The Trump administration`s environmental policy has placed the federal government in direct and controversial opposition to many national governments – particularly California, which has passed stricter environmental protection laws than most other states in the country (see California is suing Trump again for revocing the state`s authority to limit car emissions). In doing so, the government has created the most recent example of the historical tension in American politics between state and federal power – a tension that dates back to the articles of Confederation. Today, it seems that the government established by the Constitution is an improvement over that created by the articles of Confederation. But at the time, the Constitution was just an experiment. Forget what you know now about building success. Would you have been a federalist or a federalist, given their unprecedented nature and the fear that a strong national government would be a threat to personal freedom? The federalists contradicted that, they thought it was not an appropriate role for the Senate, that it would be part of the way the Senate and the Speaker would come together and take over the rest of the government. We have had a number of differences of opinion. I could go on, but these are two that are worth mentioning. I think of what they basically imagine, where the city and states of ancient Greece or the modern beginning of Italy, something like Athens in the 5th and 4th century BC or Florence at the turn of the 16th century. Some Americans are watching, I think Hamilton has also made his point that if you… state republics, all American states were organized as Republican governments. They were already much larger, at least most of them apart from saying for Delaware and Rhode Island.
Rakove: [00:37:42] One of the things I noticed 27 years ago when I did my book Original Meanings. When I worked through these debates, it was to recognize this certain precision for a modern eye, the institution that the federalists seem to fear the most was the Senate. Rappaport: [00:05:45] I agree with Jack. These are probably the two most important, the balance of power between nation and state and the size of governments in a republican system. As Jack said, there were many other topics that were important. An important topic is the Bill of Rights. The federalists, when they proposed the Constitution and advocated for its ratification, were opposed to a bill on rights. Roses: [00:02:03] Jack, let`s start with a broad question, what were the greatest constitutional differences between federalists and federalists? Mercy Otis Warren has been described as « the leading intellectual of the Revolution and the Early Republic » (Michals, 2015, para. 1; National Museum of Women`s History). Warren was both a staunch supporter of the American revolution and a staunch anti-federalist opponent of the Constitution.
Like other federalists, their opposition to the new government ranged from « the absence of a rights law that guarantees freedom of the press and the rights of individuals to the indirect undemocratic method of electing the president » (Brown-Tager, 2000, p. 108). If you wish, also read the 39 federalist and decide for yourself whether Madison supports national sovereignty, state sovereignty or a combination of the two. Tell me what you think.