DBQ4: Ratifying the Constitution
The major arguments in the debate over the ratification over the U.S Constitution were the rights of individuals verses the rights of the states, the supporters and the opponents, were the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Both sides the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists are debating to win the support of our nation.
Farmers in 1787 were not happy under the Articles of Confederation. The government could do little about infiltration that was increasing at colossal rates. The ratification of the Constitution awaited. And everyone realized that the Articles of confederation were not working which increased the number of people that wanted a change (Document1). The Crisis period was too much to take in for the majority of people. The honor system was the state of mankind, this was under the Articles and it was failing terribly (Document3). Many Americans felt the need for the ratification of the Constitution to keep Americans and America together.
There was a definite divide between supporters and opponents. The opponents did not reject the Articles. Many opponents feared that the Constitution is undemocratic and that it could be very oppressive overall. There were controversies about the Constitution and how it failed to address
the need for an Army, Navy, or rotation of offices. Gaining federal offices was not democratic at all (Document2). State legislatures determined who could vote and where the Electoral College was and that was how the first presidents were elected. State legislatures also picked U.S Senators. In the Constitution there was no listing of rights, this concerned the Anti-Federalists (Document4). Some of the non-wealthy and less educated were afraid that the wealthier people would take charge. “And get all the money into their own hands, and then they will swallow all us little folk” (Document5). Farmers didn’t have any problem having a stronger state...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document