American Government Research Project
American Government Research Project
Your goal for this research project is to understand the ideological framework and political positions of the Federalists and
Anti-Federalists during the early days of American government and to make an argument for whether either would
support the modern American government after centuries of constitutional changes and amendments. Your paper will
focus on each branch of government and the changes each has gone through since the writing of the Constitution.
Paper Requirements:
Your 2–3-page research project should address the following key topics:
- Introduction—Provide an overview of both the Federalists’ and Anti-Federalists’ positions on the government.
Reference key thinkers and political writings of each position. Briefly state, for each branch of government,
whether the Federalists and Anti-Federalists of early America would support its current power and capabilities.
Later in your paper, you’ll go into more detail about why they would or wouldn’t. - The Executive Branch—How have the powers of the Executive Branch changed since the writing of the
Constitution? What was the stance of both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists at that time? Create an argument
for the position of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists regarding the modern-day Executive Branch. Your
argument should reference specific amendments, legal cases, or precedents to support it. - The Legislative and Judicial Branches—How have the powers of the Legislative and Judicial Branches
changed since the writing of the Constitution? What was the stance of both the Federalists and Anti-Federalists at
that time? Create an argument for the position of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists regarding the
modern-day Legislative and Judicial Branches. Your argument should reference specific amendments, legal
cases, or precedents to support it.
Citing Your Sources:
Whenever you use information from research, whether on the internet, or in books or documentaries, you must cite
(record) your sources. There are different formats that researchers use to document important things like where the
information came from, who wrote the original information, and the date of the information.
SAMPLE ANSWER
American Government Research Project
In 1787, a Constitutional Convention was held in Philadelphia to debate and ratify the newly drafted Constitution. The struggle for ratification became difficult. On one hand, those who supported the ratification of the Constitution favored a stronger central government and weaker state governments (federalists). On the other hand, those opposed to its ratification argued that the constitution gave too much power to the central government at the expense of state governments. Whereas the federalists believed in the sufficiency of the Constitution to protect the liberties, the antifederalists thought the new system undermined liberty and failed to protect individual rights (Ramos, 2009a). A compromise was reached to ratify the Constitution when the federalist agreed to the anti-federalists’ request to incorporate the bill of rights into the Constitution.
The federalists, led by James Madison, John Jay and Alexander Hamilton, favored a stronger central government and weaker state governments (Ramos, 2009a). They believed in the necessity of a strong central government to band the states together to form a nation. Additionally, the federalists held that a strong central government was best placed to protect individual liberty. They claimed that the separation of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches guaranteed protected the people’s rights and freedoms because none of the branch could assume dominance over the other (Frantzich, Ernst, & Frantzich, 2009). When challenged about the lack of bill of rights, James Madison claimed any list of rights would be incomplete and consequently would misrepresent the scope of freedom that the citizens retained. Maddison also claimed that the bill of rights was not necessary because the national government lacked the power to violate individual rights.
The anti-federalists, led by Melanchthon, George Clinton and Patrick Henry, complained that a strong central government threatened liberties by failing to protect individual rights. Instead, they favored a small federal government with limited powers. They also believed in the ability of local governments to best preserve citizen’s freedom (Ramos, 2009b). They opposed provisions of the constitutions they thought weakened the power of the states. Consequently, they were concerned that having a strong central government in place would overpower local governments, causing them to lose their independence and influence. The debate about who should have more powers between the states and federal government persists today. In 2015 the Supreme Court confirmed the right of the federal government to legalize same-sex relationships nationally in the Obergefell v Hodges and United States v. Windsor cases despite bans in several states. While the states have the primary power for passing and implementing criminal laws, the federal government has been in the forefront in making and enforcing gun laws.
The executive arm has changed significantly since the inception of the constitution. The first change pertains the election of the president and the vice. Initially, the person who received the most number of electoral votes becomes the president. The person with the second most number of elector votes becomes the vice. Today, the president and vice run on a joint ticket. The 22nd Amendment also limited presidents to two terms. These changes have been effected through constitutional amendments.
The federalists wanted a president with executive powers to perform foreign policy and enforce federal laws. They argued that the president would be answerable to both the Congress and the people. The inherent weakness of Congress to conduct its legislation forced Hamilton to favor a strong presidency. Antifederalists feared the president would be like the king with limitless powers (Ramos, 2009b). With total control over the federal military, the defeated incumbent might refuse to transfer power to the winner causing chaos.
The federalists favored a separation of powers between the three arms of government while the antifederalists believed this separation thing violated the commonly held belief of government. They argued against the blend of power and responsibility over appointments to office. The federalists preferred a handful of educated and wealthy men to run the government and registered concerns with total democracy. They also wanted smaller number of representatives in positions of decision making. In contrast, the antifederalist wanted both the poor and wealthy to make up the government (Frantzich, Ernst, & Frantzich, 2009). They also championed for many representatives in decision making positions, arguing that one representative per 300000 was not logical. The antifederalists believed that large representation is required to better understand the people’s needs and interests. They advocated for more state rights and pure democracy.
References
Ramos, M. (2009). Federalists. The First Amendment Encyclopedia. https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1184/federalists
Ramos, M. (2009). Anti-Federalists. The First Amendment Encyclopediahttps://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1175/anti-federalists
Frantzich, S. E., Ernst, H. R., & Frantzich, S. E. (2009). The political science toolbox: A research companion to American government. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
