Pros and Cons of Ratifying the US Constitution

  Essential Question: Compare and contrast the Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Instructions: Students will compare and contrast the arguments made by Federalists and Anti-federalists. Read each document and answer the 2 questions after each document. Each document question is worth 2 points. Then pick one of the compare and contrast options to respond to. You must describe each author's argument to your chosen topic, and their similarities or differences. the Compare and Contrast response is worth 6 points. Finally, students will offer a compromise between the two authors by answering the summary question in a short paragraph. the summary question is worth 6 points. Background After the American colonies declared their independence they adopted a constitution. It was called the Articles of Confederation. The federal government it established was not very powerful. In 1787, delegates from 12 states met to discuss changing the Articles to make the federal government stronger. When their meeting ended, they had written an entirely new constitution. If the new "Constitution" was ratified by 9 states, it would replace the Articles. Some supporters of the new Constitution wrote editorials under the name "Publius," while opponents often wrote editorials under the name "Brutus." As you read, look for the arguments for or against the ratification of the new Constitution. Document 1: Ratify the New Constitution by "Publius,” 1788 (4 points) The Articles of Confederation do not give the federal government enough power. For example, it requires the federal government to raise money by asking the states for it. Consequently the federal government has no money. Foreign nations know this, so they do not take us seriously. The British refuse to abandon forts on our land. The Spanish refuse to let us navigate the Mississippi River. The new Constitution is better because it gives the federal government the power to tax. Under the Articles, the states can regulate trade. Many states tax each other's products. This makes America seem like 13 separate nations. The free flow of goods from one state to another is necessary for America to prosper. The new Constitution fixes this by forbidding states to tax imports and giving the federal government the sole power to regulate trade that crosses state lines. Some suggest that the federal government will abuse these new powers to tax and regulate trade. But the Constitution has more checks on the federal government's power than the Articles does. Under the Constitution, there are periodic elections of the legislature and the executive. In fact, the people themselves elect the President and the House of Representatives. Under the Articles, however, the people do not elect any members of the federal government. In addition, the Constitution balances the powers of the legislative, judicial and executive branches. For example, the executive can veto the legislature's bills and the judiciary can interpret federal laws. Under the Articles, the legislative branch is all-powerful. Some say the lack of a Bill of Rights in the Constitution is a weakness. But, it is not necessary. The Constitution lists the powers of the federal government, which means it does not have the power to do anything not on that list. Since the federal government is not granted the power to take away freedom of the press or trial by jury, then it is not allowed to do so. But, the best feature of the new Constitution is how easily it can be changed. Those who oppose specific parts or think a Bill of Rights should be added should still support the Constitution. After it is ratified, they can offer amendments to fix what they consider weaknesses. We must ratify it now. Question 1. According to Publius, what are two examples of foreign nations not taking the U.S. seriously? Question 2. According to Publius, what are two ways the Constitution places checks on the power of the federal government? Document 2: Reject the New Constitution by "Brutus,” 1787 (4 points) The Articles of Confederation has its flaws. But, those who support this new Constitution are proposing a cure that is worse than the disease. The new Constitution would give the federal government too much power. Consider the power to tax. Under the Articles, the federal government must ask state governments for money. It is true that this flaw that should be fixed. But the new Constitution gives the federal government the power to impose any taxes it wants on all individuals within all states. State governments know best which taxes are the most appropriate for their states. In some states that may be a property tax, while in others it may be a sales tax.