Danny Chasteen and Susan Rick thought that they had finally gotten their big break when they won $250,000 from the Illinois lottery. But, because the Illinois budget had not passed, they received nothing but a cold promise. No, the lottery situation is not the most pressing problem facing our government, it is merely a trivial outgrowth of a bigger problem: political gridlock in the state legislature. A large majority of the citizens of Illinois are exasperated with the government, and they have the right to be, but a Constitutional Convention is not going to fix any of our problems. Every state has its own dilemmas, and these issues can be solved through the everyday political process. A Constitutional Convention is simply not necessary, when the Constitution itself is not what is holding back the Illinois State government.
What could possibly be the purpose of a Constitutional Convention? Is it to change provisions on the state budget, income tax, or even school funding? All of these subjects can be focused on individually, and changed through the already present amendment procedures. In fact most of the Constitution itself can be changed through this existing political process. The Constitution is a living breathing document that is meant to change as its environment changes, which is the specific purpose of amendments. Each provision should be dealt with individually, so as to bring more attention to that specific problem. For instance, school budgeting or pension reform
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 was held to address problems in governing the United States which had been operating under the Articles of Confederation since it’s independence from Britain. Fifty-five delegates from the states attended the convention to address these issues. The delegates consisted of federalists who wanted a strong central government to maintain order and were mainly wealthier merchants and plantation owners and anti-federalists who were farmers, tradesmen and local politicians who feared losing their power and believed more power should be given to the states. The Constitutional Convention dealt with the issue of the debate between federalists and anti-federalists. The debates, arguments and compromises
The Constitutional Convention is a new plan for the government. It is a government people have to follow. it is important people follow it otherwise something could happen to them. the Constitutional Convention is a new plan in place of the Articles Confederation. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton where to create the Constitutional Convention. George Washington was elected by the delegates to preside over the Constitutional Convention.
In May 1787, the Founding Fathers, who were made up of 55 delegates from one of the 13 states besides Rhode Island, met in Philadelphia for what would come to be called the Constitutional Convention [BRE]. When they met they intended to fix the consitution that was already in place, which was called the Articles of Confederation. This document had many weaknesses which ultimatly led to its downfall: it only had a legislative branch, so it could not hold trials or enforce laws, it could not raise taxes (it was able to raise money, however to do this the legislative branch had to ask the states for funds), it could not draft an army, so the federal government would have to use state militia, it could not control interstate or foreign commmerce,
In 1787, the Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia in hopes of revising the Articles of Confederation before the new, established country would become unsustainable. The Articles of Confederation had failed the country as the central government was not strong enough to uphold the country and protect the people’s rights. They were then abandoned and the Founding Fathers began to draft a new government system, what we now know as the US Constitution. At the time the dilemma was, should the Constitution be ratified? The Constitution should be ratified considering that it averts abuse of power, is effective in regulation, and is in the interest of the people.
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 and the subsequent ratification of the constitution proved to be a more significant event in American political history than the Declaration of Independence. Many of the american leaders believed we needed to a new, stronger government. They had to persuade the states that stronger government was the right direction to ensure the country’s success.They did that with the constitutional convention but, To sway the states in the right direction documents such as the Federalist papers led the states to ratify the new U.S. Constitution. Which then led to the U.S. Constitution that we still live by to the day.
During a Constitutional Convention, special delegates from each state would gather in each state’s respective capital and would vote to decide whether or not they would want to ratify the proposed Amendment. While these conventions are in session, a major problem that might occur could
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 marked the evolution from the Articles of Confederation to the U.S. Constitution. The ratification argument led to disagreements between the Federalists, who wanted to approve the Constitution, and Anti-Federalists, who opposed the document. The latter believed that the new system forced by the Constitution failed to protect the individual rights of citizens and threatened liberties.
The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia was a secret meeting that took place between May and September of 1787. The reason of this meeting was to revise the Articles of Confederation. As well the problem from the Revolutionary War debt. The president of this convention was George Washington. Fifty four individuals attended which most of them were wealthy young persons who wanted to protect the economic of the state. The Constitution that arrived from the convention accepted a government with more limited powers, where each brand would check and balance the authority between the Judicial Executive and Legislative
The Constitutional Convention was held in May 25 1787 in Philadelphia to discuss revising the Article of Confederation. Delegates from the various states met in Philadelphia and George Washington president was elected to preside over Convention. However, the result of convention wasn’t likely what the purpose of convention to revise the Article of Confederation because what it ended up doing could not answer successfully the question of slavery and was creating a new constitution, which was the United States Constitution. There were three plans submitted for government structure which were Virginia, New Jersey, and Connecticut Compromise.
55 delegates of twelve states wrote the Constitution at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia during the summer of 1787 and in 1788 the states ratified it. That gathering at Philadelphia’s Independence Hall brought nearly all of the nation’s most prominent men together, including Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison and George Washington. Several of the men appointed had records of service in the army and in the courts and others were experienced in colonial and state government. When Thomas Jefferson found out who had been appointed he wrote “It is really an assembly of demigods” to John Adams. That summer in Philadelphia, the men, drew out a document defining the distinct powers for the the president, the federal courts and the Congress. This division of authority that was established is known as the principle of separation of powers, and it ensures that none of the branches of government can overstep their boundaries.
The Constitutional Convention was the gathering point of the fifty-six delegates from the twelve states where the latest Constitution was written. This historical event took place at the Annapolis Convention in Philadelphia. The Constitutional Convention met between May and September of 1787. They argued on almost everything, some delegates argued over the powers that the president should have, and other argued about the number of representatives each state should have. To settle these problems, compromises were proposed. The most important compromises that led to the creation and ratification of the Constitution of the United States were: The Great Compromise, The Three-Fifths Compromise, The Slave Trade Compromise, and The Massachusetts Compromise.
Even though a Convention of the States is idealistic, it definitely is not realistic. As much as people agree with Abbott’s second proposed amendment, it simply is unrealistic for our country to have a balanced budget. Just as many families take out a loan for their homes and students go into debt for a college degree, it is expected that our country makes investments that involve some amount of debt. Another issue with having a Convention of the States is that it is unclear how many delegates there would be, how they would be selected, and even how we would adopt proposed amendments (Stoddard). Several Republican states such as Nebraska have been debating the pros and cons of a convention and have concluded that a convention would be ineffective. Eric Berger, a constitutional law expert at the University of Nebraska College of Law addresses the fact that the chance of
The 1787 Constitutional Convention was paramount in unifying the states after the Revolutionary War. However, in order to do so, the convention had to compromise on many issues instead of addressing them with all due haste. This caused the convention to leave many issues unresolved. Most notably were the issues of slavery, race, secession, and states’ rights. Through the Civil War and the Reconstruction, these issues were resolved, and in the process the powers of the federal government were greatly expanded.
In the book “A Brilliant Solution: Inventing the American Constitution” by Carol Berkin she explains the constitution from start to finish from how it all began, to the debates inside the convention and finally the end product. Berkin takes the reader and puts him directly in the middle of the convention of 1786; throughout the book you can feel the excitement, the frustration, the tensions between delegates and the overall commitment to making a new government work for all.
The last half of the 18th century was very important for the United States. During this era, the nation was founded following the Declaration of Independence and drafting and ratification of the Constitution a decade later. The 1787 constitutional convention and ratification debate was very important in the making of the US Constitution. The dynamics, antagonism, considerations, process and the eventual consensus regarding the Constitution can be explained by discrete theories in political discourses. However, there are theories that fit best within this historical context and help better explain the process of the constitutional convention and ratification. This paper will talk about pluralist theory as a theoretical perspective that best explains the workings of the 1787 constitutional convention and ratification debate, as opposed to power elite theory. This will be achieved by looking at the premises of pluralist theoretical perspective, and the workings of the 1787 constitutional convention and ratification and then show how pluralist theory best captures the workings.