The Federalist And The Anti-Federalists And Constitutional Compromise

Introduction

In U.S. history, the Federalists were those people who advocated for the formation of a strong federal government and ratification of the constitution that will help in governing the whole country, while anti-federalists were the group that opposed the formation of the federal government as well as ratification of the constitution. Thus, anti-federalists opted for the power to remain in the hands of state and local governments. The debate between federalists and anti-federalists started after the American Revolution. Therefore, in order to come to an agreement, there were constitutional compromises that federalists agreed to comprise with the aim of taking the views of anti-federalists. The compromise between Federalists and anti-federalists are what remains to be an issue in America today: the power of federal governments considering the powers of individuals’ states.. After the signing of the constitution and the constitution conventions, individual’ states had to ratify their constitution in order for them to operate. However, anti-federalists forced the federalists to make a compromise. Whereas the Constitution describes branch state and federal government, the Bill of Rights specifies the rights of a person that the government should not violate. My thesis is the compromises the federalists deed in order to agree with anti-federalists.

The Federalist And The Anti-Federalists And Constitutional Compromise

The compromise between the federalists and anti-federalists is well reflected in the constitution: the issue of the powerful federal government relative to those of individual states. The Federalists’ willingness to address the concerns of anti-federalists is addressed in the Bill of Rights. The inclusion of the Bill of Rights into the Constitution reflects the willingness of the Federalists to address the concerns of the Anti-Federalists. The Bill of Rights refers to freedom of speech, religion, and freedom of the press. The Bill of Rights constitutes the 10th amendment of the Constitution. The 10th Amendment is one of the consequential compromises federalists made. The 10th amendment in the Constitution reflects the interest of the anti-federalists. The Bill of Rights was the main compromise. The anti-federalists were worried that a strong federal government would abuse people’s rights. Thus, to address their fears, the federalists created a bill of rights in the 10th amendment of the constitution.

A constitutional convention was a gathering of different delegates from the states in the United States with the aim of creating a new constitution. The purpose of the new constitution was to stipulate how America should be governed. After the constitutional convention created a new constitution, not everyone agreed with it; thus, it was ratified. The anti-federalist argues that the Constitution gave much power to the federal government at the expense of the state government. Therefore, in order to agree, the Federalists had to make several compromises for the anti-federalists to agree to the new constitution.

One of the compromises the Federalists made was to outline the role of Congress. Thus, federalists formulated Article 1 of the Constitution, which indicated the power of Congress to regulate the Federal government. Article 1 of the Constitution gives Congress legislative powers and limits. The Federalists used to show that the government should not do whatever it wanted; hence, this indicated that States would reserve their own powers.

Plans Involved In The Compromise

The plans that were involved in the compromise include the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan. Virginia Plan argued that the Senate representation should be based on the population of each state, while the New Jersey Plan advocated for equal representation from each state. The Connecticut Compromise adopted both plans.

Federalist And Anti-Federalists Concerns

In the constitution convention, there were two main ideological camps that elicited classical liberalism, i.e., federalists and anti-federalists. Classical liberalism is a political ideology that puts emphasis on freedom and liberty by limiting government powers. One of the major issues that federalists were concerned about was factionalism. The federalists argued that factions in the republic would result in division and conflicts among the states. Thus, to eliminate this threat, they advocated for a strong national government that would prevent factions, hence protecting people’s interests. Also, they argued that a large republic would be effective under check and balance systems. James Madison was the fourth president of the United States and was the architect of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution, he was one of the federalists who argued federal and state governments would provide better protection than in a single republic. Also, he argued that separation of power between federal and state governments would prevent a tyrannical majority. Whereas the anti-federalists had strong concerns about the constitution, they argued that a strong national government would abuse people’s rights. In the end, the Federalists won since they offended the solution to anti-federalists’ concerns.

Federalists And Anti-Federalists Constitution Interest

The Bill of Rights and Article 1 were to erase the fears of anti-federalists. Therefore, article1 and the 10th Amendment reflect the interest of anti-federalists in the constitution. The anti-federalists were worried about a strong national government, and these amendments helped erase their fears. Federalists’ paper 51, as well as Federalists’ paper 10 in the constitution, represent the interest of federalists.

Core Principles Of The Constitution

The six core principles of the Constitution include popular sovereignty, limited government, checks and balances, separations of powers, judicial review, and federalism.

Popular Sovereignty: This principle is based on the government being created by the people, and it is a subject of the will of the people. Thus, this principle means that the citizens are in charge of the government and how it’s run. People exercise this principle through voting; hence, the people they elect represent their opinions.

Separations of powers: this principle is the embodiment of three branches of the government,t, i.e., Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. The separation of powers helps each part of the government to execute its power without interfering with each other. Also, it helps that there is no concentration of powers in one branch of government. Therefore, the legislative branch is responsible for enacting laws, the executive branch of government is responsible for law enforcement, and the judicial is responsible for punishing the lawbreakers.

Judicial reviews: this principle states that nobody is above the law. It is responsible for deciding the punishment government officials deserve for breaking the law.

Limited Government: The principle decides the power the government possesses over its citizens. Therefore, determines how the population has given the government authority to work on its behalf. Hence, this is the reason the budget must go through Congress.

Checks and balances: the system helps maintain a balance between the branches of the government and ensures that one branch has more power than the other. Thus, it helps keep balance among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the government.

Federalism: the idea of creating political power between the larger group and smaller group, i.e., the national government to state government to the county level. Thus, the state government is responsible for the state under its jurisdiction, while the national government controls everyone living in the country.

Constitution Amendments

The Constitution has lasted over 200 years since it left a room that allowed amendments. The Constitution gave states the opportunity to propose change or amendment.

The constitution needs to be amended. The constitution should be amended to give the federal government some oversight authority over the state government. For instance, some States passed laws that allow the use of Marijuana, which is classified as an illegal drug by federal laws (Mark, 2017). Thus, to avoid unparalleled laws between the state and federal government, the constitution should be amended to give the federal government more authority in scenarios like this.

Conclusion

The Federalists made compromises that allowed the anti-federalists to agree on the Constitution. My thesis is about the compromises the Federalists made. Therefore, the anti-federalists had strong concerns about the constitution; they argued that a strong national government will abuse people’s right. In the end, the Federalists won since they offended the solution to anti-federalists’ concerns. To erase their fears, the Federalists formulated Article 1 of the Constitution, which indicated the power of Congress to regulate the Federal government. Article 1 of the Constitution gives Congress legislative powers and limits. The Federalists used to show that the government should not do whatever it wanted; hence, this indicated that States would reserve their own powers. Also, the Federalists created a 10th amendment to cater to the worries of the anti-federalists. There are always chapters in the constitutions that reflect the interests of anti-federalists and federalists. The arising conflicts between federal laws and state laws should be addressed through amendments to the Constitution.