opposing views of ratification compared

1. Anti-Federalists vs. Federalists Debate

2. Who were the Federalists and Anti-Federalists?
Anti-Federalists: People who opposed ratifying the Constitution
– George Mason, Edmond Randolph, and Elbridge Gerry
Each had attended the Philadelphia Convention but refused to sign the
Constitution
– John Hancock, Samuel Adams, and Richard Henry Lee
All signed the Declaration of Independence, but opposed at first the
ratification of the new Constitution
Federalists: People who favored ratification
--John Jay, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison

3. Alexander Hamilton
James Madison
John Jay

4. Prominent Anti-federalists
-Cato’s Letters
-Brutus
-Centinel
-Federal Farmer
Anti-Federalists were more concerned with protecting the rights of
the individual people and states than promoting the pubic good as a
whole.
Patrick Henry

5. George Mason
 Anti-Federalist
 Virginian Plantation owner
 Wrote the Virginia Declaration of
Rights which becomes the model
for the Bill of Rights
 Refused to sign the Constitution
until a Bill of Rights was included

6. • Most Americans were very
suspicious of government, but
the Anti-Federalists were
especially mistrustful of strong
government.
– They feared they had created a
government that the people
could not control

7. DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW
 Federalists
argued for
• a strong national
government
• Three branches of
government filled with
men of “reputation”
• a president to lead
executive branch
• No Bill of Rights
(Unnecessary)
 Antifederalists
argued
• States should have power
• Legislative branch should
be strongest branch of
government
• A strong president could
become a tyrant
• A Bill of Rights was needed
to protect the rights of
Americans

8. An Unfair Advantage?
 The Federalists publish
their essays in New
York newspapers and
pamphlets in 1787-
1789
 Newspapers support
the Federalist side and
publish more Federalist
writings than Anti-
Federalist writings!

9. The Federalists Papers
 John Jay, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison wrote
the Federalist Papers to get support for the Constitution.
The Federalist addressed issues such as representation,
rights of individuals and majority rule.
 The Anti-Federalists respond in the “Objections to the
Constitution of Government formed by the Convention”,
which argued the fear of a strong executive branch and
the absence of a Bill of Rights.

10. Does the national government have too much
power?
• The supremacy clause
means that all the
national government’s
laws are superior to
laws made by the
states
• It will only be a matter
of time until the state
governments are
destroyed
• The Constitution
provides protections
for the state
governments by
specifically reserving
certain powers for the
states
• This will prevent the
states from being
destroyed by the
national government
Anti-Federalists Federalists

11. Does the national government have too much
power?
• The necessary and
proper clause is too
general
• It gives too much
power to the national
government
• It is dangerous not to
list all the powers of
government in order to
put clear limits on
them
• The necessary and
proper clause and
general welfare
clause are needed if
the national
government is to do
the things it is
responsible for doing
Anti-Federalists Federalists

12. Does the national government have too much
power?
• The Constitution gives too much
power to the executive branch of
government
• It will soon become a monarchy
• A strong executive branch is
necessary
• It is needed if the national
government is to fulfill its
responsibilities
• Congress and the U.S. Supreme
Court have checks on the use of
power by the Executive branch
• The executive branch cannot
become a monarchy
• The power of the national
government are separated and
balanced among the three
branches
• No one branch can dominate the
others
• This system makes it impossible
for any person or group to take
complete control of government
Anti-Federalists Federalists

13. Does the Constitution provide for republican
government?
• Throughout history, the only
places where republican
governments worked had been in
small communities
• There, the people had similar
wealth and the same values
• People who are not too rich or too
poor are more likely to have civic
virtue
• Such people are more likely to
agree on what is best for the
common good
• The new nation would be too large
and diverse
• The people will not be able to
agree on their common welfare
• History has proven that selfish
groups destroyed all the small
republics of the past
• The civic virtue of the citizens
was not enough to keep people
from seeking their own interests
• People did not work for the
common good
• A large republic where power is
divided between the national and
state governments is a better
solution
• It is also better to organize
government based on checks
and balances
• Under such a government, it will
be more difficult for special
interests to work against the
common good
Anti-Federalists Federalists

14. Does the Constitution provide for republican
government?
• Free government requires
the active participation of
the people
• The national government
will be located far from
where most people live
• People will be unable to
participate in government
• As a result, the only way
government will be able to
rule will be with military
force
• The result will be tyranny
• The national government
cannot become a tyranny
• The limits placed on
government by the system
of separation of powers
and checks and balances
will prevent it
• Government will be so
good at protecting the
rights of the people that it
will soon gain their loyalty
and support
Anti-Federalists Federalists

15. Is a Bill of Rights needed for the Constitution?
• The Constitution does not include
a bill of rights
• A bill of rights is necessary to
protect people against the power
of the national government
• There is no mention of freedom of
religion, speech, press, or
assembly
• Since these freedoms are not in
the Constitution, government is
free to violate them
• Americans recently fought a war to
secure their fundamental rights
• They do not want a constitution
that places those rights in
jeopardy
• A bill of rights is not needed
• The Constitution is the ultimate
protection for people’s rights and
the people are the ultimate
sovereigns
• The Constitution does not give
government the power to deprive
people of their rights
• It gives government only limited
power to do certain things
• A bill of rights will give the
impression that the people can
expect protection only for the
rights that are actually listed
• The Constitution protects a
number of rights by requiring
writs of habeas corpus, and
prohibiting ex post facto laws
and bills of attainder
Anti-Federalists Federalists

16. Issue Anti-Federalists
Fear
Federalists Response
The
Bigges
t
threat
to
The
peopl
e
The biggest threat
to the people is
the tyranny of
the
government. If
a government is
too big, it will
have too much
power, and
consolidate,
eventually
leading to the
The largest threats to the
people is having a small
government in which those
in the minority will never
have power. If there is a
large government the
diverse populations will
ensure that a small group
of people, a dangerous
minority with radical ideas
does not gain power.

17. Issue
Anti-Federalists Fear Federalists Response
Protection
of
Individual
Rights
The rights guaranteed
to the people
should be included
in the Constitution
or else they are not
guaranteed
The checks and balances
are enough to keep
the government from
taking the rights of the
people away.

18. Issue Anti-Federalists Fear Federalists
Response
Representatio
n
The government
should be run by
representatives that
are very similar to
those who they are
representing. This
new government
will encourage only
the well educated
elite to be
representatives who
are using this as an
opportunity to gain
The federal
government
should be run
by well
educated and
experienced
men, the elite.
These are the
men that are
best educated
and will be
able to make
the best

19. Issue Anti-Federalists Fear Federalists Response
People will
not hold
governme
nt
accountab
le
A free government
requires the active
support of the
people. The new
government would
be so large that
people would not
be involved in
government,
leading eventually
to the government
taking too much
power.
The central
government created
cannot take the
rights of the people
because of the many
checks and balances
in the Constitution

20. Issue
Anti-Federalists
Fear
Federalists Response
Power given
to the
federal
governme
nt
The limits of the
power given to
the federal
government are
not clear and
will result in the
president
becoming a
monarch. More
limits should be
made through a
Bill of Rights.
The checks and
balances in the
Constitution will be
effective in
restraining the
power of the federal
government. The
president does not
have the power to
make laws, so
he/she cannot
become a monarch

21. Why did the Federalists agree to add a
Bill of Rights to the Constitution?
• A compromise was reached on the
issue of a bill of rights
– The Federalists made this
compromise to get enough support for
the Constitution so that it would be
ratified
– They agreed that when the first
Congress was held, it would draft a
bill of rights
• The argument to add a bill of rights
was a victory for the Anti-
Federalists
– It was an important addition to the
Constitution and has been of great
importance in the protection of the
basic rights of the American People