Question

4- Going over the ratification debate between Federalists and anti-Federalist explain 2 main areas of conflict between these two groups. Then choose a federalist paper we have studied, bullet point 3 main arguments of the paper. After that conclude by at least 2 examples of current implications of the paper in our political system.

Answer 1

Answer:

Conflicts were regarding to the extraordinary power given to the president and the Senate which would have a tyrannical rule.

Conflict regarding the passage of the Bill of Rights.

Debates over ratification in the fall and winter of 1787 - 88.

Explanation:

According to the Philadelphia Convention - a new Constitution for United States provided for a strong government with an extraordinary amount of power given to the president and the senate. The Anti - Federalists charged that the new federal government resembled a monarchy in its concentration of power at the expense of liberty. The Federalists rejected the arguments of the Anti - Federalists by relocating it in the people. They on the other hand argued that since the constitution which represented the people had sought to instruct and control the institutions of government, thus all sovereignty rested with the people and that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights,

The Anti - Federalists held that a bill of rights was necessary to safeguard individual liberty.

Under the leadership of Madison, the first federal Congress attempted to fulfill this promise and proposed twelve amendments to the Constitution. In 1791, ten of them were ratified by the states, and these became the Bill of Rights.

Current implications:

In the United States,

1. There is a federal court system.

2. The lower house represented the people; it became the civic faith of the United States to which all Americans must unquestionably adhere. The emergence of this rambunctious middling democracy was the most significant consequence of the American Revolution.