|
|
         
|
Federalists vs Anti-Federalists The beginning of government started long ago with the Egyptians in 6th century B.C. when a pharaoh was the only ruler and the people were his peasants. This was a popular form of government for many countries called monarchy, which by definition is a "government with an hereditary ruler." Although monarchy is different from any other government, the meaning of government is the same. According to American Government by William A. McClenaghan, government is "the institution through which a society makes and enforces its public policies. Public policies is basically what the government does like imposing income tax. If a country didn’t have a government, common jobs like police, public schools and streets would not exist. People wouldn’t be safe because they would not be protected by a military and robbers and criminals would get away. The government’s job is to simply keep the peace within the country, protect against foreign invaders and to govern the people. If your government were an anarchy, government wouldn’t exist because everyone would be his or her own government. The death toll would number in the millions and public safety would not exist. The people would revolt against each other and more killing would take place. With a government, people like police and FBI keep the country safe from the inside while others protect from foreign attacks. With the events of 9-11, people have questioned the safety of American skies. Although the United States has CIA men and women in every country, it doesn’t mean we are entirely safe. Sometimes, it is important to understand that a government can only do so much to protect itself. It is also important to know that if it weren’t for government, people would not know what to do. With a government governing the people, rules and laws can be passed so everyone can understand what to do and what not to do. It is also important to understand government so you, the citizen, will not be taken advantage of. If you understand how the government works, you understand how the country works and you understand why the government does things. Having an understanding of government works well with democracy because democracy is based on the people’s opinion (this is true democracy not United States). But if you were in a communistic country, nothing matters because the government controls everything and your opinion doesn’t matter. Knowing about the government helps you understand your rights as a citizen and the knowledge of when the government is taking advantage of you. If the government finds out that the people doesn’t care what they do, they will take advantage of that and impose laws or taxes that no one wants. In this case, the government would become a dictatorship and full power would be given to the government. As the people of America, we must not neglect what they have. The minute we stop caring about the government is the minute we become a dictatorship. War would be declared on countries and laws would be passed because the people would not know about it. Another thing that would happen would be the fall the Balance of Power. All the power would shift over to the executive branch and the ruler could pass anything he or she wants to because the legislature and judicial branches will have no power. Therefore, Americans should never neglect the privileges they have to having a democratic country. Neglecting these simple rights would end in a loss of freedom. It would also be a loss of a government that is "for the people." Not many countries in the world can boast of having a government "centered" around them because most of them are dictators. With our government, the people are the center not a political figure.
The history of United States politics dates back to 1215 when some "determined barons" forced King John to sign the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta stated that such laws as rights to a trial by jury and due process of law. After this simple principle was instituted in England, many other rights were added to them. As the years went on, England started to colonize countries. One major colony was the colony in the Americas. Originally, the Americas were used for people to flee from persecution or to serve death sentences. After a well, many immigrants from many countries came and populated the colonies. By 1733, there were 13 colonies, which were all under British control. Since each colony had its own government, if you will, it made it extremely difficult for the colonies to trade effectively because all disputes would go to the Crown, which was 3,000 miles away. By the 1700’s, the "relationship between Britain and the colonies had become, in fact, federal." This meant that London was responsible for colonial defense and foreign affairs. The problem with this was the people in London had no idea what was going on in the colonies. The Crown was making discussion based on pure knowledge and not looking into a problem. Then in 1760, London became firmer on the colonies and "taxation without representation" had begun because England had to find money to pay off the French and Indian War. In addition to taxes, many colonists started rejecting the taxes on stamps and tea and in December 1773 dumped tons of tea into the Boston Harbor. After this act of destruction, Parliament passed the Intolerable Act, which got the attention of many colonists. Many attempts to unite the colonies failed until this time when the First Continental Congress met in Boston. Delegates discussed what to do and sent a Declaration of Rights to King George III. In May 1775, a Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia becoming the first national government in the colonies. The Congress became unicameral sharing both legislative and executive powers. Then on July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was signed and sent to London where the king was outraged. By the end of 1777, all the colonies had adapted some type of constitution, which in turn started to pull away from England. Thus, the American Revolution was started and the start of the United States of America. I believe we are what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they created the American Democracy. Although it is not exact, most of the statements made by the Founding Fathers are still intact today. For example, the balance of power has remained in our government system since the beginning. It has though been changed sometimes to meet the need of the times. One thing that has changed is voting privileges for women and how we vote. The Founding Fathers specifically stated that when voting, one must be an adult male who could "meet property ownership and other rigid qualifications." Therefore, most of the things that have changed since the Founding Father were done to accommodate the people in different periods of time.
Federalists vs. Anti-Federalists At the beginning of the United States government, a document called the Articles of Confederation stated that changes could be made to the Constitution only if "all of the State legislatures agreed." But the Framers saw the new Constitution as a document to replace, not amend, the Articles of Confederation. After some debate between the newly formed states, the Constitution was established in September 28, 1787. At this very moment, a group of people emerged out of the government; they were the federalists and anti-federalists. The Federalists were people who wanted the Constitution to be printed and circulated. In short, a federalist, by definition is a person who favors ratification, approval, of the Constitution. Some of the supporters were James Madison, the most active and "effective" federalists and Alexander Hamilton. They stressed the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation. They believed that a government based on the Constitution could exist. To make their point of view popular, Alexander Hamilton wrote The Federalist. This was a 85-page essay in support of the Constitution and is the best political writing known to the English language. The Anti-Federalists on the other hand are people that attacked every part of the Constitution. The leaders of these people included popular like Patrick Henry, a Revolutionary War figure, Richard Henry Lee, John Hancock, president of the Second Continental Congress and Samuel Adams. There argument consisted of objecting to the ratification process, absence of any mention of God, denial of States making there own money and everything else the Framers wanted. Patrick Henry put it this way, "I look upon that paper as the most fatal plan that could possibly be conceived to enslave a free people." In the end, the Federalists won the battle and the Constitution was instituted. I believe the Federalists have the stronger argument. When you look at the Constitution, you see the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments. If you look at the Articles of Confederation, you don’t see anything thing that protects freedom of speech or a fair and speedy trial. All you see is stuff about State sovereignty and relations between States. The Articles of Confederation are basically stating rules for States and government and no common rights. When you look at the Constitution, you see how the government is to be run and the rights an individual has. Why would you want to know about State relations? I arrived at this conclusion when I read the Articles of Confederation.
The first Congress was called the First Continental Congress. This congress first assembled in 1774 to discuss the situation of England taxing the American colonies. On October 26, the meeting was called to a close with only creating the Declaration of Rights. Then in May of 1775, the first national government of America convened. This was the Second Continental Congress and unlike the first one, a delegate from each colony was there. John Hancock was elected the president of the meeting and the government was started. On July 1776, the Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence, firmly declaring independence from England and the King. Then it came up with the Articles of Confederation, becoming the first Constitution of America. After the Revolutionary War was won, the Articles were voted out and a new Constitution was instituted. The Framers came up with how the new Congress would be run. There would be a separation of powers between each branch of government. Since that time, not many things have changed except for a few things. One, delegates are determined by population for the House of Representatives and 2 Senators per state. Before, each state only got one vote regardless of population or size. Secondly, Congress was the only branch of government before the new Constitution was instituted. Since that time, Congress has been divided into three divisions; executive, judicial and legislative. Similarity, they both are bicameral, the terms are 2 years long and Congressional elections are held on the same day in every State. Economically, the Congress is to listen to public opinion and do what is best for the people. Although this is not always the case, they do try to listen. Through out the years, Congress hasn’t changed that much. No major rewriting has taken place nor as the need to abandon the system. Although the Senate is mostly controlled by the majority leaders, each delegate has the right to tell what their state wants.
In the beginning of the United States government, the Framers gave time to choosing the President than any other government position. It was very difficult because they Framers were against selecting the President by Congress or by the people. At earlier conventions, the delegates decided on Congress but then Hamilton argued that that would put the President "too much under the legislative thumb" meaning too much government control for a position that represents the American people. The delegates finally agreed with Hamilton and decided to let the "most enlightened and respectable citizens" vote for President. But as we know, that didn’t happen because of the selection of people and the attempt to put a corrupt man in the position of President. I think that if Framers saw the President today, they would probably be appealed. The fact that "dangling chads" was the hold up from the last election would make them die again in their grave. Framers would also be surprised to know that our President asks for power to destroy another country because another organization can’t make up there mind. In concern to the resent events of President Bush asking for power to attack Iraq is actually very constitutional. In the days of World War II, the President had to power to set food rations, minimum wage and other powers devoted to the Congress. This was also the case in Vietnam and the Cold War era. As long as the President asks the Congress about power, it is constitutional. But I don’t think it is constitutional for us to do the job of the UN. I realize that the UN is slower than a dead fish going up a waterfall but I believe they are doing something else. The US brought pretty hard accusations on Iraq about having "weapons of mass destruction". But think for a minute, what if they don’t. From the world perspective, they are probably looking at the US and seeing that President Bush is finishing up what Daddy Bush forgot. Therefore, I think that the power given to the President was constitutional but unconstitutional if we find out that Iraq has nothing and they were telling the truth the whole time. I do believe that the two party system will still be around for many more years. Although the third party independents are growing in numbers, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they will achieve the presidency. According to the book reading, many minority parties are instituted by either ideology, single-issue, economic and splinter parties. If you look at the political parties that have been started in past elections, you will see that the third party is really not seen. The minority groups like the Communist Party and U.S Labor Party only lasted for 10 years or less because of the change in American politics. The two-party system has lasted many years and it would be hard for the American people to vote for third party candidates. The two-party system basically is based on war and economic statistics. If America is at war, Republican candidates are more likely to win and if the economy is falling, democrats are more likely to win. If a third party were to win, which has never happened, the American economy and foreign affairs could be very different. If it were the independents, I think we would see a pretty good rule of government because they would put the ideas of both major parties and their own party policies. If the two party system does disappear, which it might, we would either be in a one party system where one party is dominant or a government like Star Trek. In the latter government, the money system would be discontinued and things would be created for the good of the human race, sounds like communism. But this could not work because people like to choose who governors them and money is a key to political success. Therefore, the two party system will always be around because of human nature and the need to have different choices. |