Compare and Contrast the Virginia and New Jersey Plans Presented at the Constitutional Convention - Essay Example

A comparison between the Virginia and the New Jersey plans presented at the constitutional Convention reveals some fundamental structural differences between the two plans. Firstly, while the two plans agree on the number of branches of government, i.e. the Legislature, the Judiciary and the Executive, the composition and the jurisdiction of the three arms of government differ in the two plans. The Virginia plan supports the creation of national branches of government, with national jurisdiction, but the New Jersey plan support creation of federal branches of government, with state jurisdiction.

According to the Virginia plan, there should be a national legislature consisting of two branches; the first house would consist of elected representatives of various USA states, and they would serve for a period of three years, and the second branch of legislature would consist of members elected by individual legislatures of the first house, and they would serve for seven years. On the contrary, the New Jersey plan does not address the legislative branch of government for it assumes that the USA national congress is the legislature of USA.

For that reason, no details are given for the composition of the legislature, and the terms of service for its members. But the New Jersey plan supports giving more powers to the individual states, so as to be able to make legislations on internal affairs of the states. This therefore means that the New Jersey plan supports creation of federal Congress. The details of how federal legislations were made are not given in the New Jersey plan. The main difference between the Virginian plan and the New Jersey plan on congressional representation is that, while the Virginian congress was composed of representatives of various states, who had equal voting rights, the federal congress supported by the New Jersey plan is composed only of members of the same state.

For that reason, the national Congress supported by the Virginian plan had jurisdiction of the whole nation, while the federal congress supported by the New Jersey plan had jurisdiction only over the particular state, where the congress was found. This was meant to ensure that the state and the nation related well, the federal congress was not supposed to deal with matters outside its power/jurisdiction.According to the Virginia plan, a national executive should be constituted, consisting of a single person, chosen by the members of the national legislature.

The head of the executive would serve for a period of seven years. According to the New Jersey plan, on the other hand, the national congress should be authorized to elect federal executives, who would serve for a specified period of time. The composition of federal executive is not specified, nor is the period of time that they are supposed to serve is given. As it can clearly be seen, the executive branch differs in the two plans. The executive plan in the Virginian plan gives wider jurisdiction, national mandate, to the executive, while the New Jersey plan gives the executive power only over the state.

On Judiciary, the Virginia plan supports creation of a national Judiciary, with one supreme tribunal, the judges of which are elected by the members of the second branch of the legislature. The terms of service for the members of Judiciary is not specified in the Virginia plan, nor is the period of time that they are supposed to serve is given. On the contrary, the New Jersey plan supports the establishment of federal Judiciary, consisting of supreme tribunal, the judges of which are appointed by the executive (the federal executive).

The New Jersey plan does not give the details of the terms of service of the members of the federal Judiciary.In my opinion, the New Jersey plan provides more power to the federal government than the Virginian plan. This is because, unlike the Virginian plan, the New Jersey plan gives the federal government the space to make their own laws and to have their own system of executive. The federal governments therefore are able to better control their internal affairs in New Jersey’s plan than in Virginian plan.

Work Cited Madison Debates- June 13 and June 15. Web. Student NameProfessor #History and Political Science #1st March 2014Comparison of New Jersey Plan and Virginia Plan Presented to the Constitutional ConventionA critical look at the Virginia plan and the New Jersey plan presented to the constitutional conventions reveals a number of differences between the two plans. But although there are some differences between the two plans, there are also some similarities. One evident similarity between the two plans is that both plans recogniz three branches of government; the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary.

The two plans however differ in terms of the composition and scope; the New Jersey branches of government are meant for the federal government, but the Virginian branches of government are meant for the national government.The Virginian plan supports creation of a national legislature, which has two branches. The first branch of the Judiciary is made up of representatives of various states in the USA. The second house on the other hand is made up of representatives elected by the members of the first branch of the legislature.

Contrary to this plan, the New Jersey plan does not address the issue of the composition of the legislature. But in the New Jersey plan, empowering of federal government to be able to deal with internal legislations is emphasised. This fact shows that the New Jersey plan supports federal legislature to deal with legislations on internal matters of various federal governments.The Virginian plan and the New Jersey plan therefore differ fundamentally on congressional representation. This is because while the Virginian congress is composed of representatives elected from various states in the USA, the New Jersey federal congress members is composed of representatives elected within the individual state.

This in essence means that the mandate of the federal congress dioes not go beyond the individual state, although still the legislations of various states, of course, affects the whole nation in one way or the other. The national congress on the other hand had the mandate to legislate on all matters of national concern. To ensure harmonious working relationship between the federal congress and the national congress, the New Jersey plan stipulated clearly the limits of the federal congress and the mandates of the national congress.

On Executive, Virginian plan supported a system of government with a single executive leader, elected by the members of the Judiciary. The head of the executive had a term of seven years, according to this plan. Contrary to this view, the New Jersey plan held that the national congress should elect executive members of various federal governments. The elected executive members of the federal government were supposed to serve for a given period of time; the time is not specified in this plan. The terms and conditions of service for the elected executive members of the federal government are not spelt out in the New Jersey plan.

Just like in the case of the congress, the main difference between these two proposed systems of executive is that, while the mandate and the jurisdiction of the federal government were minimal and dealing only with individual states, the mandate of the Executive proposed by the Virginian plan extended to the whole nation.The systems of Judiciary also differed between these two proposed systems of Judiciary. According to the Virginian plan, there would be one national Judiciary, with supreme tribunal.

The supreme tribunal would be headed by judges elected by the members of the second branch of the legislature. The terms of service of the elected judges of the tribunal is not given in the Virginian plan. On the other hand, the New Jersey plan supports establishment of federal Judiciary, headed by the supreme tribunal. The judges of the tribunal would be elected by the federal executive. A critical analysis of these two different systems of government shows that the New Jersey plan provides more power to the federal government than the Virginian plan.

This is because according to the New Jersey plan, the federal governments will be able to legislate on issues affecting the individual states. Also, the federal governments will have their own executive, unlike in the Virginian plan. This will therefore enable the federal government to control their internal affairs more effectively.Work CitedMadison Debates 13 and 15. Web.