United States Constitution and New York

Once we established our independence from Great Britain, the first priority was to outline the future for America beginning with the Articles of Confederation. Due to the oppressive rule of Britain, the Founding Fathers thought that an ideal federal government would be one with exceptionally limited power. Therefore, under the Articles of Confederation, the states would remain independent and sovereign, meaning the power was vested within the states. The federal government's purpose was simply to be a last resort to resolve any disputes that occurred between states, and to preside over international affairs, i.e. alliances and treaties. Additionally, the federal government maintained armed forces, and was responsible for circulating currency. However, the federal government was incapable of levying taxes and regulating commerce, issues that eventually required revisions, which led to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. At the Constitutional Conventional, the delegates concurred that a stronger central authority was necessary, enabling the federal government to have more power and control. Was this a good idea? Not necessarily. The past has shown us many unfortunate instances that did not have to happen, but had because of the federal government vying for powers belonging rightfully to the states. That is why we believe that

Using information from the evidence below as well as your knowledge of the period, discuss the development of the United States Constitution as a document which ensured popular sovereignty.

Then there were Anti- Federalists who believed that the bulk of duties should continue to be left to each state's own discretion, so that there would be no misrepresentation of the people it governed. It's left to say that neither side saw eye to eye, but would eventually reach a "compromise", the Federalists would institute their version of the Constitution which had a clear notion of Central Government and it's duties. The Anti-Federalists would receive an additional amendment to the Constitution (The Bill of Rights), which would protect the personal liberties they were convinced a Central Government would revoke. Both sides seemed fairly satisfied with the outcome, though there was still fear of that popular tyranny from the outside. But the act of tyranny they should have feared was their own, for the Framer's motives for creating a new constitution was really protecting the few (the rights of the Wealthy) against the many (the non-elite).

(Document 2) This quote illustrates that there was no way to prevent the branches (executive, judicial, legislative) from abusing their powers. The anti-federalists feared what this strong central government would become. Reasonably, if the constitution was ratified, the federalists would have endless control. The anti federalists feared the government would become a monarchy. Perhaps the biggest argument was mentioned in The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the adoption of the Federal Constitution, “it is the opinion of this convention that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of the commonwealth….powers not expressly delegated by the constitution… are reserved to several states.” (Document 6) This quote states that the powers that were not given to the original constitution would now be given to the states. Basically, if there was any right or law not originally in the constitution the states were given the right to adjust and look after it.

Before the U.S Constitution was ever set in motion, there was a constitution called the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation followed after America gained their independence from the British. This constitution gave limited power to a central government, and gave state governments, major authority. Whereas the new constitution intended to generate a powerful government in which various states could unite under a central authority. The administration of the new government wanted to implement new approaches to help expand to Western lands and to develop a stronger economy. However, the fact that the new government was federal and not state, angered many people. So, with countless crowds opposing the new government, why were

Welfare in the United States has its roots in FDR’s Great Depression era policies of the New Deal. As part of the Social Security Act, cash transfers were made from the Federal Government to families with children and little-to-no income. In 1996 the system of welfare in the United States was drastically transformed under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, which replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) with Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). One of the biggest changes that came about from this reform was how welfare was paid out. Instead of being a federal program, the administration of welfare payments was shifted to the states and funded through block grants.

The Articles of the Confederation was festering to a boil without a centralized strength. Interstate conflict would have ripped the United States apart. As such, a new government was needed; one with the ability generate funds, protect all of the people on a unified front, and defend itself. It meant hobbling the individual states’ rights and increasing the legislative power of what became the executive branches. The Constitution was a necessary evil if the states were not to slip into attrition through the abuses of their individual legislative power. The United States was founded on credit and the lenders needed to be repaid as well as a system made that would not rely on the good will and needs of corrupt men. “Too much democracy” in local or state government eroded the rights of

The United States government needs a strong base and a government that will protect its people. The people will not survive if there are not officials. Anti-federalists wanted each state to have its own local government which in turn makes the states less unified. If each state has different laws and there is no centralized government than there is no similarity between the states other than being on the same continent. The states have to remain united and have a strong central government so that all Americans have the same rights and laws that they are governed by.

Since the start of the United State the way in which a particular crime is seen has

This was the era that created significant documents even though this was not common among nations, which were run by divine right appointed kings, types of parliament, tribal leaders, or their own system. This is what made America such a unique "collection of territories" When the Articles were written they were written partially out of fear of a second England. Because of this the Articles were created and designed so that any issue was untouchable by the state, and if it was needed to be addressed at least 9 states had to be present in congress to solve. While any change in the Articles required all states to solve.

In the 18th century, nations were fighting for their independence and humans were fighting for their fundamental rights. Constitutions played a role in this process, allowing people to declare their freedom from an absolute monarchy and establishing a government that favored them. For many nations, the constitution stated why government should rule the people and be run by the people in order for things to be fair and equal. Forming a parliament, congress, or some other type of representation was an essential part of this equality. Constitutions also stated how there should be an equal separation of powers to make sure that no one power could have too much control, as a monarch had done previously. In the United States, France, and Great Britain,

As a new country/nation state the constitution… Many influences and cases helped to shape the constitution to what it is today. During the 1787 constitutional convention various political dynamics, followed with our political belief systems, the constitution was constructed. This important document states involved sources and limitation of power. Furthermore this essay will illustrate the various sources that took part in shaping our political belief systems, along with the political dynamics including the major debates at the election, in addition many of the major sources and limitations of power.

However, this innovation and sense of what was to come did not happen overnight and the framers of the constitution engaged in a great deal of debate about all aspects of the document, including what role the national government should take. It's important to bear in mind that at the time, America was very much a new country, and many of its members recalled the unpleasantness and tight control of what it was like to live in a monarchial society. At first the framers of the constitution favored a unitary government where "all significant powers would rest in the hands of the central government and state and local governments would derive their authority from the

After the Revolutionary War, the thirteen colonies were in bad shape and they needed more of a structured government, because the British system was not good enough for them. 55 state delegates, including George Washington, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin then decided to create the Constitution. The United States Constitution is a document that was made to help America’s government and to authorize the basic rights of American citizens. It was signed on September 17, 1787 in Philadelphia at the Constitutional Convention. The Constitutional Convention was made to examine and fix the weak government that remained under the Articles of Confederation. The Constitutional Convention is also what made the Constitution. The Constitution is what established the American government and America’s fundamental law, and it assured certain basic rights for American citizens.

As the citizens became ever more dissatisfied with the confederation, there was growing debate over what type of government the country should have. Some argued that a strong national government was the only way, while others feared a strong governments effects on the citizenry and feared for their liberty. As history continually shows, as a government loses popularity, its legitimacy is not so far behind. It was no different in America and it was not long before the confederation became nearly irrelevant. The government grew weaker and the number of citizens making strong demands grew stronger, the public debate over the future of the country grew as well. Much like a group of men building a house from the ground up, our countries leaders in the same way debated over elements the house should contain and how that could be made possible. Fear of continued chaos and violence among the people brought the country’s leaders together to finally hash out the details of the new government. In May of 1787, our countries representatives gathered in the Philadelphia State House for a national convention. The states were represented by men with no party affiliation, but many different ideas on how to move forward. At this point, the founding fathers were still against political parties, yet the division amongst them was becoming more obvious, setting the stage for parties in the