As we study the founding of our nation, consider what it must have been like to be a delegate to the Constitutional Convention during the hot summer months of 1787. This week's assignment requires you to follow the link http://teachingamericanhistory.org/convention/themes/ and research the major themes addressed by the delegates. Give a report (200 word minimum) that addresses two of the issues - one of which you agree with the decision reached by the delegates, and one of which you disagree. Explain why you agree or disagree. For example, on July 26 the convention voted that a president should serve a seven year term of office, but then would be ineligible for reelection. Later this decision was changed, of course, but do you agree with the original plan? How would it affect politics in the U.S. today?
I am so impressed with your posts from the previous two weeks! Great job guys - keep it up!
Personally, I’m not sure what I would have done if I were in the position that these great men upheld, but we do have our own opinions. Some decisions that were made are easy to agree with, but some are questionable. Of course we see how some of these propositions are not relevant for today so that always affects our opinions, but I just want to point out some of the topics I agree with and the ones I don’t. That is what makes our country great, voice.
ReplyDeleteThe rule of secrecy. This is a rule that can cause mixed emotions. I can see both sides of the argument, but overall I agree with this policy. Allowing the thoughts and inner workings of the Constitutional Convention to become public can cause problems. Keeping the secrecy of the government can allow for open thoughts and workings. They could work without the outside influence of the opinionated people. These men were able to make their decisions based on what was best for the people.
Hamilton’s Plan. This one really made me think about the governments place and the individuals that are a part of it. When I read some information about this topic, I took it that Hamilton put a lot of impact on man’s power. The government is not meant to be tyrannical therefore the individuals should not crave the power, but should want what is best for the country. Hamilton promoted one individual, but the democracy that works so well is ruled by more than one person, but the entire nation as one.
God has truly blessed us with a wonderful foundation and a wonderful group of men who laid down a foundation for our nation. What would you have done if you were put there in their situation?
ReplyDeleteNow most of you see the topic slave trade and immediately think how evil it is and wrong; and yes I agree slavery is very wrong. But the now independent people were trying to create unity in their nation. And can you get a person to go along with something that takes away a huge portion of their income? Almost always, the answer is no, but the men there didn’t just take the exact demands of the states threatening to not join, they created a compromise. The compromise said that congress could do nothing but discourage slave trade through taxation until 1808. This was a big change from the original proposal which said congress couldn’t stop trade and they couldn’t discourage it with taxation. So in the end I agree with what these delegates did on this issue. They made a small compromise that allowed slave trade for a while to keep peace and then shut slave trade to the U.S. for good.
But, I don’t believe all the things the delegates presented were right. Like the New Jersey Plan. The New Jersey plan wanted to stay with the one chamber congress that the Articles of Confederation had set up. The New Jersey plan sought to do the original intention of the Continental Congress, something I cannot agree with. As odd as that sounds, to be against the meetings intent, many of the people at the convention felt that the Articles were too weak and eventually they thought it was better to create a new system completely(and I agree with this change completely). The articles didn’t allow the government to tax, they didn’t have a court system, national government couldn’t gather an army, and national government couldn’t influence the countries trade. Now change all that and you basically have a completely new document. The New Jersey plan was too weak to ever be passed.
Emily, wow. I would love to be mean and disagree with you, but I have to admit I feel the same about you with both of those policies. The rule of secrecy makes perfect sense, like the article said we've all seen politicians in the spotlight and most of the time they don't think clearly with everyone breathing down their back, I mean do you? And the I love the fact how you pointed out that Hamilton's Plan put too much emphasis on the single man's power and that each man should not crave that power. Great job Emily!
ReplyDeleteThe Connecticut Compromise was presented as a refinement to the Virginia Plan, which gave the idea of have a bicameral legislature but no government for the individual states. The Connecticut Compromise suggested that the number of members in Senate for each state be the same regardless of the population, and the representatives number of members in the House be based on the state’s population. I agree with the decision to include the Connecticut Compromise in our nation’s Constitution and to give us an equal representation.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of slave trade in the Constitution first stated that Congress could never prohibit slave trading or put taxes on it. If they had kept that decision we very well could still have slavery today, but after careful consideration, they decided that Congress could not outlaw slavery until 1808, but Congress could issue taxes that would discourage it. I don’t completely disagree with their decision. I understand that they were trying to prevent an economic disaster in the South and they were probably trying to keep as much peace as they could. Still, I don’t agree with their decision, but I am glad they changed their minds and let Congress abolish slavery eventually.
Rachel good comment, but I have to say that without the decision on slave trade who knows what would've happened to our southern states? To quote South Carolinian Rutledge, "..The true question at present is(was for our purposes) whether the Southern States shall or not be parties of the Union." What if some had not joined? Would there have been a war against a small band of southern states? Could they have expanded and created a stonger Confederacy then we saw in the Civil war? I think that the only decision they could make was to compromise.
ReplyDeleteMan, I tell you what, these guys must have had a long, stressful time getting all this stuff together. All the debating and back and forth would have driven me nuts. Kudos to these people for getting our country to what it is today. While it isn't perfect, it's much better than any other out there.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I understand from the Slave Trade topic, at first most people wanted to keep slave trading legal. Article VII, Section 4 states:
“No tax or duty shall be laid by the Legislature… on the migration or importation of such persons as the several States shall think proper to admit; nor shall such migration or importation be prohibited.”
This pretty much says Congress can do nothing about slave trade at the present time. And this was set because North and South Carolina and Georgia demanded that they do so. I don't think Congress should be pushed around like that.
A month later, Congress releases a new section, section 9, saying, slave trading is still legal, but we have the right to put taxes on the importation of them if we want. This is still as equally wrong as the first section.
However, January 1st of next year, the importation of slaves was banned. Slavery, was not however. Although the banning of slavery itself did not come till 1865, I think the stopping of the importation of slaves was a good start for the United States. Because of this, I have to agree with the Slave Trade theme.
•~•
The Hamilton Plan was a plan shown to Congress to refine the New Jersey and Virginia plans. Hamilton stated that he thought that “governors of the states should be selected by the national government along the lines of the previous colonial administration”. I definitely do not think this should be allowed at all. Maybe back in the early 1800's this didn't seem like a bad idea, but if he saw the things happening in our government today and the people running, I don't think he would want those people selecting governors for our states. This is a problem because if the national government was mostly democratic, then the would obviously pick democrats to be governors of every state. I think the people should have a say in who they want to run their state, not the government.
Hamilton also stated he thought people in certain branches should hold there office for a lifetime such as the Legislature and Executive branches. Again, I don't think this is good at all. Having the same people over 10-50 years is a little to much in my opinion. We need to let new, fresh people in so they can share their ideas with others. Letting someone who has been in office for 30 years remain is almost like giving them lots of power. I just don't like the idea, so I would have to disagree with Hamilton's Plan.
Wow, I honestly don't think I could have done it. As most of you know, I don't get along with a large number of people, in small, closed in spaces, very well. The delegates had a lot to put up with.
ReplyDeleteThe Rule of Secrecy
This is a tough one. I can definately see both sides of it. Some people would say that we have a right to know about things that concern us. While others (like myself) agree with it.
The delegates must have saw that making everything public knowledge could/would be a problem. By keeping it a secret, it doesn't get the input of the people that are "flying by the seat of their pants". Instead it gets thought about and discussed between a number of people, who then make a decision based on what is best for the people. (Although it would be interesting to know some of the things they talk about).
I'm using Mr. Akers' example because I couldn't find one I liked.
Should a president be allowed to serve an eight year term and then be ineligible for re-election?
I disagree with this in two ways.
#1. I don't think that a president should serve a seven year term. If they were allowed seven years then we would have very high potential for a lot of problems. Let's say that the president we elected wasn't what we thought he would be. We would have to wait seven years to fix our "mistake".
#2. I srongly disagree with a president being ineligible for re-election after one term. Let's say that the president we had was "perfect" and his first term is over. He is running as an incumbent and his opponent is questionable (there are "holes" in his promises). Now, what is the most obvious thing that would happen? We would re-elect the incumbent and hope that someone as good (or better than him) runs when the next election comes around.
Thanks David! I really liked the point you made about slave trade. I think, especially with issues being discussed today, we try to do things impulsively. While this gets the job done quickly, it may cause even more problems. When people feel they are being forced into something or to do something, often times they resist. Not because they disagree, but just because they were told to forcefully. With the slavery issue, a economic downfall paired with angry people would not have been a good equation. So this was a great point to make!!
ReplyDeleteThe Constitutional Convention sounds really boring and miserable, kind of like this homework assignment; but I guess it was very important and necessary (unlike this homework assignment).
ReplyDeleteOne of these issues that I do agree with is the Necessary and Proper Clause (or the “elastic clause”). It states that: The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. Ah, very, very, very important.. Without this clause we would not be able to amend or change or revise the Constitution at all. That means that if there was a problem with the constitution we could not do anything about it, and we wouldn’t have those 27 or 28 amendments that we have today. Imagine if there was a typo in the constitution. We wouldn’t be able to fix it. Imagine if there was a typo in the necessary and proper cause!—then the clause would be useless and we wouldn’t be able to amend it anyways because it would be the one with the problem, taking away our ability to amend the Constitution! This is an extremely important clause and it is a very good idea to make the constitution amendable or changeable as the US changes
I don’ think that the New Jersey Plan was that good of an idea. It gave equal power and representation to all states, which was kind of unfair to the fatter states like Virginia. Since the bigger states have more people in them to represent shouldn’t they have more power? With this plan this plan 2 million people could have just as much power as 20,000. Bad idea. But I do think that all of the states should be treated somewhat fairly, this is why our bicameral legislature was such a good addition to the Constitution. I also didn’t like the way the power was distributed among the states and government.
first im gonna comment on the Virginia plan. I think this plan was absolutly necessary for the survival of the US. but however, i think it is somewhat radical in its approch of the destruction of the state gov't. i think most importantly the issue of foreign invasion, being that our relations with England where not positive to say the least. next i think it was important to adress the fact that states would not always agree and more than likely would disagree most of the time. if we were not united we could not stand and there would ultimately be anarchy and self-destruction.
ReplyDeletenow to adress wat i disagree with, i disagree with judicial review and judicial powers. first, i think the courts should be powerful in the govt and have a say in decicions. but if you rele examine it who is there to hold the courts accountable. depending on the judges views and interpretations something may or may not be declared unconstitional. i think thats maybe one of the only things i disagree with and only minorly. i think its important to remember the reliance on providence that our founding fathers had and that tho they were sinners just as we are, they followed God and believed in biblical foundations that set a foundation for our nation.
ya colby i think u bring up a very good point about slavery, i think slavery was very negative but however i think its important to see that our founding fathers didnt get everything right but they somewhat could see the problem
ReplyDeleteya man david u point our one thing i think is very important kinda like colby, after reading ur first paragraph i knew it was gonna be good. i think thats one thing to take into account when looking at the big picture of slavery and understanding why and where it came from and seeing many ppl that were white didnt agree with slavery
ReplyDeleteThe Rule of Secrecy: I think that this was a good thing. Because what if they where just throwing out ideas that weren't that great or some people may have been offended at what they may say. And the things that did leak out where authorized and probably would have been passed after long discussion. So I agree with that part.
ReplyDeleteThe Slave Trade: I don't believe in slavery so I think that they should have gotten rid of slavery sooner. But I do believe that if they had the Civil War would have started sooner and at that time they couldn't afford it (money wise).I think that Luther Martin was right when he said: "Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring the judgment of heaven on a Country." The judgement of heaven means that God created us all equal and it's wrong to enslave people because they're different than you are.
What is almost unbelievable is the fact that what the men at the Constitutional Convention had to deal with. They sit in a crowded room that was unbareably hot with all the clothes they wore and stressed out as they where with the nation's future in their hands they never really complained but just got the job done. Where now days political figures would be goin crazy having to deal with such heat and stress as those great men went through.
ReplyDeleteThere is one thing out of all the things that I agree with the most and that is the Rule of Secracy. Why I agree is because they had to keep the conversations and other things that were said in the Convention from the public. If they hadn't it would have been like a bomb if the right person had gotten some of that information and tried to turn people against what the Convention was doing.
The one thing I was mostly against was the slave trade. The weird thing that most people don't realize is that most of the fathers of this country at sometime had a slave for example George Washington. What makes me upset is that the people at the Convention could only discourage the slave trade in the south by taxes and other ways. On January 1, 1808, they finally could put the end to the horrible business of the slave trade. In the end the delegates voted 7 "yes" and 4 "no" for the prohibition of the slave trade.
This assignment has really helped me to realize all that was brought up at the Convention and what the men that were there had to go through
I agree with what Emily C. had to say about what it would have been like to have been in those mens positions and went through the stresses they all had. It would have been extremely hard for us to even understand half of the things being discussed there.
ReplyDeleteGuffey you said close to the same thing that I did. I do agree that slavery is wrong and they should have never had that problem but I see that they kept it so that the Southern states wouldn't seceed earlier than they did.So that was a really good comment.
ReplyDelete"The government is not meant to be tyrannical therefore the individuals should not crave the power, but should want what is best for the country. Hamilton promoted one individual, but the democracy that works so well is ruled by more than one person, but the entire nation as one." Emily I agree with you on this, the government should help the people not focus on what would be best for them completely. And in my opinion the right thing is not always the most popular choice but it always pays out in the end.
ReplyDeleteWhat J Byrd said about all of this being really boring and miserable is true. What he did mention that stood out to me is that the Convention was an important and necessary part to the basis of our government and history today. Its something that should not be forgotten or thought of as just another old boring thing that we have to study in school.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to start with The Rule of Secrecy. The Rule of Secrecy was created by a commity to propose "rules for conducting business." By May 29 the commity had come up with twenty-two rules for conduct. One of these rules was the rule of secrecy. The rule states "that nothing spoken in the be printed, or otherwise published or communicated without leave."
ReplyDeleteI agree with this because if the information that the congress was going over got out it could cause all kinds of arguments among the colonies. A leak information could also allow citizens to influence the votes of the deligates. In conclusion to this point I think that the rule of secrecy was a good rule.
The second item I am going to talk about is the slave trade. Slavery will all ways be a touchy subject. The main point I would like to make about this subject is that slavery was abolished. I think that the congress could have gone about the issue a little better. The Southern (these deligates are the ones for slavery) deligates used the argument that the congress should think of the issue rationally not in terms of a religious or personal moral view. Now to the reason I disagee with the way the congress handled the issue. I beleive that the govrnment should have been able to abolish slavery whenever it wanted to. Also I do agree with the descision to allow the government to tax the states that are using slave labor. The reason I do not agree is because people could interprate the constitution to mean that the government can tax states as a punishment for other reasons.
Hamilton’s Plan really made me think about the government’s place and the individuals that are in power within it. When I read some information about this topic, I took it that Hamilton put quite a bit of emphasis on a man’s power. The government is not meant to be a tyrannical ruling body, therefore the individuals within that body should not crave total power, but should want what is best for the country. Hamilton promoted one individual, but the democracy that works so well is ruled by more than one person, but the entire nation as one, and I agree with his point here
ReplyDeleteShould a president be allowed to serve an eight year term and then be ineligible for re-election? I disagree with this in two ways. First of all, I don't think that a president should serve a seven year term. If they were allowed seven years then we would have very high potential for a lot of problems like tyrrany and economic collapse. Let's say that the president we elected wasn't what we thought he would be, and the economy failed. We would then have to wait seven years to fix our screw up. The second point is that I srongly disagree with a president being ineligible for re-election after one term. Let's say that the president we had was really quite good and his first term is over. He is running as an incumbent and his opponent is questionable ,there are holes in his promises. Now, what is the most obvious thing that would happen? We would re-elect the incumbent and hope that someone as good or better than him runs when the next election comes around.
I think the rule of secrecy is a very good one, yet at the same time is bad. It’s really good because sometimes….well things spoken just shouldn’t be shared. And still, I would love to hear some of the ideas shared. Of course I’m sure there was some argument in that small room with all the heat and I know some arguments can get a bit rough. If they were to write down the fights we may be questioning the men that framed the entire constitution, which could really cause some serious problems today in the judicial system where people would want to refute parts of the constitution because some of the framers may have disagreed on one section. So in essence, the rule of secrecy played a great roll in the framing of this document.
ReplyDeleteI severely disagree with the original slave trade Article. African Americans are just as human as true Americans. I don’t see it fair or just to give them rough living conditions and buy, sell, and trade them almost like a cattle farmer. these people didn’t deserve to be forced to work and sold. I don’t think it right of congress to allow any states to have slaves, and even less when Georgia and South Carolina demanded slaves, so congress just put a tax on them which infuriates me because most of the white folk treated African Americans like property that they own and not a human being, so why not let the gov’t make some money off of them by placing a tax on them. Slaves from Africa makes me think of Fasika. If we did not fight the civil war, would slavery still exist today? would we have seen Fasika working his hind end off as he usually did to please his master? I couldn’t live with myself if I knew one of my friends was a slave. I am so thankful that we have changed our ways and outlawed slavery.
Stotts, I'm glad I'm not the only one that that thinks about what it might be like today if we hadn't outlawed slavery. It's sad when you think about it. Your family and mine did some of the things that you wrote about. And sadly, some of them still can't call people with another color of skin people.
ReplyDeleteI will always miss Fasika.
(I can't see him a slave, to me he will always be just what he was, Fasika.)
Necessary and Proper Clause:
ReplyDeleteI have mixed feelings on this issue. On one hand, I feel like it can be a great advantage to the government because it keeps lawmakers from getting "pinned down" by legal to where they can't pass an important law. Alexander Hamilton put it well when he stated that without this law, the Constituion would become a "Dead letter." I think this is a very good point.
Now on the other hand, I don't like this clause at all. It can be easily misused to pass harmful or corrupt laws.
This clause has been put into effect several times since it was first drafted. the most well known of which was in 1791. Alexander Hamilton wanted to make a National Bank for the United States. The clause held true for a a while, but it was tested yet again in 1819 during the McCulloch v. Maryland trail. Maryland had been trying to hurt the Second National Bank by imposing a tax on out-of-state banks that was crippling. Since the SNB was the only out-of-state bank in that area, it was no secret who the tax was aimed toward. The court ruled against Maryland, and the bank lived to fight another day. However, the concept of a national bank did not last much longer.
The Connecticut Compromise;
I am pretty well in favor of the Compromise. I think that under the circumstances a resolution as desparately needed. Not only did the bicameral legislative system solve the arguement, but it has been tested and no only lasted in the U.S., but in Britain as well.
"The Rule of Secrecy" really jumped out at me as an important aspect to the Constitutional Convention.
ReplyDeleteIn our time, if we want to learn about what is going on in the Senate or the House of Representatives, all we have to do is get on a computer or watch CNN (more commonly known as the Clinton News Network). There is no such thing as secrecy in Washington anymore. Everything that a politician does is scrutinized. Every meeting, every speech, every action is covered by some annoying reporter or photographer. Some politicians go the extra mile, actually wanting people to know what they are doing all the time. Thats what Twitter is for I guess. I mean seriously, they post what they had for breakfast on these things! And the weird thing is that people actually care. Personally speaking, I'd rather politicians WORK in Washington and EARN those tax dollars we pay them; instead of posting what cereal they're eating.
Anyways...back to secrecy. I COMPLETELY agree with the concept of keeping the workings of the "Framers" secret from the public. Just think about it, if people had had extreme of the inner workings of the Convention, it would have been impossible to get work done!! Countless numbers of people would have tossed in their opinions, their suggestions, and I mean its impossible to please everyone. Like the old saying goes:"You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."
Now..onto the issue which I disagree with. I definitely do not agree with what "The Central Features of the Virginia Plan" says about abolishing all State governments and placing all power in the Central government. If the State governments were abolished, then it's basically the same as when England controlled the Colonies. We thought of ourselves as states, but we were under the control of England. And we could do nothing about it.
Very nice work Michael Pope, I loved what you said about how important the Judicial Branch is. Without them interpreting the law, who knows what kind of crazy laws we would have to deal with.
ReplyDeleteWow ZiaBeth, I love that quote by Luther Martin! It really illustrates to me how we are to act as Christians, and as a Christian nation as a whole. We're all equal in God's eyes, and thats a big wake-up call for some people...no matter what we look like.
ReplyDeleteSam, I agree whole heartedly about what you said about the Rule of Secrecy. Politicians are torn down by every single small thing they do wrong. If they don't like perfect lives then it seems they are always getting torn to pieces about some small thing they said. Accidents happen, but apparently people think if a politician makes a mistake, then it is 10x worse than if a normal person does. While most of the time this applies more to their personal lives more than their public lives, I still think this rule is great to keep information away from people who will use it for bad rather than good.
ReplyDeleteOne thing i agree with is the slave trade i like how the dread scott case changed the fact that slavery was no longer allowed and nothing could change it. And slavery was no longer an issue
ReplyDeleteOne i disagree with is the fact of presidents being allowed to serve seven year tearms because if you do not like the president or he messes up then we are stuck with him. I glad they changed it to just too years for that reason.
Sam i also agree with you on the fact of how poloticans are not perfect and they do make mistakes
ReplyDeleteStotts i agree with you about slavery bein abolished i am glad they did skin color should not be judged we should all be treated the same and as hannah said its sad that people cant call others with a different skin color people
ReplyDeleteI've always had a great sense of respect and awe for our founding fathers. However, even though they brilliantly laid down the foundations for our country, they still were not perfect.
ReplyDeleteAs far as The Rule of Secrecy goes, it states that"nothing spoken in the house be printed or otherwise published or communicated without leave." This basically says that the delegates must be sworn to secrecy with all that they discuss unless they are given permission to do otherwise. According to the article, it says that they took on this rule unquestionably. As I was reading the article, I could see no reason for the rule to be at all questioned. It makes sense that while they are discussing and debating that it doesnt get out in the open for a couple reasons I can think of. First of all, it keeps some of the pressure off. If it were publicized then some other politicians may try to butt-in with suggestions that are unnessecary. Also, if the press were interfering, the delegates may not to as good of a job with desicion-making knowing that others were privy to thier ideas.
The Virginia Plan I have to say had some things about it that were good, still I have a couple arguments about it. Something that I disagreed with was that it did not allow the people to elect more than one branch of the national government, or the president. If our country is supposed to be "of the people, by the people" (in other words a democracy), then why don't the people have a say in those areas? Also, with the state legislature limited, I don't think that's such a good idea. If you have someone in charge of just your state, they will know the state's own culture and do better with meeting the individual needs of the people in that state. We are so diverse nationally, that it's difficult to cover everyone's preferences/needs.
So these are some things I agree and disagree with from the Constitutional Convention. If I were a part of the congress that met I would have these ideas and concerns.
The Rule of Secrecy
ReplyDeleteThis one was about the congress having the right to secrecy about what things they were guna pass. This was hard to read so i had Emily explane it to me lol(: but enyways i thought this was really good cause us humans are easily influenced and not letting things out of the stuff they worked on was a smart idea.
The Slave Trade
This one was a slow demolinisation of the slave industry in the Us. First they had taxes on the slaves and then they totally got rid of it. The way i look at this is that they used the slaves for money and they didnt care about them one bit. They said the reason that they couldnt demolish it right away is that they didnt have the power to. No, now thats where they were wrong. They were the people who helped rule this nation, they had the power to completely wash it away from our nation and they didnt. I mean if your guna do taxes you might as well just git rid of it but they didn't. If you cant already tell i disagree with this completely. And i think that we shouldnt have slaves enyways, we came to amaerica as free people and thats what our constitution was written upon. Just because a person is a different color doesnt mean that there not human. Like if you have blue eyes i have brown. Ohhhh I have darker eyes then you, put me into slavery!!! i just think that it was wrong to put taxes on the slavery, i really do. I dont meen to be mean or enything, but thats why we came here. to get away from persecution and we turned right around and put more people into it. But thats where i should stop cause i could go on and on about this.
Wow, I never thought about the fact that George Washington has had a slave at some point? That makes me sad, I really don't like that apparently he was a slave-owner for most of his life. At least it wasn't all of his life I guess, and at least slavery was finally abolished. I know I will never be able to understand how anyone could ever be under the impression that just a skin color defines you. Not cool.
ReplyDeleteHmm, Charity, that was a very interesting point. I agree with that, too. We did come to America to get away from being persecuted and to be free and yet they had slaves and pretty much just put other human beings into bondage.
ReplyDeleteOur founding fathers realized the slave trade placed them in a dangerous position. Men from North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia insisted that there must be no taxation on slave trade. Clearly placing the slave trade in there favor. September 17, the delegates signed the Constitution, article 1, section 9. What they signed said: Migration or Importation of slaves coming to America should not be prohibited by Congress before 1808, tax or duty could be placed on a slaves head.
ReplyDeleteThis laid down the foundation for our future Civil War. You can understand the position they were in for making this decision because if there was no slavery we had no work being done, but it doesn't matter because it wasn't right. America was based on freedom for all man kind, but to them slaves were not Americans they were only here to work for us, which is not true.
On May 29th, the Constitutional Convention Committee reported 22 rules. One of these rules was "the rule of secrecy." The exact language of the secrecy rule was. "That nothing spoken in the house be printed or other wise published or communicated without leave."
The committee adopted these rules without debate. Madison was very serious about the vow of secrecy. His notes were not available until after his death, even though people asked that he make them available to help in the interpretation of the constitution. I feel the freedom to speak their mind without fear of disclosure made for easier dialogue.
Wow, I would not have liked to be at that convention. Period. The image of being in a hot, stuffy, crouded room in May just dosen't appeal to me. I can see how they wanted to keep what they were saying away from the public, but I think it was kind of silly to wear all those heavy clothes inside. An it must have smelled teribble in there, what with them being so sweaty and all. And you know how hard it would be to have a nice conversation it that type of a situation! They must have been amazing men. I totaly agree with keeping everything secret though. I would have been hard to talk about things with people trying to put their say into it. Also, you might say something, have someone misunderstand it, and go around quoting what you said as what your view is on the matter.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree on the issue of taxing slaves though. First, when the pilgrims came to america, they were trying to get away from persicution. Then, when we become a country, we totally forget our humble beginnings, and start to enslave africans. How wrong is that? Then, we put a tax on slavery! I can see why North, South Carolina, and Georgia all wanted the slave trade to continue, because it was nessisary for the econmy, but it was such a wrong thing to do. And to tax it was sooo wrong! They should have just stopped slavery altogether.
I'm so glad that it turned out alright it the end. Have a great weekend! xalo
The Constitutional convention sounds like blast!! Except the opposite of what I just said! The hot conditions + three thick layers of clothes + a totally closed building = no fun.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of super secrecy was an excellent idea. Especially if a few choice individuals had found out our great country was without a government for a few hours, and breaking its own laws in the process. However being has crazy as they were the Constitution was an essential document that needed no additional advertisement! Honestly I think our current Government shouldn't be uber open and more secretive about somethings.
The part I really don't agree with is the slavery portion. They authorized the slave trade in article one section nine in order (or at least I think) to keep the southern states on board for the constitution. Though the idea of at least giving them some credit would be that the gave slaves the 3/5th of a person right. So they had some rights but not a lot.
The slavery issue really bothers me.
ReplyDeleteA large majority of the founding fathers had slaves including the "star" George Washington.
it proves all men have flaws, even the ones who are carved in marble.
The Virginia plan was CRAZY!
ReplyDeleteGiving all power to the central government and abolishing all state governments sounds like the idea of a crazy power hungry monster!
First of all, I want to say that the website that was given to us made the plans and compromises far too cunfusing for me to understand. So I used other sources-- hopefuly reliable ones.
ReplyDeleteAfter America gained independence from Britain, they were faced with many, crucially important decsions. I personally can't imagine the pressure that they must have felt-- or perhaps they didn't realize the urgency of the situation-- ,but regardless, the decisions that they made in that Constitutional Convention of 1787 are still affecting us today.
Another thing that I would like to mention is that for me, just reading about all these plans and compromises makes my head spin; Virginia Plan, New Jersey PLan, Hamilton's Plan, Connecticut Compromise... I would have killed myself if I had to decide which one of these things was best for our nation.
Okay, so first off, one of the simplest for me to comprehend was the Connecticut Compromise (a.k.a "The Great Compromise"). This proposal included a bicameral legislature composed of a House, whose members were elected according to each state's population; and a Senate, whose members were equally distributed (2) for each state. Sound familiar? It should. It's the system we use today.
My viewpoint is that I agree with this proposal because it satisfied the interests of both the small and large states, which is very important, especially during this time period.
Secondly, for which idea I disagree with, that would be the electoral college. I'm sure that are some really good arguments in support of this, but based upon what I know of the electoral college, it seems to me that it completely erases the principal of majority rule. It practically does away with what little equality there is in politics. We the people vote, and our votes should count. I don't think the framers expected this system to last as long as it has, because the election process is rather vague and not well thought out. As result of this, I don't think the electoral college system will last much longer personally speaking.
The Rule of Secrecy
ReplyDeleteI would only partially agree with this rule. The best way to get something done is by being secret. How do you think the stimulus bill was passed? They made the thing so complex and long that people could not understand what it really was. They disguised the harm and the trillions of dollars in dept to sell us something that would do the opposite of what it was supposed to do, dragging the nation into huge debt and possible collapse. And no, I didn’t get this from Rush Linball, just some of it. Secrecy also has some positives, say that you had an air force base in which you conducted experiments for future military technology (yes, I am talking about area 51,) you would want the base to remain secrete, right. However, that has become harder to do ever since Google Earth came out. So secrecy can be a good or bad thing, depending on whose the secrete.
The Slave Trade
I agree with the framers on this one. What they did was they made it impossible for congress to decide to keep or boot slavery, and gave that power to the individual states. What they did allow was room for a constitutional amendment. It was like they planned it out to happen this way. They left room in the constitution for a decision. For a bunch of dressed up guys in a hot room they were pretty smart and I am glad they were.
Biggin, I rather enjoy your comment about how we brought slaves here and didn't end up doing any work. That's true. In an interesting way, this was the beginings of our laziness problem, which led to the complete slobs we are today (some of us at least). Corpulence means obese and extremely fat.
ReplyDeleteOkay, so many people mentioned the rule of secrecy (camden, sam, emily). I completely understand where the viewpoint comes from that leaking info could influence delegates votes and so forth, but I really don't like how secret our government is today. There are so many things that go on behind those Senate and House doors that we know very little about. Bills are passed alll the time and many (not all) American citizens don't even keep up with all of them. The government keeps secrets from us but isn't this supposed to be a democracy? We are supposedly the ones "running the government," however I sure do feel like busy, and could-care-less-as-long-as-you-vote-for-me men are actually the ones running it.
Slave Trade:
ReplyDeleteThis was a decision I most definately do not agree with. While power was distributed so that more than one person could determine if slavery was "okay", the fact was someone had to decide. Everyone is a person..not 3/5 of one. This one bothered me.
Electoral College/Presidency:
Now this decision I agree with mostly (except for the president serving a 7 year term.) I think the framers had the right idea when they said that a president could be impeached. If you have some guy who gets in there and just makes awful mistakes, we as the American people have a right to get rid of him.
I agree with Jarred, this assignment was kind of difficult..the website was hard to decipher. But I still enjoyed it =)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI usually think of the delegates as being perfectly wise and agreeing on everything, but things like this are examples of how they were definitely not just in all their decisions. As trying as those times were, I’m sure they had trouble making decisions that didn’t divide the delegates.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, one decision I agree with is the rule of secrecy. Nothing spoken in there was to be printed, published, or even told to the people without leave. I agree because at that time, there was conflict with England and they couldn’t risk anything being spread. I’m sure they had no way of knowing if there were colonists around them that would gladly tell the British what was going on in there(or there might be a colonist rebellion if their decisions didn’t benefit the colonists who heard about it; something like Shay’s rebellion, maybe). Of course, secrecy wouldn’t fly today. Democracy involves openness, and the American people would get ticked if they didn’t know what was occurring in Congress. Back then, however, I feel like it was mostly necessary.
An issue I definitely don’t like is the slave trade. It seems that many of the delegates supported slavery. Some of them did put up the slightest resistance. One guy named Dickinson considered slavery as inadmissible on every principle of honor and safety. Another even said that every master of slaves is born a tyrant. I agree. It seems that the majority of them didn’t understand that we are all created equal. In the 1808 prohibition, Congress finally eliminated the actual slave trade. Obviously, that didn’t completely destroy slavery itself. Thank goodness for Lincoln later issuing the Emancipation Proclamation.
The Virginia plan was where the government decided that each state should send their representative and senators to Washington based on the states population. I disagree with this plan because I think that each state should have an equal amount of senators and representatives no matter the size of the state. I understand why they did it that way I just don't agree with it completely.
ReplyDeleteI agree with part of the Great Compromise (sometimes known as the Connecticut Compromise). I agree that each state sends two sentors because it's divided up evenly between all the states unlike the representatives. I understand why they have it that way to where each state sends an number of representatives based on their population but I just think that it's unfair for the smaller states. I think that each state should have the same amount of representatives representing them. Now that's just my personal opinion. I know Kentucky's representatives are probably much less than, lets say, Texas because Texas is a much larger state. I believe in equal representation.
The first issue I am going to talk about is
ReplyDeleteThe Rule of Secrecy. The secrecy rule was:
"That nothing spoken in the house be
printed, or otherwise published or
communicated without leave." And the
majority followed this rule. This issue is
one that I agree with because in any kind of
group that makes important decisions their
needs to be some secrecy involved. You can't
just go out and tell everything what is going
on if the group isn't okay with it being know
by everyone. Also you can't have people
going out and saying that they are just going
to tell one person bacause then that person
tells someone and that person tells someone
and before you know it everyone knows.
The second issue is The Slave Trade. This
is very muchly so the issue that I disagree
with. Noone should be sold like they were
just someones property. People are people no
matter what their color. It is wrong to
think that just because someone doesn't look
like you that they are anyless a person.
They are just as valuable and have just as
much potential as anyone. I cannot imagine
what it would have been like to just stand
and watch people bid on me. To know that in
only a matter of time I will be someones
slave and who knows how this person may or
may not treat their slaves. It would have
been a hard life. I am so glad that people
do not own and bid on people like they used
to. We all are humans and deserve to have
the same rights.
Slave trade:
ReplyDeleteI really dissagree with that decision and i belive it was deffinitely one of the worst if not the worst ideas they had. It was very wrong. EVERY person is created equal!!! Just because they look different doesnt give us the right to treat them badly especially as badly as we had treated the slaves in that time. It was most deffinitly one of their worst ideas. So slave trade is One idea that I completely dissagree with.
Rule of secrecy:
The rule of secrecy I personally think was a good one and I agree with it for the most part. With the rule of secrecy they were able to accomplish a lot of things in little time and keep ot secret for the good of the people (mostly). Even though it was extemely miserable they endured this for several good reasons. One was that it helped them to make decisions based on what they believed and not have the public pressuring them. It kept things quiet in terms of anything that shouldnt be let out to the public for the good of the people and the establishment of the country. So I for the most part agree with this idea.
This was a tough one.
You know, I'm glad that the delegates who made these decisions were so persevering. I know myself and I know that I probably couldn't have done it. Cooped up in a confined space in uncomfortable clothes and no air conditioning, it's a wonder they didn't all lose their sanity.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I disagreed with the Virginia Plan. I think it had some good points, such as a bicameral legislature but overall it simply wasn't fair. Regardless of a state's size, it should have equal representation. It's like saying that because Somerset Christian School has less students than Pulaski County High School, our opinions should be practically disregarded, whereas PC's students' opinions become respected and considered "law." It's simply not fair. Everybody student should have equal representation. Why should the states of our country be any different?
The Connecticut Compromise also known as The Great Compromise, in my opinion, was the best proposition to be made yet. It seemed to fix the problems of The Virginia Plan. It was much more solid I thought. It proposed the bicameral legislature - which, to me, is important partly because it keeps a check on power- plus, it had equal representation of states. Each state would have two representatives regardless of size. So the smallest state would have just as much voice in government as the largest. Much better, don't ya think?
i really agree with the judicial reviews and the judicial powers. I like this because before a bill becomes a law a council of these people has to look over it and review it. this is a good idea because our government unlike others is limited. this power limits the other banches of what they can and cannot do. this really helps us as a country today because if one of the other branches wanted to pass a bill that they wanted, but wasnt what is best for the country. then the judicial branch could just decline the bill.
ReplyDeletehowever i do not agree with everything that happened. for example the rule of secrecy. i dont agree with this because i think that we as americans have a right to know what it exactly is that our government is debating about. its because of secrets our government keeps from us, people come up with these crazy conspiracy theorys. our government shouldnt have anything to hide from us
jaykub i really agree with you about what you said about the virgina plan being a bad idea. giving up all power to a central government. that is pretty much us just givin away our rights like they mean nothing to us
ReplyDeletehey stotts i really enjoyed what you had to say on slavery. it was really wrong and its good that its abolished.
ReplyDeleteJust a note on Anna's comment about Washington's slaves. Several of our presidents were slave owners (4 of the first 5 were rich white landowners from VA, for example, and brought slaves with them as they served as our nation's chief executive). Washington is hard to understand, sometimes. While he was the richest man in America and held vast tracks of farmable land, he had relatively few slaves (about 100) for a man of his standing in society. Compare that with his wife, who personally owned 300 slaves when they married (she was, of course, a widow). Washington was miffed and embarrassed when two personal "servants" (as "inside" slaves were called)escaped his home in Philadelphia (the capital during Washington's administration) and quietly offered rewards for their return. Yet on his farm he allowed slaves to accumulate possessions, raise some crops for their own, and keep chickens (though he had a strict rule forbidding slaves from owning pigs, which could be sold for cash). Upon his death his will revealed that he emancipated all of his slaves (which means that he gave them their freedom), and included legally strong wording to make sure that his wife and his adopted children wouldn't be able to thwart his plans. His wife still owned he 300 slaves and included no such plan in her will. By the way one of her children was Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's grandparent.
ReplyDeleteThe first that i will talk about is The Rule of Secrecy which i disagree with in some ways and others i don't. I think that important meeting like this one should be documented for later use, but kept from the public for general reasons like uprisinngs and riots documenting something for use in later generations is very important especially on decisions that can change the course of the entire country itself. There is a time to work and there is a time to DOCUMENT important works like many things that were happening around this time. There is always a time for change to take place and documenting things of importance.
ReplyDeleteAlso on the other side though it would be very important in being confidential and keeping some of these things from the people. Telling certain things to the public can cause riots and great distress sometimes because one side agrees and the others don't. This is what i think of the secrecy rule.
I agree with the three delegates that did not sign they did give far too much power to the senate making it to where they could even overthrow decisions of the President. In some cases this can be for the good others it can be terrible for the nation as a whole. Messing with the economy and such because they don't believe in something.
Hannah, I really liked the point you made about the president re-election. If a president was elected for seven years, we could have a major problem. Let's face it, Americans don't always make the best choice in elections. If we elected someone who was bad for the country, they would be in for a while, whereas the four years allow for enough time to really see what the leaders can do. If we like them, we can re-elect them. Another example of the beauty of America.
ReplyDeleteDavid I agree with your thoughts on the Continental Congress. being sure they had a strong bases for governing. So that the people would feel secure in their newly established government.
ReplyDeleteColby I agree with you concerning people having a say in there government. Hamilton had a lot of old England in him very un American. He was wanting our president to be a king and wear a crown I don't think we agreed with him.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm commenting on my thoughts because this really wasn't something anyone talked about.
ReplyDeleteToday at our volleyball game,(which we won!) there was a little black boy playing with Maddy's little sister and a little blond headed girl. I couldn't help thinking that if slavery hadn't been outlawed then Maddy's sister might not be here, and if she was she might a slave because "she doesn't look like us". Also, the little boy would more than likely be a slave of the little blond girl's family.
It's nice to know that we live in a place that allows all three of these kids (with different skin colors) to interact with each other and have fun doing it.
I agree with Hannah on the the president being elected for seven years. I dont think it would have worked well at all. Your right about the president being elected for that long in the sense that if he was totally wrong in all he was doing and he was making mistakes left and right we would have to wait seven years to get someone else and fix our mistakes. A LOT can go wrong in seven years. And the president not being able to run for office again wouldnt have been a good idea because we have had some pretty good presidents in the past and they did a lot for this country and if they hadnt been able to be reelected than we may not have been as well off as we were.
ReplyDeleteI agree with stotts on the slave trade. I personally HATE that people treat people that look different like they arent as good as us. It make me SOOOOO mad that they could buy, sell, and trade another person because they werent just like us. It was totally wrong. And I have friends that are from different countries and for me to think that if the slavery hadnt been abolished that they just may have been slaves today makes me just furious that they could even begin to think of doing something like that. EVERYONE WAS AND IS CREATED EQUAL!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteMorgan I totally agree with you about the slave trade. It was horrible!! I can't imagine how they felt and I hate it that they had to go through that. I also hate it that they are treated differently. I've known some people that act like that and I just get so frustrated with them. I mean they are people just like us, who cares if their skin is a different color or if they talk differently. Well I sure don't and I hate when other people judge them because of it. If they're gonna talk about them they might as well talk about me to because I'm just like them, a person. A human being.
ReplyDeleteIf I were in the position of the delegates at this convention I feel that I would be in over my head. The decision they had to make didn’t only satisfy the colonists immediately, for the most part, but they also played a major role in our country today. In my opinion the delegates did a great job with their choices.
ReplyDeleteThe list of decisions I agreed with is a long one, but I feel they did best with the controversy over the slave trade. Now I am with anyone who thinks that owning slaves is a bad thing to be in the habit of, but they weren’t just slaves to the colonists back then. Slaves and the slave trade were a large portion of the money made in the colonies. It was cheap to own slave and have them do your work, and at the same time they sold for good price. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad they eventually abolished slavery, but the idea to continue allowing it and set a time in the future to end it was brilliant. Like I said slavery was a large economy factor, so giving the people until 1808 to figure out a way to make money otherwise was a perfect idea.
Although overall this convention was a success, one thing I don’t agree with, was the New Jersey plan. Their idea to have each state represented equally, no matter its size, is a bad idea. That is what was proposed in the Articles and it dint turn out well. This is unfair for the states that have a larger population, because they should have a larger say in some aspects. I agree with the way things are now, one branch that is decided by population, one with equal representation for everyone.
Charity, what you said about The Rule of Secrecy stood out to me. I feel that it was a good idea that they had it and I feel like they should have it today to an extent. I think we should be imformed but I also feel that some of it should be kept a secret for a while or until they feel like they have figured out what would be good for the American people. Now you may be saying, "But we should know what they are wanting to do so we can tell them if we want that done or not." Well I feel the same way. I'm not saying that ALL of it should be kept a secret, just some of it. I think they should let us know what is going on but not tell EVERYTHING about it.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to comment on someone when everyone did the same two; Slave Trade and Secrecy.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I agree with those who agreed with the Connecticut Promise. It is what started our government in a way because it gave equal representatives to each state and that satisfied all the states as well as not giving any state, no matter how many or how little people lived their.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAshley, i am commenting on what you had to say about what i said bout the rule to secrecy.
ReplyDeleteI didn't really have enough tyme to write what all i wanted to say on this because i wrote a hugeee long one and when i went to hit comment it all deleted and stupid me forgot to copy it before i did. But anyways i wasn't really saying that they should keep it away from us, Because i think that was good idea. And i kinda agree with the idea of having it today to a certain exstent.
Vanessa, You made some great points. Like with what you said first, even i wouldn't have that discipline to do that. And i also think that The Virginia Plan and The Great Compromise tied in perfectly with each other.
ReplyDeleteEmily, I agree with you about the Convention’s want for secrecy. What they were doing was illegal, but if they hadn’t done what they did who knows where the United States of America would be today, or even if there would be a UNITED America.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, I agree with your opinion on Hamilton’s plan as well. What sets our country apart from others in the world is that we are not ruled by a king or queen, but a group of individuals.
Jarred, same here! I would probably go insane if I had to deal with all the problems our founding fathers did. It IS very confusing and it must’ve been very difficult to make the decisions that would effect millions of people for generations.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you about the Electoral College system. Although it might have worked for the founding fathers’ generation, I don’t think it’s working for ours now. I don’t think it will last much longer either, give it another election or two. ;)
Madyson,
ReplyDeleteI agree completely with what you said about the electoral college/presidency. We as Americans should have the right to impeach the president if he isn’t doing his job. The other part of this point, involving the presidents term, you also got right in my book. I don’t think that would have been a good idea, one guy for seven years. And the fact that he couldn’t serve a second term wouldn’t be good either.
Hannah,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said about the Rule of Secrecy. I think if everything that got discussed by our officials was brought known to the public before it was decided there would always be chaos. People would try and persuade everyone towards an immediate decision instead of looking at the issue, taking the time to decided, and all in all making a good decision for now AND the future. That’s the way it should be.
I'd like to give kudos to Josh for his comment. I really like how he brought out the fact that the colonists where new at this, and still did amazing under the circumstances. What we have to remember is most of these guys weren't lawmakers by nature. Yes, many of them were very well educated and wealthy (almost all of them actually...), but these guys basically sat down in a blazing hot room, took a look at government systems that other countries were using, and started laying out the blueprints for a radical, new governmental system that would set the foundation for a nation that possessed previously un-heard of freedoms and rights. When I think about this I am always baffled. The feat seems almost super human.
ReplyDeletehannah..i like the comment you made about my lil sister, and that boy playing. (he was so cute lol) But it's the truth, if slavery hadn't stopped, Kate may have not even been a part of my family. Because she's darker skinned than me..
ReplyDeleteAnd finally I would like to comment on Morgan's comment of Stott's post.
ReplyDeleteI do understand that many people said similar things as Morgan did, but in her post I get this strong since of anger... probably a result of the numerous caps and exclamation points. haha, just playin'.
But anyway, I do agree with what she said. Racism is not only primitive and close minded, but it prevents a society from developing to its full potential. But we all have to keep in mind, ALL cultures were slave to SOMEONE at one point in history. Mr. Akers brought up in class the other day that East Europeans ('White' people so to speak) used to be in bondage too.
Jakob,
ReplyDeleteI dont agree with what you said about the slave trade. yes, it was a large economy factor, yes it brought in money, and yes it helped out the country..but at the expense of other human's lives. Surely, if the framers had really wanted to, they could have found a better alternative. In my opinion, white people had slaves so they didn't have to work. And think too, the conditions which most slaves lived under. It was completely inhumane, and wrong. It wasn't like a stockyard or something, these were people. The country could have done without...just saying.(not being mean or anything)
I really liked Vanessa's point about how she disagreed with the Virginia Plan. It's the same thing as our school's opinion being less respected than PC's cause we're a lot smaller. That's ridiculous. States representation shouldn't be any different. That was definitely an awesome illustration. I also liked how she contrasted the Virginia Plan by explaining the good old Connecticut Compromise.(cause it's pretty much the exact opposite)
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with Josh on slave trade It truly just isn't right there is always a way to find another way around anything even if it changes the course of things tremendously it can be a great benefit to everyone or not so much but they could still have found a way of not having slaves like not be so lazy.
ReplyDeleteI thought Biggin's comment was very good. I could tell he researched and thought through it all. Like you said, our country was truly based on freedom for all people cause we're created equal. The majority of them really didn't understand that that applies to those slaves too. To the delegates, the slaves were there just to tickle their fancy.
ReplyDeleteSam, i agree with you on the central features of the virginia plan. If they had done that, and we were all led by one gov't with practically unlimited power, well, what would we be like today? I strongly disagree with this plan because we could seriously be in a lot of trouble today but luckily it didn pass.
ReplyDeleteJosh, i like your comment on biggins comment. We are based on freedom and equality to all. I know that if i didnt understand freedom and equality to all, and i lived back then, i probably wouldve owned slaves. But since i understand it, i would never even dream about owning slaves. What they really needed was someone to explain to them what freedom and equality really are.
ReplyDeleteChojioki Umannakawa I tottally agree with your thoughts on The Great Compromise It changed the way the government was and is today instead of giving power to one house so it could control everything and do what it wants the split it and made it a bicameral legislature splitting the power so that it could be balanced although this was change for the better they can still make a bad decision but it is much better than it could be.
ReplyDeleteFirst I would like to comment on Popes. I agree with what he said about there being nobody to check the judges. I also really don't like the fact that the judges are able to make their own interpetation of what the constitution says. This is a lot like some thing we talked about in Bible class. People are starting to take apart literature and make their own interpetation instead of what the author was talking about. if this happens with the constitution then the nation will be under the authority of not what the founding fathers wrote but of what some persons interpretation says.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with what Jeremy said if our government told us every thing that it was doing our country would be in shambles. If the government had to disclose all the information it talked about the in times of war our troops would be in serious danger. the reason I say this is because the media would be telling any body that wanted to know exactly where and when our millitary was going to move. I do however believe we have the right to know what is happening in congress and the senate because those are people that are publicly elected.
ReplyDeleteHannah, I like what you said about the rule of secrecy and how you wouldn't be getting the ideas from the people who are "flying by the seat of their pants" but instead you are allowing people to sit down and discuss things and vote on them. Peole who are in a hurry or so forth are probably going to think things through in the here and now and the rush of things but if you allow people to really think things through and vote on them you ave a better chance of making something stable and better for the people in general.
ReplyDeleteVanessa, I like what you said about having equal representation. It really wouldn't be fair to not have a say in something because of a lower popupation. Just because there aren't as many people doesn't mean that what we have to say isn't important and should be disregarded.
ReplyDeleteWell the first thing ill comment on is " The rule of secrecy" I personally agree with this bill because when the public starts knowing something that go on(well it ends up like the telephone game where someone says something and as it is passed down it changes little by little) but also on the other note people have the right to know what is going on. But after looking at it from both ways i am going to have to agree with this. But I will have to disagree with the Hamilton Plan which allow the the government official to chose the state governors, which i would strongly disagree with. Like today have a most democratic government, they would most likely chose a democrat to serve as governor.I think the people of each state should have the right to vote on their own state officials.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYeah Hannah I liked what you said about the re-election and if they would have a 7 year term the we could have major problems and would have to waits year to get it gone.
ReplyDeleteJaykub. I really liked how you incorporated the fact that black people were considered to only be 3/5 of a white person. That really angers me. Slavery is something that gets to me quicker than anything. NOBODY has the right to say that one person is worth more than another. *May I throw in for free, that is what is possibly going to happen with the current presidential administration. To say that the extremely young and old have less value is detestable.*
ReplyDeleteSam Wier
I liked what you said about the Rule of Secrecy. It really would've been a fiasco if the public had thrown in their underdeveloped opinions and theories based on misconceptions and lack of knowledge. They would've had to have waded through even more propositions than they already had to deal with and that could not have possibly turned out well at all. I mean, think about it. Did they really need anymore stress???
Vanessa, i agree with you in the face that no one should ever diminish the rights of another. Our constitution says all men are created equal. We should probably stick to that..
ReplyDeleteMichael Pope.
ReplyDeleteI also think that the states rights are very important. If the state decided what they wanted, any citizen could just move to another state!! we would all still be one country of course, but function as parts of the body as Christ's church works.