Federalsit for life

The creation of the constitution was a time that brought out supporters and opponents. This was a time when the US just defeated Britain in the Revolutionary War. Also the Article of Confederations was approved by all the states, but it was an inadequate solution to the problems occurring in the United States. The people who opposed the constitution was people whom were afraid of returning to a monarchy, so they don’t want a strong government. The supporters had a more logical reason for the ratification of the constitution because the Articles of Confederations was inadequate, check and balance system, and the system of republic.

The supporters had a more reasonable argument because the Articles of Confederation was an inadequate document. The constitution made a stronger country. This is by making the central government powerful, but just having a systems of checks and balances. This is a major factor that the anti-federalist is missing in their argument. The anti-federalist want all the power to reside in the states because of their fear of returning to a monarchy. They also believed that the constitution subordinated the states rights.

The supporters had a more reasonable argument because the check and balance system. The anti-federalist believed that the executive branch would have to much power. That the federal government power was diminishing and being transferred from the states. The federalist argument was more house supportive because the constitution had a strong sense of check and balances. The Executive branch was being supervised by the legislature branch, and also the judicial branch. Each of the branches had a foot in the other ones problems. All of the branches are needed to make a decision.

The supporters had a more reasonable argument because the system of republic. The anti-federalist was afraid of a strong central government, because they didn’t want to return to a monarchy. This is address in the Virginia plan and the New Jersey plan because these plans setup the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Virginia plan benefited the large states and the New Jersey plan benefited the small states. This is another example of check and balances. So, even though the states don’t have as much power as the anti-federalist want it still have every state have representation in say so of the country.

The federalist had a better argument because the Articles of Confederation was inadequate. It didn’t help the situation that the country at all. The balance and check system help keep each part of the government power limited. The system of republic was very helpful and efficient. The federalist argument was better because it benefited the country. This is why the federalist argument is better.