Debating About the CONSTITUTION—Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists [AP Government Review]
Summary
TLDRThis video explores the ideological clashes between Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the drafting of the U.S. Constitution. It delves into key debates such as majority rule vs. minority rights, representation (highlighting the Virginia and New Jersey Plans), legislative vs. executive power, and the balance between state and national power. It also discusses the contentious issue of slavery's role in representation and the eventual 'three-fifths compromise.' The narrative culminates with the struggle for ratification and the Anti-Federalists' demand for a Bill of Rights, which the Federalists initially opposed but eventually conceded, leading to the Constitution's adoption in 1788.
Takeaways
- 🏛️ The Federalists and Anti-Federalists debated over the structure of the U.S. Constitution, with Federalists favoring a strong central government and Anti-Federalists advocating for stronger state governments.
- 🗳️ The debate on majority rule versus minority rights was central, with concerns about how to protect minority interests in a majority-rule system, leading to James Madison's proposal of separation of powers.
- 🌐 The Virginia Plan and New Jersey Plan represented the争执 over representation in the new government, with the former suggesting proportional representation and the latter equal representation for all states.
- 🤝 The Great Compromise led to a bicameral legislature, with the Senate representing equal state representation and the House of Representatives based on population.
- ⚖️ The Constitutional Convention debated the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches, eventually granting the president significant powers, including the veto, but also allowing Congress to override with a two-thirds majority.
- 🔑 The Electoral College was devised as a method for electing the president, aiming to prevent too close a tie between the executive and legislative branches.
- 🏗️ Federalism was established as a solution to balance state and national power, with the Tenth Amendment reserving powers not delegated to the federal government to the states.
- 🗣️ The Supremacy Clause established that federal law supersedes state law, thereby protecting the national government's authority.
- 🔗 The three-fifths compromise was a contentious agreement to count slaves as three-fifths of a person for purposes of representation and taxation.
- 📜 Anti-Federalists demanded a Bill of Rights to protect civil liberties, which was initially resisted by Federalists but eventually led to the first ten amendments of the Constitution.
- 🎉 After much debate and compromise, the Constitution was ratified in June 1788, establishing a new framework for the United States government.
Q & A
Who were the main Federalists supporting a more powerful central government?
-The main Federalists supporting a more powerful central government included Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, George Washington, and John Adams.
What did the anti-federalists advocate for?
-The anti-federalists advocated for stronger state governments at the expense of the national government.
What was the central problem regarding majority rule and minority rights during the Constitutional Convention?
-The central problem was how to protect minority rights in a system with majority rule, ensuring that no faction, whether majority or minority, could impose tyranny over the others.
How did James Madison propose to solve the issue of factions in government?
-James Madison proposed the separation of powers in the new government, both nationally among the three branches and between national and state governments, to set the power of factions against one another and prevent tyranny.
What were the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan?
-The Virginia Plan proposed that Congress should assign representation in proportion to a state's population, favoring larger states, while the New Jersey Plan proposed equal representation for each state, favoring smaller states.
What was the Great Compromise regarding the structure of Congress?
-The Great Compromise suggested splitting the new Congress into two houses: the Senate, where every state would get two senators, and the House of Representatives, where representation would be determined by the population of each state.
How was the power of the president versus Congress debated during the Constitutional Convention?
-The debate centered on how much power the president should have versus Congress. The president was given significant power, including the veto, but this was balanced by Congress's ability to override a veto with a two-thirds vote.
How was the president originally intended to be elected?
-The president was to be elected by the Electoral College, where each state chose a number of electors equal to its representatives and senators.
What is federalism and how does it relate to the division of power in the U.S. Constitution?
-Federalism is the division of power between the national government and state governments. The Tenth Amendment protects the reserved powers of the states, while the Supremacy Clause establishes that federal law supersedes state law.
What was the three-fifths compromise and why was it significant?
-The three-fifths compromise was an agreement to count three-fifths of the slave population for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives. It was significant as it was a contentious compromise between slave and non-slave states that allowed the ratification of the Constitution.
Why were the anti-federalists concerned about ratifying the Constitution?
-The anti-federalists were concerned about the potential tyranny of the federal government and the lack of civil liberties protections in the Constitution, such as freedom of speech and press.
How did the Federalists respond to the anti-federalists' demand for a bill of rights?
-Initially, Federalists argued against a bill of rights, stating that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to restrict these rights. However, they eventually agreed to add a bill of rights, which became the first ten amendments to the Constitution.
Outlines
🏛️ Debates at the Constitutional Convention
This paragraph discusses the philosophical differences between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the Constitutional Convention. The Federalists, who included figures like Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, advocated for a strong central government, while the Anti-Federalists, including Patrick Henry, preferred stronger state governments. The debate centered on five main issues: majority rule versus minority rights, representation in government, legislative versus executive power, state versus national power, and the contentious issue of slavery. James Madison, in Federalist No. 10, warned about the dangers of factions and proposed the separation of powers as a solution. The Great Compromise and the Electoral College were also discussed as mechanisms to balance power between large and small states, and to elect the president, respectively.
🗳️ The Electoral College and Federalism
The second paragraph delves into the Electoral College system, which was proposed as a means to elect the president without directly tying the executive branch to the legislative branch. It explains how electors are chosen by each state and how this system was seen as a compromise that pleased most delegates. The concept of federalism is also explored, detailing how power is divided between the national government and state governments, with the Tenth Amendment reserving powers not delegated to the federal government for the states. The paragraph also touches on the Supremacy Clause, which establishes the federal government's laws as supreme over state laws. Additionally, it discusses the妥协 reached regarding slave states and non-slave states, known as the three-fifths compromise, which counted slaves as three-fifths of a person for representation and taxation purposes.
📜 Ratification and the Bill of Rights
The final paragraph covers the challenges faced during the ratification process of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists were concerned about the potential tyranny of the federal government and the lack of civil liberties protection in the Constitution. They demanded a Bill of Rights, which was initially opposed by Federalists but eventually agreed upon. The paragraph highlights the persuasive role of the Federalist Papers, a series of essays by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, which helped sway public opinion in favor of the Constitution. The narrative concludes with the ratification of the Constitution in June 1788 and a call to action for viewers to engage with the content by subscribing, liking, and commenting.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Federalists
💡Anti-Federalists
💡Majority Rule
💡Minority Rights
💡Separation of Powers
💡Virginia Plan
💡New Jersey Plan
💡Great Compromise
💡Legislative Power
💡Executive Power
💡Electoral College
💡Federalism
💡Three-Fifths Compromise
💡Bill of Rights
Highlights
Introduction to the debate between Federalists and Anti-Federalists during the drafting of the U.S. Constitution.
Federalists supported a powerful central government, while Anti-Federalists favored stronger state governments.
Key Federalist figures included Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, George Washington, and John Adams.
Key Anti-Federalist figures included Patrick Henry and George Mason.
First debate: Majority rule versus minority rights in a democratic system.
James Madison's concerns about factions and the potential for tyranny, as expressed in Federalist No. 10.
Solution to factionalism: Separation of powers between national and state governments.
Second debate: Representation in the new government, with disputes between large and small states.
The Virginia Plan proposed proportional representation based on population.
The New Jersey Plan proposed equal representation for all states.
The Great Compromise: Creation of a bicameral Congress with the Senate and House of Representatives.
Third debate: Legislative power versus executive power, and the role of the president.
Concerns about a single executive resembling monarchy and the eventual agreement on a presidential system.
Presidential powers, including the veto, and the congressional power to override vetoes.
Fourth debate: State power versus national power, leading to the concept of federalism.
The Tenth Amendment and the concept of reserved powers for the states.
Fifth debate: Slave states versus non-slave states and the contentious issue of slavery.
The Three-Fifths Compromise regarding the counting of slaves for representation purposes.
Challenges in ratification of the Constitution by the thirteen states.
Anti-Federalist concerns about potential tyranny from the federal government and the lack of civil liberties protection.
The Federalist Papers, a series of essays by Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, aimed at persuading the public.
Agreement to add a Bill of Rights to address Anti-Federalist concerns.
Ratification of the Constitution in June 1788, marking the establishment of the new government.
Transcripts
hello and welcome back - hi my sister US
government edition in the last video we
talked about the central philosophies
guiding the founders as they wrote the
Constitution and although there was a
broad agreement about these philosophies
among the delegates when they came to
actually writing the Constitution that
enshrined these philosophies there was a
lot of division and the main contenders
in this debate were the Federalists and
the anti-federalists I'm gonna tell you
who they were and what they were
fighting about so let's get to it okay
so the Federalists and the
anti-federalists who were they and what
did they stand for the Federalists in
general supported a more vigorous and
powerful central government at the
expense of the state governments on the
Federalists roster were guys like
Alexander Hamilton James Madison George
Washington and John Adams
anti-federalists on the other hand
supported stronger state governments at
the expense of the national government
on the anti-federalists roster where
guys like Patrick Henry and George Mason
and so with both sides lined up they
basically found about five categories of
ideas and we'll go through each in turn
the first point is debate among these
groups was majority rule versus minority
rights and when I say minority I don't
mean like an ethnic minority I just mean
that if they're like a hundred people in
a room and 60 move off to this side and
40 move off to this side and the 60 of
the majority and the 40 of the minority
so a central problem that these folks
thought about was how to protect
minority rights in a system with a
majority ruled for example in those days
the economic majority were the poor and
middle class farmers and landowners well
the economic minority were those who had
great wealth and if those with low
incomes found themselves in power then
wouldn't it be tempting for them to
impose onerous taxes upon the wealthy
minority or take another example how
could the agricultural majority be
restrained from enacting retributive
tariffs on the manufacturing minority
and this was the problem as James
Madison wrote in Federalist number 10 of
factions in Madison's terms a faction
was a group of people motivated to
secure their own interests at the
expense of the common good and he warned
that if a faction was able to gain power
than it could impose the same kind of
tyranny over the American people that
they had just fought to throw off and he
further argued that the majority could
be dangerous as a faction and the
minority could be dangerous as a faction
if the majority faction had power then
it would always silence the
voice of the minority faction and if the
minority had too much power than they
could wield tyranny in the form of veto
power like they did in the Articles of
Confederation and Madison's solution to
this was the separation of powers in the
new government not only would power be
separated nationally in the three
branches of government but power would
be further divided between national and
state governments and by setting the
power of factions against one another in
this way the new constitution would
ensure that no faction could tyrannize
the others and believe it or not this
solution actually pleased both the
anti-federalists and the Federalists
okay the second issue that these groups
fought about was representation in the
new government and this was basically a
fight between large states and small
states you see when the Articles of
Confederation ruled the land every state
had one vote and that didn't feel very
fair especially to the larger states and
so the Federalists and the
anti-federalists came up with their own
respective plans for how representation
would work in the new government they
were called the Virginia Plan and the
New Jersey Plan the Virginia plan
proposed that Congress should assign
representation in proportion to a
state's population and in that way big
states like Virginia would have a
disproportionate voice in the making of
laws the New Jersey plan on the other
hand proposed that each state should
have equal representation and in that
way small states like Rhode Island would
have a disproportionately large voice in
the making of laws and as you can
imagine both sides dug in their heels
and it looked like this might break the
whole process it was that important of a
problem to solve and when all seemed
lost in this respect it was the
delegates from Connecticut who came up
with what was called the great
compromise what they proposed was that
the new Congress would be split into two
houses the Senate and the House of
Representatives in the Senate every
state would get two senators therefore
upholding the desires of the small
states and in the House representation
will be determined by the population of
each state therefore upholding the
desires of the larger states the third
argument at the convention was over
legislative power versus executive power
which is to say how much power would the
president have versus how much power
would Congress have you should know that
many of the delegates rejected the idea
of a single person acting as president
because to them that smelled too much
like monarchy in fact one of the
delegates Edmund Randolph proposed a
three-person executive because in his
words a single president would be the
quote fetus
of monarchy even so the delegates
eventually agreed to give the power to
one person in the executive office
because they argued that Congress is by
nature a large body and therefore also
by nature very slow moving and so
especially in times of crisis they
realized that we needed a nimbler
decision-making process and that could
only be achieved by a single executive
so they invested the president with
power but at the same time they
restrained presidential power of the
most significant power they gave to the
president was the power of veto by which
the president can reject any law passed
by Congress on the other hand that power
was restrained by giving Congress the
power to override the President's veto
by a two-thirds vote but there was
another sub debate over the president
and that was how would the president be
elected we came pretty close to having a
system just like Britain's in which the
Prime Minister is elected by Parliament
the delegates fear that that arrangement
would tie the executive and the
legislative branches together too
tightly so they propose that the
executive will be elected by something
called the Electoral College and the
basic version of the Electoral College
is this that every time a presidential
election came up every four years that
each state would choose a number of
electors that was equal to the number of
their representatives and their senators
and how were these electors to be chosen
well they left that decision up to the
individual states now the system of the
Electoral College has come under fire in
the last few decades but I'm not going
to take that argument up here we'll save
that for another time all we need to say
at this time is that during the
convention the Electoral College
proposal pleased most of the delegates
and therefore calm to the argument the
fourth argument at the convention was
over state power versus national power
now I've already mentioned the solution
to this conundrum earlier but I didn't
name it then the solution for who got
the power in the new government was
called federalism and federalism just
means that the power to govern was
divided between the national government
and the state government and I got a
hold of the set of videos on federalism
I'll link them below if you want to know
more but all you need to know now is
that the power given to state
governments is protected by the Tenth
Amendment which says the following the
powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution nor
prohibited by it to the states are
reserved to the States respectively or
to the people now this is what we call
reserved powers which is to say that if
the Constitution doesn't explicitly give
a certain power to the national
government that power then belongs to
the state and then that way the Tenth
Amendment provide
limits for national power but it wasn't
only the states power that was protected
by the Constitution the national
governments power was protected as well
we find this in what's called the
Supremacy Clause of the Constitution and
article six and it says that any law
passed by the federal government is the
supreme law of the land and therefore
Trump's any state law that contradicts
it and the fifth major debate at the
Constitutional Convention was between
slave states and non slave states and as
you can imagine this was a nearly
insurmountable issue of the southern
slave states refused to agree to any
measure that would limit slavery and the
northern non slave states didn't like
that insistence on slavery but they also
didn't want to lose everything they had
worked for in the Constitutional
Convention by offending unnecessarily
all the southerners maybe the most
contentious argument between these two
entities was how the slave population
will work into representation in the new
Congress southern states of course
wanted all the slaves to be counted in
terms of population because that meant
more seats in the House of
Representatives the northerners of
course objected and said no the slaves
should not be counted as population
because you southerners don't count them
as people in any other area of life so
why should they give you more seats in
the House of Representatives they ended
up coming up with a compromise which
became known as the three-fifths
compromise basically what that meant is
they would count up all the slaves in
the southern population and take
three-fifths of that number for purposes
of representation now that arrangement
didn't make either side completely happy
but it was an arrangement that the
southerners could live with in exchange
for ratifying the Constitution okay so
those are the major arguments and the
major compromises that occurred during
the Constitutional Convention and once
they had it all hammered out and they
actually wrote the Constitution it was
up to the thirteen states to ratify it
now out of thirteen states only nine
needed to give it the thumbs up in order
for it to be our new governing document
but there were problems already brewing
Rhode Island for example sent no
delegates to the Constitutional
Convention and refused to appoint a
ratifying committee state of New York
seemed entirely against ratification
from the outset and other states were
pretty well split right down the middle
so it's going to be a difficult road to
ratification let's see what happened
when it came to ratification the
anti-federalists were worried about the
federal government becoming too
tyrannical they were being asked to give
up some of their state-level
governmental power to the national
government and that made some of them a
little twitchy but the main reservation
of the anti-federalists was the
constitutional lack of any protections
for civil liberty
they argued that a bill of rights should
be included in the Constitution to
protect things like freedom of the press
and freedom of speech but that request
was pretty much rejected by the federal
it's for several reasons after all they
argued the Constitution doesn't give the
federal government the right to restrict
any of those rights anyway so we don't
need to spell them out plus if you start
writing down all the rights that are
going to be protected you're sure to
leave some of them out so let's just not
write them down and the Federalists had
good reason for arguing this way because
state constitutions already protected
freedom of speech and freedom of press
and the rest even so the
anti-federalists dug in their heels and
said they would not ratify without a
bill of rights but the Federalists had
the advantage in nearly every way I mean
first of all it was the Federalists who
wrote the Constitution and they were
really the only ones who were offering a
solution to all the problems that were
occurring on to the Articles of
Confederation
additionally the Federalists had the
expansive minds and furious pens of
Alexander Hamilton James Madison and
John J and it was those three men who
wrote a series of essays later known as
the Federalist Papers in which they
explained the details of the new
constitution point by point and showing
how the Constitution solved all the
really big problems facing the nation
now these essays were aimed at a New
York audience but they were published
widely and convinced many reluctant
souls around the nation and in addition
the Federalists did indeed agree to add
a bill of rights which ended up being
the first ten amendments to the
Constitution and this called
anti-federalists fears that the new
federal government would overstep its
bounds and as it turns out the
Federalists won that debate and not
without much struggle the Constitution
was ratified in June of 1788 and baby
who we got ourselves a new constitution
my the only one who wants to high-five a
bald eagle right now all right thanks
for watching now if I got everything I
wanted in this world you would subscribe
to this channel and like this video and
comment below but it could be that I
have to compromise in the spirit of the
Constitutional Convention so I'll take
whatever you give and I leave that
decision up to you I will see you in the
next video
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
The CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION and Debates Over RATIFICATION [APUSH Review Unit 3 Topic 8] Period 3
AP Gov | 1.3 Government Power & Individual Rights | NEW!
Federalists vs Anti-Federalists in Five Minutes
Mr. Lahasky - APUSH Period 3 - Lecture #13 - The Great Debate
Constitutional Compromises: Crash Course Government and Politics #5
The Constitutional Convention | May to September, 1787
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)