It is due to the powerful leaders that guided America that the country has become as prosperous as it is. These leaders include: George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson. All of these men had to make multiple difficult decisions in order to satisfy the country as a whole. Their quick and logical thinking is what established a stable government in the United States of America.
Subsequent to the American Revolution, the new country unanimously elected George Washington to become the first president of the USA. Two of the changes that Washington initially made were the Judiciary Act of 1789, which in essence defined what the court’s powers were, as well as the formation of the executive departments or, cabinets. Additionally, Washington's
…show more content…
One of the main differences between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists was that the Anti-Federalists believed in strict construction of the Constitution, which meant that the central government was not allowed to do more than what the Constitution said. While the Federalists believed in loose construction, which meant that the central government could do more than what was listed in the Constitution. One main instance in which this came into issue was during the Louisiana Purchase. In 1801 when Spain returned the Louisiana territory to France, president Jefferson was worried that Napoleon and the French would want to use the Mississippi River and develop the territory. Jefferson sent James Monroe to help negotiate the purchase of New Orleans for $10 million; however, Napoleon instead offered the entire Louisiana territory for a mere $15 million. This was such a great offer that Jefferson did not even consult with Congress, he straight away bought the land. The Constitution did not grant the executive branch the power to purchase land. By buying the land, Jefferson had clearly gone against the strict interpretation of the Constitution; however, he did what he felt would be the best for the country. Jefferson breaking from his Anti-Federalist ways united the two factions and led to a more stable
Establishing an effective system of government has proven to be an obstacle for centuries. Fortunately, the Founding Father recognized the common flaws of governments, as did many common men in the colonies. Consequently, the ratification of the constitution was vital for a healthy governmental system, though it did bring about much debate and persuasion. There were two main positions which people took during the ratification, those being the Anti-Federalist and the Federalist. The Anti-Federalist were a diverse assembly involving prominent men such as George Mason and Patrick Henry, and also the most unlikely of individuals, those being Farmers and shopkeepers. The chief complaint about the Constitution was that it confiscated the power from the sates, thereby robbing the people of their power. Oppositely, the Federalist believed in removing some control from the states and imparting that power to the national government, thus making America partially national. Throughout this debate, many letters were shared between the two sides, and eventually, it led to the federalist winning over the colonies.
The concept of theory versus reality is a constant in everyday life. Every person has experienced a situation in which the idea in their head was much better than the outcome. All actions have consequences, and sometimes those consequences are worse than others. In the case of the Federalists vs. The Anti-Federalists, was the drafting of the Constitution actually worth it in the end? When the colonists first came over seas from Great Britain there was one thing that was vastly agreed on—a change in how government works and runs was necessary for the future of America. Two major groups eventually formed behind this way of thinking, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were under the impression that the formation of a constitution and a strong federal government was needed. On the opposite political end there were The Anti-Federalists, were opposed to the idea of a constitution because they worried that the government and the people running it would become too corrupt and powerful. They also believed that a smaller central government was needed with larger governments at the state levels. This smaller central government would be similar to what was formed under the Articles of Confederation. Both sides bring very good arguments, and it is impossible to truly know whether one side’s plan of government would have been better than the other. But when looking at the facts of where our country came from, and where our country is
For AP United States history I chose the federalist and anti federalist compare and contrast that impacted America to the first party system because the past actions have affected us in the present. We analyze the past to find the foundations of present day political problems. I relate this to the SLO by committing time to community to present the past to the community they can understand how our country was developed and where the problems came from. I can urge them to understand why seeing the past is important to relate to the present. I overcame the obstacles in the completion of this assignment by reading and researching on comparing and contrasting the federalist and anti federalist to understand their point of views and why they had
The Anti-Federalist put up a long and hard fight, however, they were not as organized as the Federalists. While the Anti- Federalist had great concerns about the Constitution and National government, the Federalist had good responses to combat these concerns. The Federalist were and for the Constitution and feel the Article of Confederation were not worth ratifying, these should be scrapped altogether. They felt that the Articles limited the power of congress, because congress had to request cooperation from the states. Unlike the Anti-Federalist, the Federalist organized quickly, had ratifying conventions, and wrote the Federalist papers to rebut the Anti- Federalist arguments.
Federalist vs. Anti-Federalist The road to accepting the Constitution of the United States was neither easy nor predetermined. In fact during and after its drafting a wide-ranging debate was held between those who supported the Constitution, the Federalists, and those who were against it, the Anti-Federalists. The basis of this debate regarded the kind of government the Constitution was proposing, a centralized republic. Included in the debate over a centralized government were issues concerning the affect the Constitution would have on state power, the power of the different branches of government that the Constitution would create, and the issue of a standing army. One of the most important concerns of the
In 1787, the passage of the Constitution by the states were not by any means certain. There were two sides to the ratification of the Constitution: Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were against ratifying it, while the Federalists were dead set on trying to ratify the constitution. One of the major issues constantly being debated between these two parties was the inclusion of the Bill of Rights. The Federalists thought this addition was unnecessary, because they believed that the Constitution would only have limitations on the government, instead of limiting the people. While the Federalists thought the inclusion of the Bill of Rights was unnecessary, Anti-Federalists explained how they thought the Constitution gave
In America today there are many political parties which include the Democrats and the Republicans. The beginning of political parties started in 1787 with the federalist, then later on the anti-federalist in 1796. Alexander Hamilton was the leader of the federalist party. Thomas Jefferson was the leader of the anti-federalist; who called themselves the Democratic-Republicans. Our first president, George Washington warned us about having parties and the danger of them. However, "not until Congress debated the ratification and implementation of Jay’s Treaty with Great Britain did two political parties clearly emerge"; the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. Today the most influential parties are the Democrats and the Republicans. These parties win all of the presidential elections as of today. Political parties formed because the United States was beginning to grow and expand. Many people had different opinions and so political parties were formed. People were concerned about the how the new government was going to be organized.
The federalists and anti-federalists were two opposing political parties during the time period of the ratification of the constitution. This process of ratifying the constitution was extremely difficult due to the dissent between the federalists and anti-federalists. The federalists, a northern based party mainly geared towards the upper class, supported the ratification of the constitution. The anti-federalists, a southern and western based party geared towards farmers, opposed the ratification of the constitution. The federalists recognized the issues in society were due to a weak national government, whereas the anti-federalists viewed the new government as too strong. This process of ratification was a group of debates and compromises to promote agreeance. During the ratification of the Constitution, the Federalists and anti-federalists debated over the need for a strong national government; but the Federalist party prevailed with slight amendments.
After the Revolution, America’s democratic government began with insecure self-reliance. Fortunately, stabilization followed with the contributions and policies of George Washington's presidency in 1789. Washington's talent for electing cabinet members and governing lead to his second term of presidency. Washington laid the foundation of America through many actions, The Whiskey Rebellion and The Jay Treaty in 1794 are two examples. The Whiskey Rebellion shaped Washington’s protection for his country, while The Jay Treaty helped normalize trade with Britain, and resolve financial debts from the Revolution. Thomas Jefferson’s vision for America varied extensively, as he demanded for an agricultural government with more rights and economic freedom.
While the anti-Federalists believed the Constitution and formation of a National Government would lead to a monarchy or aristocracy, the Federalists vision of the country supported the belief that a National Government based on the Articles of the Confederation was inadequate to support an ever growing and expanding nation.
1. Federalists were the colonists who favored the Constitution, wanting a strong national government. These supporters recognized that the issues the country faced in the 1780’s could be traced back to weaknesses of the central government. The lack of influence the central government had was in part due to the Articles of Confederation, which formed a basis for the functions of the government after the United States declared independence. The colonists feared a strong central government would resemble the tyranny of the king.
Federalist The Anti-Federalists needed to keep our administration as it might have been. This implies the administration would be a government. Threatening vibe towards the administration would come to fruition if this somehow managed to happen. A solid focal government was needed by the Federalists alongside needing the constitution to be endorsed as snappy as could be allowed without altering it. Federalists additionally trusted that some force ought to be taken out of the states and put into the administration.
The anti-federalists were a group that had many issues concerning the ratification of the Constitution. They had a large number of diverse authors who all had similar ideas on the ways the government should be. Those against the 85 Federalist Papers, wrote down all their issues and their side of things that soon became known as the Anti-Federalists Papers.
There are a lot of differences between the federalists and the antifederalists. Today i will tell you some.
Although the Federalists and Anti-federalists didn’t agree on the ratification of the Constitution, they both feared the president would obtain or misuse too much power. Igniting a corrupt tyrannical government, equivalent to previous British rule. The Anti-federalists were afraid that ratifying the Constitution, would take away most of the power from local governments and individual states to the central government. So, the powers that the president should acquire were highlighted. Among these were expressed, delegated and inherent powers. On the other hand, Federalists feared a weak centralized government would influence abusive presidential powers. As a result, they expressed limited powers of the President, during his time in office. Such