The initial purpose of the Convention was for the delegates to amend the Articles of Confederation; however, the ultimate outcome was the proposal and creation of a completely new form of government.
What was the final outcome of the ratification debate?
Finally, after long debate, a compromise (the “Massachusetts Compromise”) was reached. Massachusetts would ratify the Constitution, and in the ratifying document strongly suggest that the Constitution be amended with a bill of rights.
What is the ratification process?
Congress must pass a proposed amendment by a two-thirds majority vote in both the Senate and the House of Representatives and send it to the states for ratification by a vote of the state legislatures. This process has been used for ratification of every amendment to the Constitution thus far.
What were the strongest arguments against the Constitution?
The Anti-Federalists had several complaints with the Constitution. One of their biggest was that the Constitution did not provide for a Bill of Rights protecting the people. They also thought the Constitution gave too much power to the federal government and too little to individual states.
What were five issues involved in the ratification debate?
The ratification debate involved the following five issues: centralization of power, the powers granted to the executive branch, the Bill of Rights, the issue of slavery and whether the formation of the constitution was legal.
Why is the ratification process important?
The ratifying conventions served the necessary function of informing the public of the provisions of the proposed new government. They also served as forums for proponents and opponents to articulate their ideas before the citizenry. Significantly, state conventions, not Congress, were the agents of ratification.
What was the next step in the ratification process?
Once the Constitution of the United States was written in 1787 at the Philadelphia convention, the next step was ratification. This is the formal process, outlined in Article VII, which required that nine of the thirteen states had to agree to adopt the Constitution before it could go into effect.
How does a country ratify a new constitution?
Ratification was a three-step process. First, a country’s parliament or parliamentary bodies had to approve the Charter, if that was foreseen in the country’s constitution. In the British case, for example, that meant votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords. Second, a country’s head of state had to sign the Charter.
How many days did it take to ratify the Constitution?
Eleven days after the delegates at the Philadelphia convention approved it, copies of the Constitution were sent to each of the states, which were to hold ratifying conventions to either accept or reject it. This approach to ratification was an unusual one.
Why was the ratification of the Constitution rejected?
A proposal to allow each of the states their own discretion in deciding its method of ratification was rejected. Philosophically, by having conventions representing the will of the people directly, this process would make the new federal Constitution superior to any specific legislature.