In the late 1780s, prominent political leaders in the United States came to realize that the government created under the Articles of Confederation was ineffective and impractical and could not serve a nation in managing relationships among states nor handle foreign nations. The fear of creating a government that was too powerful was the basis for foundation of the Articles of Confederation.
It created a weak national government that allowed for most of the power to be under the control of the state legislatures. Under the Articles, Congress had no means to prevent war or security gainst foreign invasion. The federal government could not check the quarrels between states or regulate interstate trade, collect taxes, enforce laws. These weaknesses of the confederation distressed political leaders; in response, they requested a assemblage in order to revise the Articles and revive the ailing nation.
In May of 1787, representatives from each state gathered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to find the means of turning the United States government into an efficient and powerful business that conducted affairs The delegates meeting at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 ere given expressed consent to alter and revise the Articles of Confederation. With the exception of those from New Jersey and Virginia, the delegates intended to revise the Articles.
One of 55 delegates, William Paterson and his colleagues Roger Sherman, Ellsworth, and Dickinson offered a list of suggestions for revising the Articles of Confederation in his New Jersey Plan. Paterson was a delegate from New Jersey who favored the weak national government that the Articles created. Patterson asserted the rights of the small states against the large states and wished to expand upon the Articles aking a more practical and efficient government.
The New Jersey Plan suggested the Congress maintain its unicameral house system, with states equally represented. They proposed that the Congress would have the power to regulate interstate trade and could have closely limited power to tax. It also called for a federal Executive with persons appointed by Congress who could be removed on the request of a majority of the state governors. The New Jersey plan also allowed for a federal Judiciary with a single supreme tribunal appointed by an executive.
The New Jersey plan offered a series of olutions to the growing concern that the government was too weak under the Articles. Pattersons proposals were supported by those who discouraged a strong national Just as Patterson created a plan, James Madison created a plan that offered solutions to the flawed Articles of Confederation. Prior to their arrival at the Philadelphia Convention, Madison and the other Virginian delegates formulated a revised document that would eliminate the Articles of Confederation and create an entirely new document.
The Virginia Plan called for a stronger national government. The Plan would create a ederal system with the existence of two governments, national and state, each given a certain amount of authority. Under the Virginia Plan, the national government would have the power to collect its own taxes and make and enforce its own laws. The government would consist of three separate branches, the legislative, the judicial and the executive.
The legislative branch, under the Virginia Plan, was bicameral, with the number of representatives in each house based on proportional representation, or the number of people in each state. The representatives of the lower house, or the House of Representatives, would be popularly elected and the representatives of the upper house, or Senate, would be chosen by the lower house. Congress would also have the power to veto any state law in conflict with national law, and to accept new states to the Union.
In addition, an Executive branch would have the authority to execute national law and the Judiciary branch would consist of one or more supreme tribunals and of inferior tribunals. Both the Judiciary and the Executive branches would be able to override and veto acts of Congress creating a system of checks and balances. While both the New Jersey and the Virginia Plan offered solutions to the problems governing the United States created by the Articles of Confederation, there were major differences between the two plans.
The major differences debated at the Philadelphia Convention concerned the debate over what powers to give the new government, the creation of subsequent branches, checks and balances, and the principles of representation, singular of plural executive. After hours of delegations, it seemed as if neither Plan could be accepted by small states who did not want proportional epresentation and those who feared a tyrannical leader of there was a singular executive. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention disputed over the two proposals.
After three days of deliberations, the New Jersey Plan was rejected due to the overwhelming demand to create an effective national government. Despite the advantages of both plans, neither posed a solution to the fears of all the delegates consequently the Virginia Plan was also discarded. What they created instead was a bundle of compromises. The new Delegates compromised to secure the integrity of the smaller states and relinquish the ears of those who believed the central government was too powerful.
If I had been a delegate to the Philadelphia Convention, I would have opposed the idea of a plural executive and favored that of a singular executive. I would support the to have With an appropriate number of advisors, the American people could be assured that an Executive leader could be relied on make quality decisions to ensure the success of the nation. In addition, a single executive is more likely to be responsible for the decisions made and in effect be more prudent in the process.
It seems that an executive committee ould create chaos in the executive branch by the way of disagreement on how to handle the affairs of the nation. That kind of uncertainty would not assure the people that Alexander Hamilton asked, And what even is the Virginia Plan but democracy checked by democracy…? The parts of the VA plan that are democracy checked by democracy are the provisions that provide for three separate branches that can veto the other and override decisions. This complicated system of checks and balances is the basis of the government that the Constitution of the United States created.