V.

Ratification Controversies

Supporters of the Constitution called themselves Federalists and labeled their opponents as Antifederalists. The Antifederalists attacked the Constitution on several grounds. They first objected to the absence of a bill of rights. Several states had adopted written guarantees of the rights of citizens to ensure that the government would not destroy the liberty of the people. A bill of rights would assert the freedoms of speech, assembly, and religion, and maintain the protection of property and due process of law. Antifederalists feared that the new, strong central government could too easily threaten these liberties and be unchecked by the states.

Another Antifederalist objection was concern that the proposed federal government would have too much power, and like the power that had threatened the colonists in the 1760s and 1770s, would lead to corruption. The president was seen as a quasi king, with extensive powers beyond the reach of the people. Antifederalists viewed the Senate and the judiciary—neither of which was selected by the people—as aristocratic. Opponents of the Constitution even attacked the House of Representatives because they believed it did not contain enough members, and the districts represented were so large that it would be difficult for common people to find a person to represent their interests. Antifederalists also held that the Constitution would destroy the sovereignty of the states. In other words, many Antifederalists believed that the Constitution protected the interests of an emerging aristocracy at the expense of the common people. From their perspective, the Constitution represented a defeat of the democracy created as a result of the American Revolution.

The response to these charges appeared most brilliantly in The Federalist papers, written by Hamilton, Madison, and John Jay. This series of articles, published in the newspapers of the day, argued that a stronger form of government would avoid future conflicts between the states. Previously, political theorists held that each branch of government represented a different level of society, each of which needed to check the other. The executive represented the monarchy, the upper house represented the aristocracy, and the lower house represented the common people. In the new Constitution each branch of government could be given greater power because each was a special representative of the people. The Federalists adopted the democratic language of their opponents and claimed that under the Constitution neither the states nor the federal government would be sovereign; instead, the people would be sovereign. The Federalists believed the different ways of electing and selecting government officers were merely different avenues to the same thing—a balanced representation of the will of the people. In their view, the first words of the Preamble of the Constitution—'We the People'—held the key to understanding the entire document.

The Federalists organized quickly and pushed ratification through several states before their opponents knew what was going on. They then used this momentum to convince all but two states to ratify. North Carolina and Rhode Island initially voted against ratification, but reconsidered soon thereafter and joined the new government by the end of 1790. The Constitution went into effect on June 21, 1788.

The Federalists soon conceded the need for a guarantee of rights. By 1791 the new government had ratified the first ten amendments, which outlined a Bill of Rights. During the following years, 16 more amendments were made to the Constitution, including amendments to election laws and provisions regarding slavery and the political status of women. The authors of the Constitution created a document that stands today as the fundamental law of one of the longest-lived democracies in the world. The U.S. Constitution has been the model of balanced government followed by many other nations and is the defining characteristic of the democracy of the United States of America.