The Patriot Post® · The Raging Debates
Welcome back to Philadelphia, the City of Brotherly Love and birthplace of a new nation. This morning, however, the “brotherly love” was not evident as the debate raged over the same issues that had plagued the conventions since the days of the Declaration of Independence — power and money!
What were the “power” issues? It’s simple. The question was who holds the power — small states, big states, or a balance of power between the states?
James Madison arrived with the Virginia Plan for the creation of the government and was joined by the Virginia delegates in proposing its adoption. James Patterson, a New Jersey delegate, came with his own plan that heightened the voice of the small states, ever fearful of the “big bullies” with money and population. How did the plans differ?
The Virginia Plan altered the weak national powers of the Articles of Confederation by authorizing the centralized government to make and enforce its own laws and collect the taxes to fund those laws. Madison envisioned that every citizen would exist under two governmental systems — national and state — and there would be a skillful balancing of the power between the two that today is described as federalism. (We’ll deal with county and city governments later, as Madison knew that states would control those aspects of government.)
Power would rest in three branches — the legislative, executive, and judicial — with the legislative branch wielding the most power because it would be the most “representative” of the people. The House of Representatives members would be elected directly by the people — let’s be honest, the white men — and the Senate would be comprised of members chosen by the state legislatures. The number of representatives in the Congress would be based on population and/or contributions to the federal tax base. The two houses of Congress would legislate in the areas where the states could not easily resolve the problems and handle issues related to interstate trade. The issue that Washington had encountered with Shay’s Rebellion — no federal military forces — would be solved by the right of the national government to call forth troops, even against a state in violation of constitutional law.
How did the delegates react? Just as you imagine. The large states raised their voices in praise and the small states reacted with fear; they had arrived doubting that a balance of power would truly be created. The Virginia Plan fulfilled all their worst nightmares!
James Patterson stepped forward and suggested what became known as the New Jersey Plan. His idea was that the delegates choose to keep the Articles of Confederation but make some changes that made it more workable, centered around one legislative house with additional powers to address the obvious shortcomings of the AOC. Congress would regulate trade and could collect taxes via import duties and a stamp tax to fund operational costs. The new document of government would be the supreme law of the land, and states could not make laws that conflicted. The executive branch would be a committee chosen by Congress and it would administer the laws and direct the military. The executive branch would select the judiciary, which then would settle disputes between states, between a state and the national government, and issues with other nations.
Two glaring differences predicted heated arguments: How would the number of representatives per state be decided? How much power would the national government have?
Into the gap would step Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth with The Great Compromise proposal. (Don’t you love that it’s not just an “Okay Compromise”?) The House of Representatives would be elected by the people, and the number of representatives by state would be determined by population. Each state would have two members of the Senate. Any issues dealing with money had to originate in the House since its members had a more direct connection with the electors. Yes!
But wait … how would population be determined? Who counted?
Let the debates continue.