Shaping of the U.S Constitution

Abstract

The Constitution needed to be ratified by at least nine states in the United States to come to its effectiveness. The struggle to its ratification was tedious and lengthy. The ratification of the U.S Constitution was only supposed to be undertaken by specific ratifying conventions and not by the legislature's arm. However, the different states were reluctant in ratifying the Constitution since it gave more power to the central government and little ability to the individual states. The group of people and institutions that supported the ratification was referred to as Federalists.

In contrast, the people and institutions that did not favor the ratification were referred to as Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were mainly against the weakness of the Articles of Confederation. The Anti-Federalists supported the House of Representatives that should be given enough authority. However, the Anti-Federalists agreed that the Constitution was not perfect, but they conserved that it was much better than the suggestions given. This paper will look at how the federalists and the antifederalists' plans affected the Constitution's outcome.

The Executive Branch

During the Constitution's ratification, the Antifederalist's fears on the executive branch were that the President would become the Country's overall elected monarch. They feared that the government would develop a system that would ensure the President's reelection. Further, they feared that the President's Veto power would be abused. Besides, the Anti-Federalists feared that the amount of power given to the President concerning granting pardons would eventually be beaten by leaving a loophole for the President to form deals with other people with a dangerous intention for the nation at large. On the other hand, the Federalists fully supported the presidency. They referred to the Confederation and State governments' weakness with their executives, terming them weak and void of power. The Federalist plan on the executive branch was that the Country needed a President that had an independent executive authority that granted him or her the ability to enforce federal laws and lead the foreign policies profitably. Also, the Federalists maintained that the President would be accountable to the American people and the Congress, meaning that reelection to the seat would depend on whether or not he would satisfy the people. At the end of the debate, the Constitutional Convention ruled to have a single executive instead of more than one executive. 

The Legislative Branch

The Legislative Branch was made up of the United States Congress. Congress's purpose is to make the laws that would govern the Country. The Congress is composed of two houses; The Senate and The House of Representatives. The Anti-Federalists believed that the legislative branch had a lot of power that was not accountable. The House of Representatives is made up of 435 members, while the Senate is comprised of 100 members. Each State is expected to have only two senates representing them in Congress. To qualify to be a representative in the House of Representatives, one has to be 25years and above, having been a Citizen of the United States for at least seven years. Also, one can only be a representative of the State they are living in. The House of Representatives is vested with taxing bills and the power to impeach a sitting president accused of any wrongdoing.

On the other hand, to qualify to be a Senator in any of the States, one must be at least 30 years old, a citizen of the Country for more than 9years, and should be living in the State that one seeks to be a Senator. The Senate confirms the President's appointments and votes in or out the agreements made by the President by the use of a majority vote. While the House of Representatives can impeach the President, the Senate holds the impeachment trial. 

The Judicial Branch

The Judicial Branch of the United States government is made up of the Supreme Court in conjunction with all the other federal courts. The Judicial system was set into place by Congress. The most vital authority that the Judicial Branch has is the Judicial Review. The Judicial Review checks the laws passed by Congress and determines if the Constitution has allowed them. Also, it determines if the negotiations made between the President and other external entities are permitted by the Constitution even after the Senate has approved of them. The Judicial Branch checks whether or not the President of the United States' actions are within the law and are backed up by the Constitution. The Judicial Branch also determines whether or not the laws passed by Congress are within the Constitution's boundaries. The Judicial Branch checks to confirm that the laws passed by the states at the state level do not collide with the laws passed by the Federal government. This, therefore, means that power is well distributed between the two groups of government.

In the Summer of 1787, a Constitution Convention was called to revise the Articles of the Confederation. However, to achieve this one objective, a new constitution was drafted. During this time, many groups were formed to gain as much support as possible. One of the significant compromises that existed was the one that gained support from both Virginia Plan and New Jersey Plan to form the legislative system. The other Compromise that existed was the Three-Fifths Compromise. For this Compromise, the people in Southern America were a great support as it allowed them to provide slaves for their representation and deal with their taxations. The Federalists were in support of a strong government that also had a powerful Executive.

However, the Anti-Federalists were in favor of a weak Central Government. Furthermore, the Federalists did not support the Bill of Rights' existence and believed that the new Constitution was perfect in itself. However, the Antifederalists were strongly advocating for a Bill of Rights. According to the federalists, the Constitution's weakest part was the lack of a Bill of Rights. However, they still supported its absence, claiming that the Constitution already contained enough protection for the people and that Congress would still keep proposing amendments. 

However, the Antifederalists were against the Constitution. They believed that the state governments had the best knowledge of what the citizens needed. As a result of this knowledge, they were best placed to protect the people's rights and freedoms. They stated that the Constitution would lead to a Central government that was immensely powerful and that this would be very dangerous to the People. One of the main arguments that were put across by the Anti-Federalists was the fact that the Constitution did not have a Bill of Rights. As such, the people were left bare and unprotected. With time, many of the Anti-Federalists sided with the Federalists and agreed to their arguments.

Both the Federalists and Antifederalists wrote letters to newspapers. However, they did so using pseudonyms. These were fake names used by members from the different parties to hide their identity and undisclosed for various purposes like their security.

Based on my Academic Understanding, I would choose to side with the Federalists. Led by their leaders Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, the Federalists were more organized in their approach. They believed that it was not necessary to have the ratification of the Constitution. The United States government needed to establish a sizeable National Government as it would naturally unify the relationship between the states, and thus the Country would be more united. Also, the Federalists believed that having a solid Central Government was vital in preserving the people's rights and freedoms. By having a widely spread republic, the rights of the minor groups would not be easily overlooked by the majority. The federalists were at the forefront in protecting the sovereignty and government structure of the United States. By creating a government based on popular sovereignty, the new governments' legitimacy could be secured. 

Conclusion

The United States Constitution's ratification was only to be done by special ratification agreements and not by the legislative. The ratification process is tiresome and lengthy. The Federalists were the people that supported the ratification, while Anti-Federalists referred to those that did not favor the ratification of the Constitution. Antifederalists feared that the President had too much power and the power should be stripped and directed to the state governments. Federalists did not think that the Bill of Rights was necessary, while the Anti-Federalists strongly advocated for a Bill of Rights. 

References

Federalism in the Constitution | Boundless political science . (2019). Lumen Learning – Simple Book Production. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-politicalscience/chapter/federalism-in-the-constitution/

Hamilton, A., Madison, J., & Jay, J. (2009). Federalist no. 78. In The federalist papers (pp. 235-240). Palgrave Macmillan, New York.

Madison, J. (1787). The federalist no. 10. November , 22 (1787), 1787-88.

Madison, J. (1788). The federalist papers: No. 51. The Federalist , 337.

Ratification of the Constitution | Boundless political science . (n.d.). Lumen Learning – Simple Book Production. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-politicalscience/chapter/ratification-of-the-constitution/

The debate over the President and the executive branch . (2017). Center for the Study of the American Constitution. https://csac.history.wisc.edu/document-collections/constitutional-debates/executive-branch/