Article the First: The Federalist and Antifederalist Perspective - Essay Example

? Article the First: The Federalist and Antifederalist Perspective Federalists’ Support for Article the First Ever since the United States attained her independence in the 18th century, the nation has had to grapple with numerous constitutional amendments, some of which were controversial, while others underwent ratification through a popular vote (Publishing & Duignan, 2013). Although many of the constitutional amendments passes by the congress formed the bill of rights in the United States constitution, some were not very successful in the process. This was especially so in the year 1789 on June 8 when one Virginia 5th District congressional representative agitated the congress to consider passing the Bill of Rights as part of the initial reforms to the constitution of the United States (Vile, 2010). Nevertheless, the congress representative succeeded in 1791 when a three-quarters majority ratified the Bill of Rights to become the law guiding the nation (Publishing & Duignan, 2013). Although this was a major breakthrough in the US history as far as constitutional reforms are concerned, the congress failed to ratify Article the First, which became the center for debate owing to the varying reactions elicited by the divided Congress on the matter. Article the First was a proposed amendment to the constitution of the United Sates whereby it sought to determine both the minimum and the maximum number of representatives at the US hose of Congress (Vile, 2012). As a federalist, one would support Article the First of the Constitution of the US, owing to the democratic space that America enjoys today due to liberal laws besides the fact that this amendment would change history in that more American citizens would feel represented and participate fully in an all-inclusive government. In 1789, the American representatives of the House of congress were involved in hectic constitutional amendment procedures that saw some articles incorporated into the bill of Rights that formed the constitution of the United States (Vile, 2012). However, some contentious articles did not make it to the constitution following the strong opposition to them by the antifederalists. In this regard, Article the First, which came to be the first proposed amendment to the constitution of the United States of America, did not pass the ratification test although its proponents particularly the federalists pushed hard for its ratification (Vile, 2010). Also known as the congressional Appointment Amendment, Article the First was the first, as the name suggests, of the twelve amendments that the first congress delivered on 25th September 1789 (Publishing & Duignan, 2013). In accordance to Article V of the constitution of the United Sates, the first congress submitted Article the First for ratification. However, the state legislatures failed to ratify the article despite the fact that they ratifies many other articles that became the Bill or Rights that formed the constitution of the United States of America (Vile, 2012). Fundamentally, the major framework o Article the First entailed the setting of the size of representatives of the House of Congress whereby the maximum and the minimum number of Congress representatives was clearly determined by the article (Publishing & Duignan, 2013). In this case, the article contemplated a scenario whereby one Congress Representative would represent thirty thousand American citizens until the total number of representatives would reach one hundred. Thereafter, it would be the responsibility of the congress to regulate the number of representatives so as not to go below one hundred. In this regard, Wolverton (2013) reports that the Bill of Rights envisaged that: After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons (Para. 13). As a federalist, I would support "Article the First" of the Constitution owing to its good intention for the people. Originally, the amendment had an overall objective of providing a workable formula for establishment of the Representatives in the House of Congress (Wolverton, 2013). This was particularly important because the constitution of the United States had already the maximum size of the Representatives in the House of Congress (Publishing & Duignan, 2013). The law actually wanted the people to feel included in the federal government through active participation of their Representatives (Vile, 2012). When one Representative has a larger number than thirty thousand people to represent in the House, they normally face a myriad of challenges ranging from delayed deliverance of services to administrative and governance challenges. The bill advocated for equal representation of the people of America irrespective of their racial, religious, cultural, or social backgrounds. This means that every determined number of people were to be represented by one House of Congress representative without giving due advantage to some districts (Wolverton, 2013). In addition, the substitution of the wording of Article the First suited the people of America at the time in that by placing or electing multiple Representatives in a given District would have amounted to conflict of interests from various spheres of influence (Wolverton, 2013). Subsequently, this would have created confusion to the extent of hindering coordination of various governance procedures. Having recognized this impending problem in advance, the Senate adopted the bill before convening a meeting of the two houses to harmonize the article (Vile, 2012). From a federalist perspective, Article the First was an impressive piece of law that would ensure that every American citizen is equally represented at the House of congress (Publishing & Duignan, 2013).  Although Article the First was an impressive price of law for a vast majority of both the public and some Congress Representatives, it is worthy to note that the bill failed to pass to become part of the constitution to the joy of the antifederalists (Wolverton, 2013). According to the antifederalists, Article the First failed to pass a number of tests ranging from a redundant maximum to a proportionate minimum (Vile, 2012). Essentially, the joint house committee created more problems by formulating a maximum size for the Congress Representatives, even though the constitution of the United States had already set the maximum. Moreover, the joint senate committee created an irresolvable error in math by contradicting the population range between the maximum and the minimum (Publishing & Duignan, 2013).  In conclusion, Article the First was a good piece of administrative law although it had its fair share of challenges like any other piece of legislation. This means that the first article proposing amendment to the US constitution had good intentions from the start of ensuring equal representation of the people of America across the board. As a federalist, one would support Article the First of the Constitution of the US, owing to the democratic space that America enjoys today due to liberal laws besides the fact that this amendment would change history in that more American citizens would feel represented and participate fully in an all-inclusive government. Reference Publishing, B. E., & Duignan, B. (2013). The U.S. Constitution and Constitutional Law. Chicago: Britannica Educational Pub. Vile, J. R. (2010). A companion to the United States Constitution and its amendments. Santa Barbara, Calif: Praeger. Vile, J. R. (2012). The writing and ratification of the U.S. Constitution: Practical virtue in action. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Wolverton, J. (2013). Article the First: Is Congress Ignoring an Amendment Ratified by the States? Retrieved from http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14223-article-the-first-is-congress-ignoring-an-amendment-ratified-by-the-states Read More