Virginia Plan Vs New Jersey Plan Essay

First of all, the New Jersey Plan will make every state equal, despite their size or population. A goal of the New Jersey Plan is to protect state sovereignty, or supreme power. The New Jersey Plan is the way to go because it’ll give all the states an equal amount of representatives and votes. The New Jersey Plan also calls for a separation of powers in the three branches of government. The plan also proposed a one house unicameral legislature. In addition, every state, big or small, would have equal power which would ensure that the large states wouldn’t overrun the smaller states. On the other hand, if the Virginia Plan gets put into action, the large states will gain more power, leaving us smaller states in the dust with very little power in the federal government. The Virginia Plan was created to make the large states more powerful than the smaller states. Do you honestly want to live in a country where you can’t voice your opinion because your country is too small? Generally speaking, the Virginia Plan will make the small states feel like they’re living in the 13 colonies under British rule all over

The Virginia Plan sparked debate over its legislative representative proposals. The plan proposed representation of the states by population. This proposition favored the larger states. The Jersey Plan also known as the smaller state plan rallied for equal representation for all states. A compromise was finally reached. One house of the legislature would consist of two representatives from each state. This satisfied the small states. The second house of the legislature would consist of representatives based on population, thus satisfying the larger states. The establishment of a fair measure to apply taxation and representation in the legislature was described in the Federalist Papers: The Apportionment of Members among the States. The government would conduct a census that would prevent the states from understating their population for taxation and overstating their population for representation. The “Great Compromise” resolving the issue of representation did not mean that the federalists and anti-federalists had come to agreement on the Constitution.

Madison’s national veto also weakened the Virginia Plan, since the national government’s supreme judgment could only cause resentment by local authorities grappling with purely local issues. To counteract Madison’s bold proposal, delegates from the smaller states, headed by New Jersey’s William Paterson, offered a competing plan, the New Jersey Plan. To its credit, the New Jersey Plan amended the Articles of Confederation by adding a plural executive and a judiciary appointed by the executive branch. The New Jersey Plan proposed proportional representation in both houses of Congress to protect the smaller states. Although the addition of an executive would have strengthened the existing confederation, it resulted in a weak plural head of state. Furthermore, since the New Jersey Plan merely amended the Articles, and since the Articles had never been amended given the necessity of a unanimous vote by all of the states, the Plan was almost certainly doomed to

During the constitutional convention, two plans were proposed to solve the problem of state representation in the government. The first of the two plans was the Virginia Plan, proposed by James Madison and the second being the New Jersey Plan, proposed by William Patterson. Both plans consisted of three branches of government, executive, legislative, and judiciary. however, the New Jersey Plan allowed for multiple executives. Additionally, the Virginia Plan had a bicameral legislature, both houses based on state's’ population or its wealth. The New Jersey Plan, on the other hand, has a unicameral legislature, with its single house giving a single vote to each state

In the “Virginia Plan vs. New Jersey Plan” both plans called for a strong national government with 3 branches which led to the Great Compromise. The Great Compromise provided for a bicameral congress. The bicameral structure wanted to accommodate both large and small states unlike the unicameral which only included the small vote.

The Federalist Papers written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay are one of the greatest collections of literature from the time period of 1787 to 1788 when the Constitution was being ratified by the states. This collection of eighty-five essays was written for the states, to help them better understand and grasp a concept of why they should vote for the ratification of The Constitution. Why did the Madison, Hamilton, and Jay write The Federalist Papers and what is there underlying meaning? Who were James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay? What was Madison trying to say in regards to the concept of federalism, separation of powers, republics and ratifying the Constitution and why? Each of these questions can be further explored and answered in Madison’s Federalist #51. By analyzing #51, with the addition of #10, clarity can be gained on the meaning behind these essays and there obvious importance to the nation’s history.

Of the many plans to structure the government present the two that drew the most attention were the Virginia and the New Jersey Plans. Both of these plans were decimated by members of the convention for various reason. The plan from Virginia was viewed as a structure that would be more beneficial to larger states because it recommended an executive and judicial branches of government in addition to a two chambered congress with all representation based on the population of the state which was less beneficial to smaller states such as New Jersey. While the plan recommend called the New Jersey Plan would be just the opposite of the Virginia Plan since it called for a stronger national government to support the Articles of the Confederation with the ability to tax and regulate commerce between states. The New Jersey Plan also called for a single chambered congress and each state having one single vote. Deliberations lasted many weeks until finally

The largest dispute between these two plans was over the differing population sizes. The Virginia Plan called for representation to be determined by the population of a state. This meant the larger the population, the more representatives it would have. This satisfied the bigger states but left smaller states like New Jersey with less representation. Alternately, the New Jersey Plan pushed for each state to have equal representation. The Virginia Plan called for a bicameral legislative branch while the New Jersey Plan wanted a unicameral legislative. With a bicameral legislative each state's amount of votes would be based on their population. With a unicameral legislative each state would be entitled to only one vote. These quarrels eventually led to the two plans being examined, and certain ideas merged to fulfill the needs of both

Sentences 1. The republic of the United States allows the citizens to elect representatives to make laws that satisfy the needs of the people. 2. Before the Constitution was written, the U.S. government had an unicameral legislature; a single law-making body. 3.

On the other hand, delegates from less populous states favored the New Jersey Plan which declared that all states would have an equal amount of votes. This idea goes back to the Articles of Confederation giving each state one vote. Both ideas were strongly reinforced by their respective sides, but they needed to be combined together in a way that would satisfy both large and small states.

This worked out to satisfaction of the smaller states and for the larger states they were given a House of Representatives that would consist of a larger body of representatives for each state in proportion to the amount of the people in that state.

The Virginia plan wanted a strong national government that was organized into three branches and two houses in the legislature. The key features of the Virginia plan were to have a national legislature with supreme powers and one legislative house elected directly by the people. The Virginia plan proposed that number of votes each state was allowed depended on the number of free citizens in the state. The Great Compromise reconciled the provided a dual system of congressional representation. In the House of Representatives, each state would be assigned a number of seats in proportion to its population.

I believe that within the Constitution, there should be equal representation of each state instead of representation proportional, corresponding to size, to each state’s population. I support the New Jersey plan which continued to follow the one-house legislature the Confederation, a voluntary association of independent states, went by. Every state only received one vote in this ideal situation. This plan also allowed Congress to set taxes as well as conduct trading which the Articles of Confederation did not have the power to do. Paterson was against the Virginia plan that wanted the state’s population to depend on the number of representatives it had. He said that the Convention should allow the states to continue with the equality they

On June 15, 1787 at the Constitutional Convention the New Jersey Plan, also known as the Small State Plan, was proposed by William Patterson. The Small State Plan would give equality to all of the states by giving them equal representation in congress. Each state got one vote in congress. The goal of the plan was to keep all of the state’s equal no matter the population size. It also stated the government had the power to tax the colonies. It also would make 3 branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial. The small state plan effects still remain within our government as each state can only send two representatives into the senate.