Introduction
It is a known fact that the United States had two constitutions in its history. “The Articles of Confederation,” which came into power in March 1781, was the first document. It was followed by “The Constitution” itself in June 1788. These documents seem to have many similarities. However, a more detailed and precise analysis reveals many differences. This analysis provides a comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of both documents, the process of drafting the Constitution, and provides major arguments from the debate for ratification of the most significant document of the United States.
The Strengths and Weaknesses of the Articles and the Constitution
Both the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution had advantages and disadvantages for the nation. Thus, the Constitution of 1787 is a more practical document than the Articles, and its statements mirrored the real interests of the American nation. At the same time, the Articles were actively criticized due to some reasons. First of all, this document supported the centralization of power, which did not meet the needs and desires of states (“The Articles of Confederation,” n.d.). The lack of support for a centralized power can be explained by the fact that it could not become an effective government for such a big country like the United States. The Constitution received support because it proposed a bicameral legislature. It presupposed the creation of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Moreover, the Articles set one year as the estimated period in power for legislators, and the Constitution suggested a period of six years for Senators and two for Representatives.
Thus, the term of service was another weakness of the Articles because a politician would not be able to demonstrate effective work or implement any changes within a one-year period. One more evident advantage of the Constitution was the introduction of the institution of the Supreme Court (“U.S. Constitution,” n.d.). Another weak point of the Articles was their focus on delegating power to decide about the army and navy forces to the states. This policy could cause military conflict inside the country. The Constitution provides a more effective decision authorizing Congress not only to deal with military power but also coin money. Also, the Articles did not include any algorithm for selecting a leader of the whole country. The document suggested that the states could choose their leaders. Nevertheless, this approach could result in more serious disagreements between the states. The last advantage of the Constitution is the ban of ex-post-facto legislation, while the Articles allowed it.
Drafting of the Constitution
The text of the Constitution significantly differed from that of the Articles. Consequently, its drafting provoked active discussions. The draft of the Constitution was printed in many newspapers throughout the United States. This step allowed involving a great part of the population in the dispute about the future Constitution. Nevertheless, these debates made up only the initial stage of conventions ratification. The process of ratification in such a big country is a complicated process, and it would not be effective without the compromise because of the desire of states to present and protect their interests. For example, regulation of trade by Congress created a problem that needed time to be resolved because the Northern States supported this regulation while the Southern States did not agree that Congress could have the authority to regulate trade issues. However, the long debate finished with a compromise according to which Congress received control over trade but the export tax was excluded as well as the slave trade was agreed to be unlimited for the following 20 years (Maier, 2011).
The long discussion led to a dead-end of the Constitutional Convention. The major problem that needing a solution was legislative voting. After some time, a solution was found. Roger Sherman, a representative of a Connecticut delegation, suggested an approach known as Sherman’s or the Great Compromise (Maier, 2011). It presupposed that the House of Representatives had to be represented by the population. As for the Senate, the number of representatives was suggested to be equal for all of the states. This compromise hit a double target. It contributed to the resolution of the voting problem and stimulated the solution of other disagreements.
The Debate Over the Ratification of the Constitution
The process of creating the Constitution demanded much time and effort accompanied by negotiations and compromise. Nevertheless, the ratification process, which had to be completed by every state, also caused some problems. The major debate over the ratification developed between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Anti-Federalists did not support the Constitution since, according to their opinion, it did not provide the preservation of the rights of all the states and lacked democratic ideas. The Anti-Federalists had a fear that the president, as described by the Constitution, could become a King. Moreover, the Constitution omitted a Bill of Rights, which was supported by the Anti-Federalists (Hamilton, Madison, & Jay, 2009). The most active and famous Anti-Federalists included such historical personalities as Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, James Monroe, and Samuel Adams.
As opposed to Anti-Federalists, the Federalists, such as Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, George Washington, and John Adams supported the ideas of the newly created Constitution. According to Madison (Hamilton et al., 2009), “the charge brought against the proposed Constitution, of violating the sacred maxim of free government, is warranted neither by the real meaning annexed to that maxim by its author nor by the sense in which it has hitherto been understood in America” (p.101). In his turn, Hamilton expressed his opinion about the courts. He stated (as cited in Hamilton et al., 2009) that the consideration of the courts of justice “as the bulwarks of a limited constitution against legislative encroachments” could “afford a strong argument for the permanent tenure of judicial offices” thus contributing to the independent spirit in the judges, “which must be essential to the faithful performance of so arduous a duty” (p.238).
As for the opposition, the figure of Governor John Hancock should be mentioned. During Massachusetts’ discussion, he introduced some amendments to the suggested text of the Constitution. One of these amendments was the inclusion of the Bill of Rights (Maier, 2011). His suggestions had a positive impact on the process of the debates and contributed to the successful ratification.
Conclusions
The process of creating and ratifying the Constitution was time-consuming due to the necessity to meet the needs of the country and include the interests of all states. However, long debate and discussion shaped the main document of the country and included all issues necessary for its successful application. The few amendments made since 1787 prove that the country developed an effective document able to regulate its functioning for centuries.
References
The Articles of Confederation. (n.d.).
Hamilton, A., Madison, J., & Jay, J., (2009). The Federalist Papers. M.A. Genovese (Ed.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Maier, P. (2011). Ratification: The people debate the Constitution, 1787-1788. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
U.S. Constitution. (n.d.) Web.