Free BookRatification The People Debate the Constitution 1787-1788

Get Ratification The People Debate the Constitution 1787-1788

Get Ratification The People Debate the Constitution 1787-1788

You can download in the form of an ebook: pdf, kindle ebook, ms word here and more softfile type. Get Ratification The People Debate the Constitution 1787-1788, this is a great books that I think are not only fun to read but also very educational.
Book Details :
Published on: -
Released on: -
Original language: -

Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788 Free bill of rights Essays and Papers - 123helpme Free bill of rights papers essays and research papers. Articles of Confederation - US Constitutions of 1777 and 1787 The United States of America is the product of two constitutions. The first the Articles of Confederation was passed on November 15 1777 ratified on February 2 ... An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic. It is important to keep in mind the difference between a Democracy and a Republic as dissimilar forms of government. FAQ: Basic facts about the Bill of Rights - Constitution Daily The president and CEO of the National Constitution Center answers listener questions about sanctuary cities presidential power and more. The Constitutional Convention - United States ... The role of The Constitutional Convention in the history of the United States of America. United States Constitution - Wikipedia The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. The Constitution originally comprising seven articles delineates the national ... 1791: US Bill of Rights (1st 10 Amendments) - with ... Online Library of Liberty. A collection of scholarly works about individual liberty and free markets. A project of Liberty Fund Inc. United States Bill of Rights - Wikipedia Prior to the ratification and implementation of the United States Constitution the thirteen sovereign states followed the Articles of Confederation created by the ... Natural Law and the United States Constitution The ... Natural Law and the United States Constitution. Bonus material: Click visionandvalues.org/p=9339 to watch Dr. Barkers lecture at the American Founders ... THE HISTORY OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT - GunCite Valparaiso U. Law Review; The History of the Second Amendment by David E. Vandercoy Rank: #312809 in eBooksPublished on: 2011-06-01Released on: 2010-11-23Format: Kindle eBook 42 of 43 people found the following review helpful.A battle for ourselvesBy Thomas M. CarpenterWe owe a huge debt of thanks to Professor Pauline Maier for taking the time to review the records of the various state ratifying conventions that led to approval of the U.S. Constitution. In college we read The Federalist Papers, and we talk about the constitutional debates (often from James Madison's notes), but we really do not focus upon the fact that what the men in Philadelphia did has nothing to do with what the various state conventions thought the constitution meant. From the beginning, the conventions were taken aback by the phrase "We the People," in the preamble, because of the significance it had for the creation of a government. Whether the people had such authority when the congress had authorized a mere tightening of the Articles of Confederation was not a foregone conclusion. It was clear that the Articles would not work. But, since the Articles often required unanimity, could something else be offered which did not What impact would this new central government have on the economic or political well-being of a state. How would peculiar insitutions such as slavery be impacted. Is it necessary to have a list of protections from federal governmental action in the same way that many state constitutions had a bill of rights against the states All of these questions are addressed by Professor Maier in a most approchable manner. Whether the reader is a scholar who reads the footnotes and makes additional personal commments; or, like me, someone who reads a lot of history and reviewed the footnotes for more detail, or for location of an interesting source; or, for many, who ignore the footnotes and just enjoy the book, this work is a pleasure. I have studied and written about Constitutional Law, in one way or another, for 37 years. It can be so dry that just the thought of picking up a text makes me thirsty. But, not so Professor Maier. I cannot honestly say that I had to stay up all night every night to finish the book. BUT, I can say that I kept wanting to find another stopping point, and another, until I realized it was so late I just had to stop if I was going to function the next day. This is virtually the only work of its kind. Professor Maier has filled an abyss in ratification material, and has made it fun to do so along the way.22 of 22 people found the following review helpful.Constitutional HistoryBy Leonard J. WilsonRatification, by MIT historian Pauline Maier, presents a detailed history of the debates in 1787-88 that preceded the ratification of the US Constitution. Today, two centuries plus two decades after the Constitution was ratified, it has long since achieved the status of holy writ, sacred scripture, never to be questioned. Part of its durability lies in the fact that it was questioned, vigorously, by many of prominent leaders at the time of its ratification. Dr. Maier has provided a detailed, state-by-state, history of the issues debated by these leaders in the 13 state ratifying conventions.Some of these state-by-state histories may be of interest primarily to the dedicated student of the early years of the republic. However, the issues and the "parties" (forerunners of the first political parties) are important to anyone who hopes to understand the Constitution and the thoughts of those who wrote and ratified it as the basis for the US federal government.The primary issues at the time of the Constitutional Convention included the following:* Under the Articles of Confederation, the Federal Congress could print paper money (but not coin) and incur debts but had no power of taxation. Not surprisingly, inflation destroyed the value of the currency, and the government was insolvent. Something needed to be done.* The Constitutional Convention was called by the Continental Congress to propose changes to the Articles of Confederation, not to replace them with a new charter. None-the-less, it the Convention drafted an entirely new Constitution and proposed that it be approved directly by the states, bypassing the Continental Congress. How should the Continental Congress respond to being sidelined in the approval process, its mandate ignored, and its existence threatened* Should a Bill of Rights be added to the proposed Constitution If so, should it be added before ratification or after* Leaving revision of the Constitution to the states prior to ratification would likely result in a plethora of proposed changes. The 13 states might well approve 13 different version of the Constitution. Then what* Postponing changes until after ratification presented the states, people and their ratification assemblies with the stark choice of "Take it or leave it". That might be hard to sell.The "Parties" that formed with respect to the above issues ranged from those strongly supportive of the Constitution as written to those unalterably opposed to ratification. With some over simplification, they might be described as follows:* Arch-Federalists (Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Henry Knox) who supported ratification of the Constitution as written. This group may have also hoped to create a strong national government, even at the expense of the power of the states, perhaps even to the extent of eventually merging the states into a single republic (although this could hardly be called "federal")* Federalists (James Madison): Ratify the Constitution as written with power vested in both the federal government and the states. Some members of this group also favored a federal power to veto state laws and objected to the equal representation of states in the senate.* Moderates: (Edmund Randolph) Seek modifications to the Constitution, including a Bill of Rights, prior to ratification, but support ratification even if the modifications are not included.* Anti-Federalists: (Richard Henry Lee, George Mason, Elbridge Gerry): Support ratification after appropriate amendments are made to the Constitution. Examples include: Add a Bill of Rights, enhance the representation of the voters by expanding the size of the Congress, curtail the powers of Congress and the federal judiciary.* Arch Anti-Federalists (Patrick Henry, Luther Martin, Robert Yates and John Lansing): Reject the Constitution. Keep the Articles of Confederation as the basis of the federal government, perhaps with some minor changes. Structure the Federal Government as an agreement among the states with the federal government having no power over the people. Only the states would have power (taxes, civil law, criminal law) over the people. The states would have equal votes in all parts of the federal government (like the current Senate, unlike the current House of Representatives).The two most interesting state Ratification Conventions were those held in Pennsylvania and Virginia.Pennsylvania Federalists made a vigorous effort (too vigorous, in fact) to become the first state to ratify the constitution. To speed ratification through the assembly, they refused to allow entries into the official records of any dissent to ratification and restricted distribution of the text of the constitution to parts of the state that were reliably pro-ratification. Not surprisingly, these tactics energized the opposition in Western Pennsylvania who, ironically, belonged to the state's "Constitutional Party", which had been formed a few years earlier to support the ratification of the Pennsylvania state constitution. These strong-arm tactics greatly prolonged the assembly's deliberations, allowing Delaware to become the "first state". Delaware's approval was a foregone conclusion since the constitution would prohibit Pennsylvania from taxing Delaware on imports entering the country through the port of Philadelphia and then shipped to Delaware.The Virginia Convention was significant in the number of prominent leaders and thinkers who participated: James Madison, James Monroe, Patrick Henry, George Mason, Edmund Randolph, Richard Henry Lee, and Henry ("Light Horse Harry") Lee were all present. Absent, but still highly influential via their extensive contact with Convention delegates, were Thomas Jefferson (serving as ambassador to France) and George Washington.As we all know, the Constitution was ratified and a Bill of Rights was soon added in the form of the first 10 amendments. They have both served us well for two plus centuries.The wonderful thing about reading history is that there is no end to the possibilities for further research. Reading Ratification raised two questions that linger in my mind, but are clearly beyond the scope of the book:1. Could the US have survived the foreign challenges from Britain, Spain, and France that arose in next decades if the Constitution had been rejected The national government under the Articles of Confederation was probably too weak to deal with these challenges. For details of these foreign challenges, see my reviews of the several books by Samuel Flagg Bemis (Jay's Treaty, Pinckney's Treaty, and John Quincy Adams and the Foundations of American Foreign Policy).2. What were the intentions of the authors of the Constitution regarding states' rights and state secession In addition to the obvious example of the Civil War, consider the earlier examples of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1799 which declared the Alien and Sedition Acts unconstitutional and void, the Hartford Convention of 1814-15 in which the New England states debated secession as a response to their opposition to the War of 1812, and the nullification of the "Tariff of Abominations" by South Carolina in 1832. The Civil War put a final answer to these issues in place, but it did not clarify the intentions of the founding fathers.85 of 89 people found the following review helpful.THE Great Debate - Then and NowBy applewoodI am only in the fourth chapter of this book (just as the public debate is heating up) but want to write this review, because 1) I can see the general form and substance of it so far, and (more importantly) 2) I get the feeling neither of the previous two reviewers have fully read it. (I say this because it is a long dense book but it was reviewed within a few days of publication, with neither review going into any details of the substance of the debates, nor how Maier distinctively presents them.)I'll keep this short and simple for now and add an update when I finally finish.What is so attractive about this book is how it purports to reveal a previously partially told story, one which we think is already complete and resolved, but is in fact still being debated today. Using extensive (all available) original sources, Maier turns her authoritative scholastic skills to perhaps the most important subject in our nation's history - the drafting and ratifying of our Constitution. For too long this has been an issue dominated by the (winning) Federalist protagonists - with scant or dismissive attention given to the (by implication disloyal, antagonist) "Antifederalists" (obviously not the name they chose for themselves), who ironically often took pseudonyms incorporating the name "federal", and were actually more federalist in really caring about a strong federation of states than the self-claimed "Federalists" were. The (centralizing) Federalist were unified mainly in wanting ratification to be a swift all or nothing proposal. The (decentralized) Antifederalist were anything but unified, which is why they lost.One of the things I like about Maier's approach is that she doesn't obviously and overtly set up this dichotomy of ideologies and characters - as they (ideas and people) were apparently more complex and evolving in regard to this. It does become clear however that from the very beginning there were real and strong difference in people's vision for the new country. There was also an imminent need to 'make it work'. What resulted was a profoundly idealistic but practical and, yet also secretive, partisan and elitist, document pushed through without much faith or interest in the democratic process...This is fascinating stuff! And it is perhaps even more important today as we look to move forward on a sound basis (needing to shore up our foundations), debating the same old issue of balance of powers between the government and the governed (expressed not just in the lopsided and formal arrangement of the separation of powers in the 'Three Branches of Government' - Legislative, Executive, and Judicial, but between the various States and the unified "Federal" government, and even more profoundly and directly between citizens and their elected appointed officials and the hired bureaucrats (the 'hidden iceberg' part of the government) - how we actually express our individuality and exercise our power to check the collective realm by how we freely choose - think, speak, vote, rule on juries, shop and invest.)Maier's writing style is dense and comprehensive, seeming authoritative to me (a nonacademic armchair historian), informed, thorough and balanced, yet also reading almost like a novel - a densely detailed, passionate and convoluted Russian novel.See all 79 customer reviews... Natural Law and the United States Constitution The ... Natural Law and the United States Constitution. Bonus material: Click visionandvalues.org/?p=9339 to watch Dr. Barkers lecture at the American Founders ... Articles of Confederation - US Constitutions of 1777 and 1787 The United States of America is the product of two constitutions. The first the Articles of Confederation was passed on November 15 1777 ratified on February 2 ... Free bill of rights Essays and Papers - 123helpme Free bill of rights papers essays and research papers. FAQ: Basic facts about the Bill of Rights - Constitution Daily The president and CEO of the National Constitution Center answers listener questions about sanctuary cities presidential power and more. THE HISTORY OF THE SECOND AMENDMENT - GunCite Valparaiso U. Law Review; The History of the Second Amendment by David E. Vandercoy The Constitutional Convention - United States ... The role of The Constitutional Convention in the history of the United States of America. 1791: US Bill of Rights (1st 10 Amendments) - with ... Online Library of Liberty. A collection of scholarly works about individual liberty and free markets. A project of Liberty Fund Inc. United States Bill of Rights - Wikipedia Prior to the ratification and implementation of the United States Constitution the thirteen sovereign states followed the Articles of Confederation created by the ... An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic. It is important to keep in mind the difference between a Democracy and a Republic as dissimilar forms of government. United States Constitution - Wikipedia The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. The Constitution originally comprising seven articles delineates the national ...
Free Download BookCore-Training für einen gesunden Rücken (German Edition)