ipl-logo

Strong Vs Weak Central Government Essay

485 Words2 Pages

The debate for a strong versus weak central government was a prevalent issue in 1787 only years after becoming an independent country. Young America was struggling how to best rule the country while representing the people. With past disastrous events with the English tyranny and the more current issues with the articles of confederation, our country’s ruling became a heavily debated topic. The main fear of the anti-federalists was that the national government would have too much control preventing the people from expressing their rights. The federalists saw the faults in the Articles of Confederation and knew there had to be more of a national control. During a meeting of which the twelve states discussed how to improve the Articles and entirely …show more content…

America was also in a financially vulnerable state and without the power of federal taxation we were sinking deeper into debt. Even when these issues were acknowledged there was not much to do because any amendments had to be unanimously decided by the states. The Federalists saw these weaknesses and wanted to completely start from scratch with an entirely new constitution. They saw that the states were no longer united and new something must be done. In the new draft of the constitution they separated the powers of the government into three different branches (Judicial, Legislative, and Executive) to prevent the government from becoming overpowering and once again tyrannical as the English rule was. The Anti-Federalists on the other hand only wanted to make amendments to the Articles. They were concerned with the government becoming too powerful. People’s rights as expressed in previous American documents were something they were strongly protecting. Power was something they believed best to be left to the states. They believed the states would be closer to the people and more helpful in addressing the people’s needs. The individual’s rights being protected were something that appealed to and was supported by the lower

Show More
Related
598 Words | 3 Pages

According to my point of view the anti-federalists played upon these sentiments in the ratification tradition in Massachusetts. By this point, five of the states had sanctioned the Constitution without any difficulty, however the Massachusetts tradition was significantly all the more sharp and hostile. At last, after long open

Read More
1152 Words | 5 Pages

In the early years, after winning independence from Great Britain, the American colonies set up their government in accordance with their first constitution, the Articles of Confederation. This means that the majority of the power laid in the hands of the states and Congress, “the only institution of national authority” (Brinkley 151) at that time, had very little power. This distribution of authority was the manifestation of the American’s fear of a strong, central government. However, as time passed, more and more people came to agree that the national government was too weak and needed to be strengthened.

Read More
282 Words | 2 Pages

In the summer of 1787, the new government of the United States of America realized that there was a problem with their current government. Many parts of the constitution guards against tyranny because the new constitution has checks and balances, the separation of powers and federalism. The original problem that was called to the attention of the old government was the articles of confederation were very weak, and they needed to create a strong central government. According to document A, a quote by James Madison states, “The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will controlled by itself.” The central and state government will work together, which shows federalism.

Read More
867 Words | 4 Pages

In the late 1700’s, it was America’s goal to create a republic that had a representative government that was based upon the approval of the people. Unfortunately, the people feared a strong central government because of the previous trouble the colonies had when they were ruled by Britain. They were always being unfairly taxed and had very few rights. In order to avoid this, a very weak government was developed that seemed to satisfy the people, but would not satisfy the well being of the country. It wasn’t until Shay’s rebellion which brought light to the fact that the Articles of Confederation were not going to cut it, so the Constitutional Convention was created and convened to find an alternative solution which was the creation of the Constitution.

Read More
1159 Words | 5 Pages

These authorities that the national government should have, were all up to the states to decide under the Articles. With the taking away some of the states rights in the Constitution, Anti-federalists feared that this would leave the states too weak, resulting in more problems. Under the new Constitution, many powers that were now in the government 's hands are: the power to levy and collect taxes, the power to regulate interstate commerce, the government set up a national court system consisting of district, circuit, and a supreme court, the government could enforce laws, there was now a house based on population, and a senate based on equal representation (two votes per state), to amend the Constitution, a ⅔ vote of Congress was needed, and a ¾ vote of the states were needed, and a majority rule was needed to pass bills. These new powers and abilities of the national government helped to create a strong, new

Read More
148 Words | 1 Pages

The Articles of Confederation was structured to give the majority power to the States while limiting the involvement of Government. The federal government was bestowed with the responsibility of mutual defense for the states and to “secure the blessings of liberty.” Government was supposed to be able to pass acts, however, each state was only permitted one representative regardless of that state’s population and votes needed to be unanimous for an act to pass. The power of the central government was vague and nearly unenforceable. Without a judicial system the federal government was unable to enforce penalties or consequences and without the ability to collect tax they could not finance the government meetings let alone the military to defend

Read More
3023 Words | 13 Pages

Not so long after, problems arose with the governmental system and our founding fathers gathered and started considering different ideas to improve the governmental structure. Large and small states had different suggestions on what should be done to solve the problem. Yet, two things remained clear; Americans feared the British system and wanted nothing similar to it and, the Articles of Confederation had proved inefficient due to the restricted power of the federal government. Two main plans were the reason of debate, the battle was between the federalist and the antifederalist. The powers vested on the executive were a big part of the discussion and the arguments were sustained through a series of publications called the Federalist

Read More
3946 Words | 16 Pages

They also thought that only wealthy and educated people should govern the states because the common people did not necessarily know what was best for the nation. The United States Constitution is a product of federalist strategies because it gives the federal government power to deal with national problems. The central government can enact laws, levy taxes, and declare

Read More
537 Words | 3 Pages

They were scared that the federalists' idea of creating separate state and federal government would take all the states rights and it would not allow for any states to make their own decisions. They also saw that the states agreed with them and saw this as an issue. To fix this, the federalists separated everyone into smaller factions and the factions got split and that's how they claimed the power would be more even and equal throughout the states. The federalists tried to make it better but made it worse and didn't fix it whatsoever. The states' rights became no stronger not weaker than they already

Read More
784 Words | 4 Pages

They believed that this government could provide the stability and security against violent outrages. The foil of these people were the Antifederalist. The Antifederalists offered three objections: that the Congress had conspired under a “veil of mystery” to create a new form of government, that a strong national government would destroy states’ rights, and that the new system of government resembled and monarchy and that violated the principle of liberty that guided the American Revolution. They also pointed that the voters will not directly

Read More
566 Words | 3 Pages

James Madison eventually began writing amendments that still continued the centralized government view while simultaneously focusing on worries of the people. Some amendments focused on the multiple freedoms and others on protection, general rights, and assembly. Anti federalists still had doubts and fears regarding not enough change in other worry’s from the Constitution. Although this point for the Federalists, they have now shown that they listen to others worries and prioritize their rights and liberties. This builds a rapport and trust with the people, gaining even more support, furthering the Federalists goal of a centralized government.

Read More
1495 Words | 6 Pages

Anti-Federalists wanted the complete opposite of the Federalists. Anti-Federalists were for power of the states and not the government. They believed in the Articles of Confederation that the Constitution wouldn’t defend individual rights. Anti-Federalists such as John Hancock, Patrick Henry and George Mason argued that the Constitution did not include the Bill of Rights and the government had way too much

Read More
1859 Words | 8 Pages

In Federalist no. 51, he explained the distribution of powers between the states and the nation within the three branches of national government (Abernathy 71). Under this structure, none would be above another. The Constitution still did not appeal to the Anti Federalists. They enforced an addition of Bill of Rights to promise citizens their rights and protection (Abernathy 74). Ten amendments to the Constitution were added to please

Read More
256 Words | 2 Pages

Anti-federalist commonly refers to a movement that opposed the creation of a stronger U.S. federal government. Many of those people that were Anti-federalist were typically the lower end of the small towns. Antifederalists didn’t believe in a stronger government mostly because there state governments could more easily protect their rights. The federalists were the complete opposite of the antifederalists. They felt the need for a strong central government to regulate over the U.S. rather than having it ran through each state governments.

Read More
880 Words | 4 Pages

Anti Federalists were the people that kept individual rights still today. They did not like the Constitution and wanted all the power to be held within the states. The anti federalists felt that a strong national government threatened people and state’s rights. Federalists opposed the Articles of Confederation, they wanted a strong national government under the Constitution. The people thought the Constitution needed to be ratified, by adding the Bill of Rights to protect people’s rights and freedoms.

Read More

More about Strong Vs Weak Central Government Essay

Open Document