying an amendment. The first and most common method of ratifying an amendment is a three-fourths vote from the legislature in favor of the proposed amendment. The second method of ratifying an amendment is through a special convention called on by the states in which three-fourths of the states must approve the proposed amendment. This second method of ratification has only been used once. (Sidlow and Henschen) Since the constitution came into effect in 1789 more than eleven thousand amendments have been introduced to Congress, of those proposed amendments only twenty seven made it through the process and became a part of our constitution. All twenty seven amendments have been proposed by the first method to amend the constitution, a two-thirds vote in the...
Words: 671 - Pages: 3
...Implications of Legalizing the Illegal In the recent 2012 election, the states of Colorado and Washington passed a law that would legalize marijuana in their respected states. Though they are the first to completely legalize the substance, other states, like California, have passed similar laws allowing for medicinal use. Despite the fact that these laws were passed by the voters of Colorado and Washington, the use, possession and distribution of marijuana is punishable by federal law. By allowing the law to go into affect, both states have changed the course of political and popular culture and violated principle concepts of the constitution and federalism. The legalization of Marijuana has also brought forth tensions that question American politics, the constitution and federalism. American political and popular culture has been defined by major events and influences in American history dating back to the 16th century. The influences of the Puritans, Thomas Pain, and John Locke are all deeply rooted within American politics. As a consequence of these impacts, tensions rose within political culture. The Puritans greatly believed in a sense of community, and therefore created a local self-government. However, both Locke and Paine viewed natural and individual rights were sacred, and not the community. In fact, Paine believed that the national government should be limited from individuality, and should solely represent popular opinion. These two opposite beliefs created...
Words: 783 - Pages: 4
...presiding over the court cases are, thus, expected to have great discernment and an in-depth understanding of the US Constitution. This is so as to assess who, between the two lawyers, is right and, consequently, make a ruling that is as fair as possible. The Constitution of the United States of America is comprised of a set of legal decrees with different geneses. Some of the laws therein were passed by the American parliamentary body while others came to be as a result of the establishment by elected representatives in the different American states. In addition to these two sources of laws and constitutional interpretation, there are others that are also applied by judges. These include the natural law, the implications of alternate interpretations, as well as the text and structure of the American Constitution. As will be indicated in this paper, the manner by which the US Constitution is interpreted has undergone transformation over the years. This is a normal occurrence since public policies are always being altered, modified, changed or completely abandoned for fresh ones perceived to be more practical. The system, whereby the lawyers can interpret the various laws in a manner that will serve to help them win cases, has oftentimes been referred to as a ‘necessary evil.’ This paper will investigate this system with the objective of revealing the challenges and/or benefits of such a framework. It will also focus on any necessary transformations that need to be conducted on the...
Words: 1473 - Pages: 6
...Democratic is the American Constitution Summary Robert Dahl explains in the beginning of the book that he is not proposing changes in the American Constitution, but suggests changes in the way we think about our constitution. In this essay, I will explain the history of this American constitution, what Dahl suggests about the American Constitution, and my opinion about this book. In the history of the United States, there are two factors that mark its constitutional history. For one thing, the rights of citizens were organized through limits to power, linked to a libertarian conception of liberal viewpoint. For another, the original structure of the constitution is influenced by the fear of the "framers" to a popular majority government could oppress the rights acquired as Alexis de Tocqueville considered that the democratic government incorporated elements that endure to this undemocratic, preventing the formation of compromise. The result of this misunderstanding between democracy and fundamental rights did not allow equality. The author acknowledges the obstacles to achieving political equality are related to institutional distortion and sacred morals of citizenship to the constitutional system, which increase the distortion and hope, are two obstacles to any reform. The focus of their criticism revolves around the unequal representation in the Senate. The tension between the need and right to get over representation by small states in the original constitution, were used to increase...
Words: 930 - Pages: 4
...We the people, three simple words that hold up an entire country. The Constitution of the United States was ratified in 1787. Split up into three distinct parts, this document setup a way of governing that the United States government has followed for the past 230 years. The three parts of the Constitution include the preamble, the articles, and the Bill of Rights. The most important of these being the preamble, for it gives a promise to the one thing America needs to keep going, its people. The framers of the Constitution included this promise to ensure America’s future. Unfortunately, the government has failed to keep this promise that has been 230 years in the making. The preamble of the constitution is known by nearly every American. Within...
Words: 894 - Pages: 4
...The Closing Argument for the Petitioner Dred Scott I shall summarize my legal case history such that all can remember the details and gain a better understanding of my case. My name is Dred Scott, I was born a slave in Virginia around 1800. I was bought by Peter Blow and worked on the family farm until 1819. The Blow family moved to St. Louis, Missouri and opened up a boarding house called the Jefferson Hotel. Peter Blow rented out my services to the river boats on the Mississippi River. In 1832, I was subsequently sold to an army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson for five hundred dollars. Shortly thereafter, Dr. Emerson went to live at Fort Armstrong in Illinois. Illinois was a free state and did not allow slavery. Three years later, Dr. Emerson was transferred to Fort Snelling on the Mississippi River in the Wisconsin Territory, again another slave free territory. During this time, Dr. Emerson purchased a female slave named Harriet Robinson. We fell in love, considered ourselves married and eventually had four children. Following a short period at Fort Jessup in Louisiana, Dr. Emerson returned to St. Louis with his wife Irene and my family. In December 1843, Dr. Emerson died and bequeathed my family and me to his wife. After the death of Dr. Emerson, I tried to purchase my families freedom from the widow Mrs. Emerson. When she refused to sell our freedom, I filed a lawsuit for our family’s freedom. On April 6, 1846, the lawsuit was filed where I claimed that I should be given my...
Words: 1304 - Pages: 6
...The word "slave" never appears in the Constitution directly. However, slavery is mentioned and protected in the document, even though the term is never specifically used. The infamous three-fifths clause counted 0.6% of the slave population in allocating representation, which granted the South extra representation in the house. The Constitution also forbade Congress from condemning the Atlantic slave trade. Additionally, the Constitution granted the federal government the power to quell any local uprisings, which could, of course, include violent slave rebellions. If Northerners demanded the removal of any mention of slavery from the US Constitution, the South would only act negatively and the entire situation would be detrimental to the building...
Words: 390 - Pages: 2
...Corporations Are Not People Frances Sears ENG122 English Composition II Prof. Kritisin Narjes June 4, 2013 Corporations are not people. The constitutional rights were intended for real persons, not artificial creations. Corporations use money to be successful; not the people that make up corporations. Corporations are heartless and do not care about people and their lives. I feel that corporations are not people. Are Corporations People There have been arguments since 1886, whether corporations are people or not. The constitution shield living beings from arbitrary government and endowed them with the right to speak assemble petition. The case of Santa Clara County vs. Southern pacific Railroad Co. was the beginning of corporate ‘personhood,’ under law. The defendant corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in the constitution of the United State. The Amendment forbids a state to deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protect of laws. (p. 118 U.S. 395) I feel this was a great decision because no matter of race or circumstances; we should all be considered equal. Throughout the years there have been arguments whether corporations are ‘person’. Through this research I felt that the courts did not hear arguments whether the equal-protection provision of the 14th Amendment applies to the corporations. The court decision still allows laws that require financial regulations; as long as they do not treat corporations or unions differently from individuals...
Words: 1778 - Pages: 8
