#8
Historical Context and the Constitutional Convention of 1787
Background and Weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation (AOC):
The Articles of Confederation established a government structure that proved excessively weak in executing national governance.
Recognizing these deficiencies, leaders sought to convene and discuss potential revisions.
An initial convention attempt failed after delegates from only states appeared.
Following this initial failure, Alexander Hamilton issued a formal call for a new convention to address the weaknesses of the national government.
The Philadelphia Convention of 1787:
In response to Hamilton's call, out of the states sent delegates to Philadelphia in . Rhode Island was the sole state that refused to send delegates.
The convention officially opened in the summer of .
The original mandate was assumed by the public and many delegates to be merely amending and strengthening the existing Articles of Confederation rather than drafting a new document.
Upon gathering, delegates determined that amending the AOC was insufficient, leading to the pivotal decision to discard the Articles entirely and construct a brand-new founding document.
Strict Secrecy Protocols:
The delegates met in complete secrecy throughout the entire summer of .
To prevent eavesdropping, the windows of the meeting hall were sealed completely shut.
Reasoning for Secrecy: Delegates feared that if details of their discussions to replace the Articles leaked, public panic, outside pressure, and political lobbying would compromise their ability to design an effective government.
To maintain absolute confidentiality, delegates burned their working notes, and participants were strictly forbidden from discussing convention proceedings outside the hall.
Only one comprehensive set of personal notes survived from the convention proceedings (kept by James Madison).
Debates on Centralized Power and the Reevaluation of the Articles of Confederation
Factions on Government Restructuring:
Reform Faction: Some delegates initially desired only minor tweaks and amendments to the Articles of Confederation to maintain strong state autonomy.
Replacement Faction: Leaders such as Alexander Hamilton and James Madison argued forcefully that the original framework had to be abandoned in favor of a completely new constitution.
Philosophical Stances on Central Power:
Thomas Jefferson: Favored a weaker national government, believing the decentralized structure of the AOC was largely sound and required only minimal adjustments.
Alexander Hamilton and James Madison: Advocated for a strong, centralized national government capable of effectively managing national affairs and maintaining stability.
Historical Nuance Regarding the Articles of Confederation:
Common Misconception: The Articles of Confederation are frequently characterized as a complete failure.
Historical Reality: In , following the declaration of independence from Great Britain, the founding fathers explicitly sought a weak national government where primary sovereignty resided within individual states.
Under those parameters, the Articles of Confederation were a smashing success because they delivered precisely the decentralized system the founders intended.
By the mid-s (-), the founders realized their original design was flawed and that an excessively weak central government was dysfunctional, prompting them to revise their stance.
Parallel Example: Similar to how early Massachusetts Bay settlers sought freedom to practice their specific religion rather than establishing universal religious freedom, the founders originally designed the AOC for a specific weak structure before recognizing the need for change.
The Virginia Plan vs. The New Jersey Plan
The Virginia Plan (Large State Plan):
Introduced by James Madison of Virginia, signaling the definitive end of attempting to patch the AOC.
Proposed a bicameral legislature consisting of an upper chamber and a lower chamber.
Representation in both chambers was to be determined strictly by population.
States with larger populations would receive significantly higher numbers of representatives in both houses.
Because Virginia was the most populous state in the union at the time, this plan granted Virginia and other large states overwhelming political power while leaving small states with virtually no representation.
Small State Reaction: Representatives from small states strongly rejected the proposal.
The New Jersey Plan (Small State Plan):
Introduced as a direct counter-proposal by smaller states.
Proposed a unicameral legislature (a single chamber).
Representation was based on equal representation, granting every state an equal vote regardless of population size.
Large State Reaction: Representatives from large states strongly rejected this plan, arguing it was fundamentally unfair that a small state like Rhode Island would possess equal legislative power to a heavily populated state like Virginia.
The Great Compromise (Connecticut Compromise)
Deadlock and Summer Conditions:
Debates reached an intense loggerhead with neither large nor small states willing to compromise, threatening the complete collapse of the convention.
The atmospheric conditions in Philadelphia during the summer of exacerbated rising tempers.
Because windows were sealed shut for secrecy, no air circulated through the hall. Delegates wore heavy wool coats, long-sleeved shirts, and wigs (with the exception of Benjamin Franklin), enduring severe heat and emotional strain.
During the heated exchanges, one delegate declared: "We give congress too much power. We shall cease to the republic." Benjamin Franklin observed: "Their tempers are as hot as the weather."
Roger Sherman and the Connecticut Compromise:
Roger Sherman of Connecticut proposed a solution known as the Connecticut Compromise (or the Great Compromise).
Analogy: This resolution functioned like a Reese's Peanut Butter Cup commercial, where two distinct elements—one person eating peanut butter from a jar ("I love peanut butter") and another eating a chocolate bar ("I love chocolate")—collide to combine distinct ingredients into a superior unified product. The Great Compromise combined the core elements of both the Virginia and New Jersey plans.
Key Terms of the Great Compromise:
Established a bicameral legislature containing two distinct bodies:
The Senate (Upper Chamber): Designed as the more elite body based on equal representation. Every state receives exactly senators regardless of population (satisfying the New Jersey Plan). Senators were originally appointed directly by state legislatures rather than by direct popular vote.
The House of Representatives (Lower Chamber): Representation based strictly on state population (satisfying the Virginia Plan).
Voter Eligibility: Members of the House of Representatives were directly elected every years by eligible voters (at the time defined as white males over years of age who met state property and wealth qualifications).
Structure and Branches of the Federal Government
The Executive Branch:
Head of the executive branch was designated as the executive, later titled the President of the United States (the precise title was heavily debated initially before settling on "President").
Designated as the Commander in Chief of the military, responsible for national defense.
Original Scope of Power: The original Constitution granted the President only specific enumerated powers, leaving the legislative branch with far greater constitutional authority.
The Judicial Branch:
Established as an autonomous judicial court system independent of the other branches.
Autonomy: Federal judges do not run in political elections and are not beholden to Congress or the President for job security, allowing them to focus exclusively on interpreting the Constitution.
Head of the judicial branch is the Supreme Court, composed of Justices.
Size of the Court: Originally established with members in . Congress later expanded the body to members (where it remains, despite periodic modern proposals to increase it to ).
Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances:
The Constitution divided power across all three branches so that no single branch holds total control or tells another branch what to do.
Each branch possesses specific constitutional mechanisms to oversee, check, and balance the actions of the other two branches to prevent illegal or unconstitutional overreach.
House Procedures, Taxing Powers, and State Representation
Popular Control and Fiscal Legislation:
Because of the House of Representatives faces election every years, it was designed as the branch most directly responsive to the public.
To maintain public control over the national purse, the Constitution dictates that all bills that spend money or levy taxes must originate in the House of Representatives.
Appropriations Bills: Proposed legislation that authorizes the spending of government/taxpayer money.
Revenue Bills: Proposed legislation that raises taxes.
Congressional Representation Case Study (South Dakota vs. California):
Every state is constitutionally guaranteed at least representative in the House of Representatives.
South Dakota holds seat out of the total seats in the House of Representatives (held by Dusty Johnson).
Historical Shift: Prior to , South Dakota held House seats. Due to slower relative population growth compared to the rest of the nation, the state lost one representative following census reapportionment.
By contrast, California holds approximately to seats in the House due to its large population.
Proportional Ratio: Because of the minimum one-representative constitutional guarantee, smaller states like South Dakota possess proportionally more voting power per capita in the House of Representatives than heavily populated states like California.
The Slavery Debates and the Three-Fifths Compromise
The Conflict Over Slavery and Population:
The delegates decided that the legal status of slavery would remain primarily a state-level decision.
A massive conflict erupted over whether enslaved individuals should be counted as part of a state's population when calculating seats in the House of Representatives and determining state federal tax obligations.
Regional Positions:
Southern Planters' Position: Demanded that enslaved Black individuals count as full persons () for legislative representation to maximize Southern voting power in the House. However, they refused to count enslaved people when calculating direct tax assessments owed by states to the federal government, claiming slaves were property.
Northern States' Position: Argued that since Southern states denied enslaved people basic human rights, political representation, and citizenship, slaves should not count toward representation in Congress. Conversely, Northerners insisted that if South states considered slaves population for representation, they must also be counted to determine federal tax burdens.
Existential Threat to the Union:
The fierce debate over slave counting threatened to collapse the convention entirely. Southern states threatened to refuse union with the North and form a separate nation in if their representation demands were ignored.
The Three-Fifths Compromise:
To prevent the dissolution of the convention, delegates agreed to the Three-Fifths Compromise.
Dictated that out of every enslaved individuals (or of the enslaved population) would be counted toward both a state's population for Congressional representation and for direct federal tax burdens.
Dehumanizing Impact: The compromise codified the dehumanizing premise that an enslaved person was mathematically valued at three-fifths of a white person under federal law.
Historical Reality: The Constitution permitted human slavery to persist, legally protecting masters who subjected enslaved Black men and women to severe violence and whipping (evidenced in historical photographs showing enslaved individuals with extensive keloid scars and scabs across their backs).
Summary Characteristics of the United States Constitution
Expanded National Power: The national federal government gained vast authority compared to its weak status under the Articles of Confederation.
Restricted State Sovereignty: Individual state governments lost explicit powers relative to the power they held under the AOC.
Framework of Compromise: The Constitution was built upon a series of negotiated concessions (such as the Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise); no regional or political faction was satisfied with the final document.
Strengthened Chief Executive: Created a powerful unified executive branch missing under the AOC.
Direct Federal Power to Tax: Authorized Congress to legally levy and enforce mandatory taxes on states and citizens directly (unlike the AOC, which only allowed the federal government to request voluntary funds).
Consent of the Governed: Governed by the consent of the voting populace, though full voting rights were strictly limited to white, property-owning males aged and older, explicitly excluding women, enslaved people, indentured servants, Native Americans, and Asian individuals.