Constitutional Compromises: Crash Course Government and Politics #5
Summary
TLDRIn this Crash Course Government and Politics episode, Craig Benzine explores the creation of the United States Constitution, highlighting the challenges faced during its drafting and the key compromises that shaped it. The video discusses the Articles of Confederation's inadequacies, the contentious debates between large and small states, and the Three-Fifths Compromise's controversial impact on representation. It also touches on the Federalist and Anti-Federalist viewpoints, leading to the Constitution's ratification and the promise of a Bill of Rights, emphasizing the foundational role of compromise in American governance.
Takeaways
- 📜 The United States Constitution is considered the most important document in America, serving as the foundation of the U.S. government.
- 🔄 The Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation, which was the first attempt at American governance and was deemed ineffective.
- 🤝 The Constitutional Convention saw delegates from various states with differing agendas, necessitating compromise to create a unified government.
- 🏛️ The Articles of Confederation lacked an executive branch, judiciary, and the power to levy taxes, significantly limiting the government's capabilities.
- 🌳 The Northwest Ordinance of 1787, an achievement of the Articles government, established rules for new territories and prohibited slavery in those regions.
- 🗳️ The Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan represented the conflicting interests of large and small states, respectively, in the formation of the new government.
- 🔄 The Great Compromise resulted in a bicameral legislature, addressing the issue of representation in Congress and balancing state interests.
- ⚖️ The Three-Fifths Compromise was a contentious decision that counted slaves as three-fifths of a person for taxation and representation purposes.
- 🗣️ Ratification of the Constitution was not guaranteed, with Federalists advocating for a strong central government and Anti-Federalists fearing a loss of individual liberties.
- 🏛️ The promise of a Bill of Rights was a critical compromise made to secure the Constitution's ratification, reflecting the necessity of balancing different interests.
Q & A
What is the main focus of the video script?
-The main focus of the video script is to discuss the creation and significance of the United States Constitution, including the compromises made during its drafting and the subsequent ratification process.
What was the first attempt at an American government?
-The first attempt at an American government was the government set up under the Articles of Confederation, which was in place during the Revolutionary War and for almost 10 years afterwards.
Why did the delegates gather in Philadelphia in 1787?
-The delegates gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 to revise the Articles of Confederation, but they ended up scrapping the whole thing and creating a new Constitution.
What was the main issue with the Articles of Confederation government?
-The main issue with the Articles of Confederation government was that it really couldn't govern effectively due to the lack of an executive branch or president, no judiciary, and the inability to levy taxes.
What was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, and why was it significant?
-The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was a set of rules for the governance of the Northwest Territory and the process for admitting new states to the Union. It was significant because it forbade slavery in the territories, which was a major step in the early history of the United States.
What were the two opposing plans for the structure of the new congress proposed by the states?
-The two opposing plans were the Virginia Plan, which proposed a congress where the number of representatives was proportional to the states' populations, and the New Jersey Plan, which proposed a congress with an equal number of representatives from each state.
What is the Great Compromise, and how did it resolve the conflict between the Virginia and New Jersey Plans?
-The Great Compromise was a proposal by Roger Sherman from Connecticut that led to the creation of a bicameral legislature, consisting of a Senate with equal representation for each state and a House of Representatives with representation based on population.
What is the Three-Fifths Compromise, and how did it affect the representation of states in Congress?
-The Three-Fifths Compromise was an agreement that determined how enslaved individuals would be counted for purposes of taxation and representation in Congress. It stated that for every five slaves, three would be counted as the population of a state, which affected both taxation and representation.
Why was the ratification of the Constitution necessary, and how did it occur?
-The ratification of the Constitution was necessary because it needed to be approved by at least 9 of the 13 states to go into effect. Ratification occurred through special conventions in each state where delegates voted on whether to adopt the new constitution.
What were the main arguments of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the ratification process?
-Federalists believed in a strong central government and supported the Constitution because they thought it would benefit the country as a whole, while Anti-Federalists were skeptical of a large government that could potentially trample on individual liberties and favored stronger state powers.
Why did the Federalists eventually promise a Bill of Rights?
-The Federalists promised a Bill of Rights to appease those who were concerned about the lack of specific protections for individual liberties in the original Constitution, which helped secure its ratification.
Outlines
📜 Introduction to the U.S. Constitution
Craig introduces the topic of the United States Constitution, emphasizing its significance as the foundation of American government. He notes that the Constitution was a second attempt at forming a government after the Articles of Confederation proved ineffective. The video aims to explore how the Constitution was created and the compromises made during its formation. Craig humorously points out the lack of an executive branch or judiciary in the Articles, which led to a weak and indecisive government. The delegates at the Constitutional Convention had to overcome disagreements and find common ground, leading to the creation of a new Constitution that replaced the Articles.
🗳️ The Great Compromise and Ratification
The second paragraph delves into the contentious issue of how representation in Congress would be determined, particularly the debate over how to count slaves for the purpose of representation, known as the Three-Fifths Compromise. This compromise allowed states with large slave populations to have more representation in Congress, while also ensuring that slaves were considered less than full persons. The paragraph also discusses the ratification process, which required approval from at least nine of the thirteen states. The Federalists, who supported a strong central government, and the Anti-Federalists, who were wary of such power, are introduced. The Federalists' persuasive efforts, including the Federalist Papers, are highlighted, as well as the eventual promise of a Bill of Rights to secure ratification. The paragraph concludes with a reminder of the importance of compromise in the formation of the Constitution.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Constitution
💡Articles of Confederation
💡Constitutional Convention
💡Compromise
💡Virginia Plan
💡New Jersey Plan
💡Great Compromise
💡Three-Fifths Compromise
💡Federalists
💡Anti-Federalists
💡Bill of Rights
Highlights
The United States Constitution is considered the most important document in America and serves as the foundation of the U.S. government.
The Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation, which was the first attempt at an American government.
The Articles of Confederation had no executive branch, no judiciary, and each state had veto power, leading to ineffective governance.
The Articles government couldn't levy taxes and relied on states for funding, which was unreliable.
The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was a significant achievement of the Articles government, setting up rules for new settlements and forbidding slavery in new territories.
The Constitutional Convention in 1787 aimed to revise the Articles but resulted in creating a new Constitution due to the Articles' inadequacies.
Delegates at the Constitutional Convention had to compromise on various issues to create a workable Constitution.
The Virginia Plan proposed a congress with representation proportional to state populations, favoring larger states.
The New Jersey Plan suggested equal representation for all states in congress, to prevent smaller states from being dominated by larger ones.
Roger Sherman's Great Compromise led to the creation of a bicameral legislature with the House of Representatives and the Senate.
The Three-Fifths Compromise determined that slaves would be counted as three-fifths of a person for representation and taxation purposes.
The Constitution had to be ratified by at least 9 of the 13 states, leading to public debates and the division into Federalists and Anti-Federalists.
Federalists, including Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, supported a strong central government and wrote the Federalist Papers to promote ratification.
Anti-Federalists were skeptical of a large government and feared it would infringe on individual liberties and states' rights.
The Federalists eventually won the debate, and the Constitution was ratified, but not without the promise of a Bill of Rights.
The Constitution's ratification process demonstrated the importance of compromise in American government, a principle that remains central to its functioning.
Crash Course Government and Politics is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios and supported by Voqal, promoting social equity through technology and media.
Transcripts
Hi, I'm Craig, and this is Crash Course Government and Politics, and today we're going to talk
about the single most important document in America, one that we'll be talking about a
lot over next few months. No, I'm not talking about O Magazine - it's the United States Constitution,
and what we're really gonna focus on is how it got made and how it became the foundation of our government.
[Theme Music]
Those of you who watched the U.S. History series with John Green probably remember that
the government set up by the Constitution is actually the second attempt at an American
government. Also, as pointed out in the comments, you probably noticed that I am not John Green.
The first American government, which was in place during the Revolutionary War and for
almost 10 years afterwards, was the Articles of Confederation. Like many first attempts,
the Articles government had some good ideas and it meant well, but it was poorly executed.
Give it a break, it never did this before!
So when delegates gathered in Philadelphia in 1787 to revise the Articles, they ended
up scrapping the whole thing and creating a new Constitution. It's probably not because
they didn't know what revise meant. So, the delegates from the various states each had
their own agendas at the Constitutional Convention, and that made it difficult for them to agree
on what the new government should look like. In order to hammer out a Constitution, they
had to do something you don't see very much of in government these days - compromise.
Oh, let's compromise, I'm sorry, eagle, I didn't mean...
Before we get into what those compromises were, it's kinda necessary to look at what
was so bad about the Articles government in the first place. The main thing was it really
couldn't govern. There was no executive branch or president and no judiciary to settle disputes.
It was basically just a congress where each state was equally represented and they all
pretty much had veto power and could sink legislation they didn't like. All decisions
were collective, which meant that very few decisions were actually made, because it's
really hard to get 13 people to agree on something that will be in the interest of all 13. I
can barely agree with Stan on anything. Right, Stan? He said wrong.
Most important, the Articles government had no power to levy taxes, which meant that if
it needed any money to do, well, anything, it had to ask for the money from the states,
which were free to say, "No, I don't think we'll be giving you any money today. ...or tomorrow. Or ever."
As I remember from my college years - and I don't remember much - living without money
is awful. Without money, it's pretty much impossible for a government to do anything,
except buy ramen noodles. The Articles government was able to accomplish one notable thing,
though. One of the big issues it had to deal with was Americans moving out West, which
in the 1770's and 80's meant to places like Ohio and Indiana that weren't states yet.
The government managed to set up rules for these settlements in the Northwest Ordinance
of 1787, which set up a system for eventual statehood. But most importantly, it forbade
slavery in these territories, which, as students of American history know, was kind of a big
deal. You wouldn't know that, you're not a student of American history. You're a symbol of America, bird!
I'm not gonna punch you.
Other than that, though, the Articles government was a flop. And the very thing that made it
so ineffective threatened to screw up any attempts at new government, too. This was
the issue of competing interests between different states, more specifically the states with
large populations and the smaller states. Basically, a state with a large population
like, say, Virginia, had different needs than a state with a small population, like Delaware.
More importantly, large states might stand to benefit more from any government spending.
When the delegates decided to make a new congress, these large population states wanted the number
of representatives to that congress to be proportional to the states' populations, which
would mean that the larger states would have more representatives than the smaller ones.
This idea, a large congress made up of many delegates, was called The Virginia Plan. Because
it was put forward by the delegates from Wisconsin. Just kidding...Virginia.
The delegates from small New Jersey put forward a plan that would have a congress where each state would send an equal
number of representatives. In other words, something that looked a lot like the Articles government.
This New Jersey Plan would prevent smaller states from being dominated by the larger states, and also
ensure that the large states wouldn't be able to vote themselves a bigger share of government spending.
These two opposing interests threatened to scuttle the whole new government thing until
Roger Sherman from Connecticut proposed The Great Compromise, that gave us the bicameral
legislature that we talked about in episode two, and we've all come to know and love, sometimes.
So The Great Compromise meant that we would have a two-house legislature, but this wasn't
the only issue related to how the seats in Congress would be apportioned. The membership
in the House would be based on the state's population, but at the time there was an issue
about how to count that population.
The issue was slavery. More specifically, how to count slaves as part of a state's population.
Let's go to the Thought Bubble.
The states with large slave populations, like South Carolina and Virginia, had a pretty
big interest in counting these slaves for the purposes of determining representation.
And the states with few slaves didn't want them counted at all. Because this would mean
that the white non-slave people in those states with lots of slaves would effectively be better
represented than the white non-slave people in the states with few slaves.
The delegates at the Constitutional Convention solved this problem with another compromise
that was decidedly less great. Article 1 Section 2 of the Constitution includes the following
clause: "Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several states
which may be included within this union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be
determined by adding to the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service
for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons."
If you're looking for the word "slave," you won't find it. They're the ones described
by the phrase, "three-fifths of all other persons." This is the notorious Three-Fifths Compromise.
What it means is that in order to determine how many representatives a state has, you
count the number of free people in the state, including indentured servants, and add to
that number three-fifths of the number of non-free persons, otherwise known as slaves.
So in terms of counting, each slave was worth three-fifths of each free person.
Thanks, Thought Bubble.
Anyway, this meant that states with large populations of slaves would be disproportionately
represented in Congress, but not quite so badly that most northern states with small
numbers of slaves wouldn't vote for the Constitution.
What this also did was enshrine the idea that slaves, who were mostly black, were worth
less than free people, who were mostly white. And it embedded slavery into the Constitution.
So before this constitution of compromise could go into effect, it had to be ratified
by at least 9 of the 13 states. So each state had a special convention where delegates could
vote on whether or not to adopt the new constitution. These conventions were more open to the public
than the Constitutional Convention itself, and the ratification process is the reason
why some people say the Constitution is based on the will of the people.
But not everybody wanted the Constitution, and they needed convincing. This is where
things get a little confusing. Did you want the Constitution? Did ya?
In 1787, public opinion about the Constitution was pretty evenly divided. Those who wanted
the Constitution were called Federalists, largely because of the Federalist Papers,
a series of articles written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay.
They wrote the Federalist Papers to convince voters in New York to ratify the Constitution.
And since New York did eventually ratify the document, I guess they worked. But we should
listen to both sides of the argument...in the Clone Zone.
So joining us in the Clone Zone today will be Federalist Clone and Anti-Federalist Clone.
Let's hear from Federalist Clone first. Feddy? Can I call you Feddy?
No. The Federalists were the incredibly intelligent Americans who thought that a strong central
government would benefit the country as a whole. They tended to come from cities, and
often they represented commercial classes, especially wealthy people, who had lent money
to the government during the Revolution.
They liked the new Constitution because they felt that a strong national government would
pay its debts, and this was good for business. They also tended to want stronger ties with
England, again because England was a good trading partner. Given the raging success
of the Articles government, it's pretty clear that the Federalists were right.
Okay, now let's hear from Anti-Federalist Clone. How do you respond, Anti?
I'm not your aunt! Sure, Federalists were right to believe in tyranny. Anti-Federalists
were right to be skeptical of a large government that would trample on our individual liberties.
They didn't want a big government that would tax them to death, and possibly take away
their slaves. In general, Anti-Federalists felt that states would be the best protectors
of people's rights and liberties, because being smaller, they would be more responsive
to people's needs. Okay?
The Anti-Federalists published pamphlets and articles, too. But we weren't quite as organized,
so we didn't have a coherent set of Anti-Federalist Papers to push on government students.
Okay, okay, you seem really mad about this.
I am.
But you eventually lost the debate.
I did.
Huzzah!
How come he got to shoot fireworks--
--I didn't know he was gonna--
--I wanna shoot fireworks--
Okay? I'm sorry, I'm sorry--next time. You can have fireworks.
So the Federalist position won out and the Constitution was ratified. And that's the
government that Americans have been living under ever since. Hooray!
Because the Constitution was passed, we tend to think that everyone loved it. But it wasn't
nearly as clear-cut as hindsight makes it appear.
Eventually, the Federalists had to offer another compromise, promising a Bill of Rights in
the first ten amendments. This isn't called one of the constitutional compromises because
it happened outside of the Convention, but it was yet another example of how different
interests had to give a little in order to get a Constitution passed.
It's very important to remember that compromise, the idea of balancing interests and giving
a little to get a lot, is embedded in the Constitution. While today it seems like a
political dirty word, compromise is the basis of the American government itself.
Thanks for watching. I'll seeya next week. Well, I'll compromise. Seeya in a week and
a half. Let's face it; Stan's probably not going to get this done in time anyway.
Crash Course Government and Politics is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios. Support
for Crash Course U.S. Government comes from Voqal. Voqal supports non-profits that use
technology and media to advance social equity. Learn more about their mission and initiatives
at voqal.org.
Crash Course was made by all of these nice people at the Chad and Stacy Emigholz Studio,
in tropical Indianapolis. Thanks for watching. I'm going to the beach.
Voir Plus de Vidéos Connexes
The CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION and Debates Over RATIFICATION [APUSH Review Unit 3 Topic 8] Period 3
The Constitution, the Articles, and Federalism: Crash Course US History #8
James Madison, the Federalist Papers
Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances: Crash Course Government and Politics #3
Federalist No. 10 (part 1) | US government and civics | Khan Academy
The US Constitution, 3/5, and the Slave Trade Clause: Crash Course Black American History #9
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)