Based on what we know today, critique the arguments and compromises at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, as well as the ratification debate between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. If a new constitutional convention were held today and you were asked to represent your state, what changes might you suggest to the constitutional framework in the areas of federal versus state power, individual rights and equality?

Answer 1

The arguments and compromises at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 laid the foundation for the United States government, but they were not without flaws. The three major compromises during the convention were the Great Compromise, the Three-Fifths Compromise, and the Commerce Compromise. While these compromises helped to address the concerns of different states and regions, they also perpetuated inequality and failed to fully protect individual rights.

The Great Compromise, which established a bicameral legislature consisting of a House of Representatives and a Senate, was a necessary compromise to bridge the divide between states with small and large populations. However, it led to disproportionate representation in the Senate, where each state is equally represented regardless of population. This has led to an imbalance of power, where a vote in a smaller state carries more weight than a vote in a larger state.

The Three-Fifths Compromise, which counted enslaved persons as three-fifths of a person for the purpose of determining representation and taxation, was a deeply flawed compromise that perpetuated the institution of slavery. It devalued the humanity of enslaved individuals and denied them their rights, while granting slaveholding states increased representation and political power. This compromise undermined the principles of equality and individual rights that were supposedly at the core of the new nation.

The Commerce Compromise, which allowed Congress to regulate interstate commerce while prohibiting the taxation of exports, balanced the interests of states reliant on exports and those concerned about federal overreach. However, the compromise did not address the issue of slavery and allowed for the continuation of the slave trade until 1808. This compromise displayed a lack of moral courage and failed to confront the deep contradictions between the lofty ideals of liberty and the harsh reality of enslavement.

Moving to the ratification debate between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, it was mainly centered around the lack of a bill of rights in the proposed Constitution. The Anti-Federalists argued that without explicit protections for individual rights, the new federal government would have too much power and could potentially infringe upon the liberties of the people. Eventually, the Bill of Rights, consisting of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, was added to address these concerns and safeguard individual rights.

If a new constitutional convention were held today and I were asked to represent my state, I would suggest several changes to the constitutional framework. Firstly, I would propose a more proportional representation in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, taking into account the population of each state while ensuring fair and equal representation for all. This would rectify the imbalance of power and enhance the democratic principles of the government.

Secondly, I would advocate for the removal of any remaining compromises or provisions that perpetuate inequality or discrimination. Specifically, I would propose the elimination of the Electoral College, which can allow for the election of a president who did not win the popular vote. This change would ensure that the voice of every citizen is valued equally in the election process.

Lastly, I would suggest the addition of stronger and more explicit protections for individual rights, ensuring that all citizens are guaranteed the fundamental liberties enshrined in the Constitution. This could include expanding the rights to privacy, voting, and equal protection under the law, among others, ensuring that the government cannot infringe upon these core rights.

Overall, a new constitutional convention today should aim to address the flaws and shortcomings of the original framework, striving to create a government that truly embodies the principles of equality, individual rights, and democratic representation.