The Constitution of the United States was developed and endorsed by politicians who were well read in political philosophy and were not elitists as Beard suggests. The founding fathers wanted to even the powers among different areas of government to form a strong central government without becoming an autocracy. They also had many differences in opinion and different theories on how things ought to be, which rules out the possibility that they were conspiring to make the constitution strictly beneficial to themselves as an elitist crowd. And during their instigated reform, they strove for popular approbation, showing a genuine desire to please the people.
The New Jersey Plan clearly followed the status quo set forth by the Articles of Confederation and did not contain a strong central government. This gave the states too much jurisdiction to the point that the states could not unite as one mighty power because of their conflicting procedures.
The Articles of Conferderation, ratified in 1781. ...
The Articles of Confederation, ratified in 1781. T...
The Articles of Conferderation, ratified in 1781. ...In its place, the founding fathers compromised the Virginia Plan, which led to the establishment of a central authority to help unite the states in the interest of all the people.
Also, the fathers disagreed on legislative representation. One side thought the legislature should be proportionate to population, while the other side believed it should be equal among all states. There were pros and cons to each idea, but they came to a compromise by having both, thus pleasing both the small states and the large states.
The writers of the Constitution were trying very much to create a Constitution acceptable to many different types of constituents. They were attempting to please the majority of the states by making the constitution fair and equal for everyone. The state legislatures even had their citizens view and vote on the constitution in Rhode Island, so eager were they...