Ratifying The Constitution Dbq Essay

Congress decided their current form of government, the Articles of Confederation, had many flaws. It was too weak to stop things such as Shay’s Rebellion. Because of this they organized a convention, many state representatives showed up, but some did not because they were pleased with how it was and didn’t want to change this. The people who were against changing the Articles of Confederation are called Anti-Federalists, and people that were for this are called Federalists. As a Federalist I believe the people of the United States should ratify the Constitution because we would fall to pieces without it. In Federalist paper 84 they say there is no purpose for a bill of rights because it is dangerous and unnecessary in multiple ways, such as allowing the government to gain more power than it is granted. Also in Federalist paper 51, they talk about the importance of maintaining separate branches and protecting the rights of the people. However, anti-federalists strongly disagree with these claims.
There shouldn’t be a bill of rights because including a listing of rights would only make the people feel as if those are their only protected rights, which aren’t their only protected rights. In Federalist paper 84 it states,”The Constitution itself is a bill of
…show more content…
One might argue that the reasons for the constitution weren’t stated clearly. However, if they were stated precisely it would make the people believe to have those rights protected. If the people believe the rights are protected while they aren’t people would become furious. This would only have a negative effect. Some might also believe that too much power is given over to the federal government, yes it will have more power than it did, however their powers will be limited. The Constitution will protect the state governments. This won’t overpower the government like you may think, it will actually have a very positive

Related Documents