Creating a Republican Government Flashcards
Timeline - Creating Republican Governments, 1776-1790
1776-1780s: States draft revolutionary constitutions. 1781: Continental Congress ratifies Articles of Confederation. 1784-1787: Northwest Ordinances outline process for sale of new lands. 1786-1787: Massachusetts farmers rise up in Shays’ Rebellion. 1787: Philadelphia Constitutional Convention drafts plan for federal government. 1787-1788: Constitution is debated across country. 1789: U.S. Constitution is implemented. 1791: Congress passes ‘Bill of Rights’.
*Common Sense: From Monarchy to an American Republic*
The guiding principle of republicanism was that the people themselves would appoint or select the leaders who would represent them. The debate over how much democracy (majority rule) to incorporate in the governing of the new United States raised questions about who was best qualified to participate in government and have the right to vote. Revolutionary leaders argued that property holders had the greatest stake in society and favored a republic that would limit political rights to property holders. In this way, republicanism exhibited a bias toward the elite. George Washington served as a role model for the new republic, embodying the exceptional talent and public virtue prized in its political and social philosophy.
Popular Sovereignty
Popular sovereignty, or sovereignty of the peoples’ rule, is the principle that the authority of a state and its government are created and sustained by the consent of its people, through their elected representatives (Rule by the People), who is the source of all political power. It is closely associated with social contract philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Popular sovereignty expresses a concept and does not necessarily reflect or describe a political reality. The people have the final say in government decisions. Benjamin Franklin expressed the concept when he wrote, “In free governments, the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns”. See also ‘Popular Sovereignty’ as used in the 1850s to describe a highly controversial approach to slavery in the territories as propounded by senator Stephen A. Douglas.
Early Frameworks of the U.S. Constitution - Pennsylvania
In 1776, Pennsylvania’s Quaker roots and belief in the equality of all men made the most radical, inclusive constitution. The Pennsylvania constitution got rid of property requirements for voting and for holding office. All adult males who paid taxes were allowed to vote and to run for office. Pennsylvania got rid of their governor and had a unicameral government, meaning the legislature had only one body. Instead of maintaining the status quo, the Pennsylvania constitution decided that ‘the people’ could rule more effectively through one body with complete legislative power. This Pennsylvania plan did not sit well with many of the more conservative patriots. Many saw the Pennsylvania constitution could lead to little more than disorganization and mob rule.
Early Frameworks of the U.S. Constitution - South Carolina
In 1778, South Carolina’s conservative approach reserved power and decision making to a few wealthy aristocrats who they believed were the most suited to rule. In South Carolina, only white men who possessed a good deal of property could vote, and they had to own even more to be allowed to run for office. Actually, these property requirements were so high that 90 percent of all white adults were prevented from running for political office!
Early Frameworks of the U.S. Constitution - Massachusetts
In 1780, Massachusetts came up with the idea of a special convention to develop a government that would preserve the liberties of the people, which had been fought for in the revolution. The state legislature presented the voters with a proposed constitution in 1778. It was rejected because the people thought if the government could make its own rules, then it could change them whenever it wanted and easily infringe on peoples’ freedoms. Following through on this, Massachusetts held a special convention in 1780 where representatives elected just for this process met to decide on the best framework for the new state government. This new idea of the use of a special convention of the people to decide important constitutional issues would play a central role in the ratification of the national constitution.
Early Frameworks of the U.S. Constitution - Connecticut Western Land Claims
Connecticut, like many other states, used its state constitution to stake claims to uncharted western lands.
*How Much Revolutionary Change?*
After the Revolution, the balance of power between women and men and between whites, blacks, and Indians remained largely unchanged. Yet revolutionary principles, including the call for universal equality in the ‘Declaration of Independence’, inspired and emboldened many. Abigail Adams and others pressed for greater rights for women, while the Pennsylvania Abolition Society and New York Manumission Society worked toward the abolition of slavery. Nonetheless, for blacks, women, and native peoples, the revolutionary ideals of equality fell far short of reality. In the new republic, full citizenship—including the right to vote—did not extend to nonwhites or to women.
*Debating Democracy*
The late 1770s and 1780s witnessed one of the most creative political eras as each state drafted its own constitution. The Articles of Confederation, a weak national league among the states, reflected the dominant view that power should be located in the states and not in a national government. However, neither the state governments nor the Confederation government could solve the enormous economic problems resulting from the long and costly Revolutionary War. The economic crisis led to Shays’ Rebellion by residents of western Massachusetts, and to the decision to revise the Confederation government.
Articles of Confederation
Articles of Confederation, first U.S. constitution (1781–89), which served as a bridge between the initial government by the Second Continental Congress of the Revolutionary period and the federal government provided under the U.S. Constitution of 1787. Because the experience of overbearing British central authority was vivid in colonial minds, the drafters of the Articles deliberately established a confederation of sovereign states. The Articles were written in 1776–77 and adopted by the Congress on Nov. 15, 1777. However, the document was not fully ratified by the states until March 1, 1781.
Articles of Confederation - Congress of the Confederation
The ‘Congress of the Confederation’, or the ‘Confederation Congress’, formally referred to as the ‘United States in Congress Assembled’, was the governing body of the United States of America that existed from March 1, 1781, to March 4, 1789. It governed under the newly adopted Articles of Confederation.
Articles of Confederation - Flaws
The Articles of Confederation formed too weak of a central government to survive. A firm league of friendship, more like the European Union than what we call the United States today, was formed. States retained their sovereignty and independence, and the states created their own money and rules for commerce. There was a unicameral representative congress, or just one lawmaking body. They had no power to tax. This is very important because under the Articles there was no way for the central government to bring in revenue, and there was no power to enforce military service.
Articles of Confederation - Northwest Ordinance
Congress had one success under the articles. In 1787, it passed the ‘Northwest Ordinance’ to establish a process for admitting territories to the Union as states. Each territory was to be governed by Congress until it had 5,000 free, white males. Then settlers could vote whether to become a permanent state with all the rights of the other states in the Union. It also abolished slavery in the territories and granted freedom of religion and the right to trial by jury. The ordinance promised fair treatment to Native Americans, but did not extend the same rights to them. The U.S. actually got a great deal of this land by fraud and violence against Native Americans.
Articles of Confederation - Shay’s Rebellion
Shay’s Rebellion showed that for the American experiment to work there had to be a stronger central government. The Articles of Confederation could not nationally enforce taxes or control inflation because each state had its own currency. This lack of unified administration affected people who were in debt from the war and were being punished by creditors or indirectly by this situation. In Massachusetts locals turned to former revolutionary war leader Daniel Shays. He led a group of other farmers to pick up their guns and go to the state courthouse to stop them from foreclosing on their homes, and it worked. There was no national standing army to put down the rebellion.
*The Constitutional Convention and Federal Constitution*
The economic crisis of the 1780s, shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation, and outbreak of Shays Rebellion spurred delegates from twelve of the thirteen states to gather for the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Although the stated purpose of the convention was to modify the Articles of Confederation, their mission shifted to the building of a new, strong federal government. Federalists like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton led the charge for a new United States Constitution, the document that endures as the oldest written constitution in the world, a testament to the work done in 1787 by the delegates in Philadelphia.
Explain the original purpose of the Constitutional Convention and how the delegates strayed from that purpose.
The Articles of Confederation were too weak, so 55 delegates from 12 of the 13 states met in Philadelphia from May 25 to September 17, 1787 to amend them in a Constitutional Convention. George Washington was selected as the presiding officer. Instead, they decided to start from scratch and the decision to create a new document was made. Notable representatives in attendance were James Madison of Virginia and Alexander Hamilton of New York. John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and Patrick Henry did not attend, with Henry proclaiming “I smell a rat”. In the formation of the new constitution the Great Compromise was reached between the big states and the small states, consisting of the New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan; the Three-Fifths compromise was also made.
The Great Compromise of 1787
In 1787, delegates came together at the Constitutional Convention to address national reform. The resolution of this debate became known as the Great Compromise of 1787 and resulted in the creation of the United States Constitution. A compromise was reached between the big states and the small states. The proponents of the ‘Virginia Plan’ got what they wanted in the population-based House of Representatives, while the proponents of the ‘New Jersey Plan’ got what they wanted in the equal representation of the Senate. They also agreed to the ‘Three-Fifths Compromise’ in which 3/5 of the slave population would be counted towards the overall state population and representation in government.
The New Jersey Plan
Part of the Great Compromise of 1787, the ‘New Jersey Plan’ proposed that all states get an equal number of representatives in the new government regardless of state size. The U.S. Senate is based on this concept.
The Virginia Plan
Part of the Great Compromise of 1787, the ‘Virginia Plan’ proposed that each state should gain representation based on population. The U.S. House of Representatives is based on this concept.
Three-Fifths Compromise (1787)
Part of the ‘Great Compromise of 1787’, although the South did not want any rights for their slaves and wanted slaves treated as property, they did want their slaves to count as population when deciding their representation in the government. Since the Southern delegates would not move forward without the slaves being counted, a compromise was reached. 3/5 of the slave population would be counted towards the overall state population.
Understand why there was debate in the states about ratifying the Constitution.
The states held conventions to ratify the Constitution, but these conventions had other purposes, such as informing the public of the details proposed in the new government (because it was produced in complete secrecy), serving as a public place to debate ideas, and, most importantly, assuring that the state conventions, not congress, were responsible for ratification. Conventions were held to make sure that the Constitution’s authority came from representatives of the people, not the standing state government. Ratification was in no way certain. Passionate and articulate citizens used newspapers, pamphlets, and public meetings to debate the Constitution. The Antifederalists and Federalists held a great debate on the nature of the Constitution.
Antifederalists
The Antifederalists originally opposed the Constitution. Their biggest criticism was that there was no Bill of Rights. Most state constitutions had a Bill of Rights, or at minimum, a statement of the natural rights of man as found in the Declaration of Independence. In addition to this, they believed the delegates had exceeded their authority by replacing the Articles of Confederation with what they saw as an illegal document. Some also claimed the delegates were a well-born aristocracy and had written a document that only served their own interests and only reserved rights for the property owning upper class. A common big objection was that the Constitution gave too much power to the national government. There was fear that a representative government could not manage a republic this large. George Mason had actually proposed a Bill of Rights. George Clinton, governor of New York, aired these Antifederalist concerns with the Constitution in newspaper essays in New York.
Federalists
The people who supported the ratification were called the Federalists, and they disagreed with the Antifederalists. They were convinced that failure to ratify the Constitution would result in anarchy and continued strife for the public. Three men, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, responded to Clinton’s writings with the Federalist Papers, which laid out the details and the thoughts of the framers and responded to the Antifederalists’ concerns. To the issue of a Bill of Rights, the Federalists argued that a set list might not be complete and that the new national government was so controlled by the Constitution that it could not threaten the rights of individual citizens.
The Federalist Papers
The Federalist Papers (1787-1788) were a collection of essays in support of the Constitution of the United States. They were written by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay in order to persuade New York State to ratify the Constitution. Because they were first published under a pseudonym (“Publius”), the authorship of the individual essays is sometimes debated. Regardless of who wrote which essay, they have had a lasting impression on both the politics and literature of America.
