Federalism vs. Anti-Federalism. Who could set rules and regulations for The States?

Essay by creditcardmailCollege, UndergraduateA+, March 1997

download word file, 3 pages 4.0

After the American people liberated themselves from the tyranny, and unfair oppression of British rule, they were free. They became they own country. Wait! Now who would set rules and regulations for the states? In order for them to be prosperous, they must have some order and unity. Questions like who, how, and why were dominant in the minds of the American people of the time.

Eventually a rift of political opinion formed among the ungoverned people, as the great minds, of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and others like them, set upon the arduous task of building a constitution, and governing body that would stand the test of time and serve the American people. As you can well imagine this was an extremely difficult task to complete with satisfaction from all parties. Although it would only take the approval of nine states, the founding fathers wanted the approval all thirteen states as to create a lasting union that would not come about, if done so grudgingly.

Each state had its own wants and demands. Some even held out until they were met. Rhode Island comes to mind. Rhode Island held until the end because they wanted the rights of the people protected. These wishes gave birth to the Bill of Rights.

While all these concerns and demands are prevalent, the biggest conflict of the people at the time, was; "How much power should be granted the federal government?" This is where the rift was formed. Either side was an extreme. Those who opposed granting much power to the federal government were dubbed the "Anti-federalists". On the other extreme were those who favored a song central government, dubbed the "Federalists". The key was to give just the right balance. During the Revolutionary War the central government had been too...