Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey plans presented at the Constitutional Convention

The constitutional convention of 1787 was formed and tasked with the duty of proposing amendments to The Articles of Confederation besides coming up with a workable plan for the national government. The two contentious plans were presented by the state of Virginia and New Jersey. Structurally, the two plans were the same. Both were for the idea of three branches of Government, which were the legislature, judiciary, and the Executive.Advertising We will write a custom critical writing sample on Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey plans presented at the Constitutional Convention specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In terms of congressional representation, the New Jersey plan proposed a unicameral house, which would allow all states equal representation while the Virginia plan vouched for a bicameral house that would have the House of Representatives elected by people and the senate that would be elected by state legislatur es (Foner 257). This representation is possible since congressional power differs per state. Each plan had benefits to the states that were vouching for them. The small states were vouching for equal power because of the fear that the large states would swallow them in the future due to their expansionist agenda. At the same time, they were simply securing resource allocation to themselves against the large states (Foner 257). The large states were securing the democratic rights of their people in terms of proportional representation, as well as decision making at the national level with proportionate allocation of resources. Both Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson were great diplomats (states’ rights) in the American society. Hamilton’s idea of the American governance system was based on the British model whereby he proposed a monarchy and parliamentary system. Hamilton was never for the idea of states as he thought they were not necessary. Rather, he supported m ercantilists and companies (Foner 258). He was also a champion of the new constitution. Jefferson was a strong proponent of the state. He supported agriculture as the backbone of the economy. He believed in the independence of the states as advocated in the previous constitution. Alexander Hamilton would favor the Virginia plan, as he was a federalist, because he was a strong proponent of a less fractured America with a more centralized government, which was powerful and to which all states would be subjected. He believed in the loose interpretation of the constitution. Thomas Jefferson would favor the New Jersey plan because he was anti-federal (Foner 259), as he believed in less power being vested in the central government. He believed in the ability of the individual states to retain power besides favoring agriculture over industries.Advertising Looking for critical writing on history? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The fi nished constitution protected slavery and the slave trade. At the same time, it allowed different states to enact legislation that would allow for the freedom of slaves, which paved way for the United States of America to pass legislation that either abolished the slave trade or permitted the freeing of slaves. The constitution encouraged industrialization, which substantially increased mechanization in the cotton industry thus leading to less and less work force being required. It also led to the passing of anti-slavery laws in the different states (Foner 258). The bill of rights, as found in the constitution, when interpreted later on, led to total abolishment of the slave trade and slavery in all American states. As a citizen of the new America of 1790, I would have favored Alexander Hamilton’s view of mercantilists that encouraged industrialization and global trade (Foner 259) because the whole world was opening up and would allow the American people to exploit the worldà ¢â‚¬â„¢s resources besides trading with other countries competitively. In terms of the constitutional plan, I would have borrowed from both plans, as they both had exceptionally strong valid areas that are beneficial for the American society. Works Cited Foner, Eric. Give me Liberty: An American History. New York: W.W Norton Company, 2012. Print. This critical writing on Compare and contrast the Virginia and New Jersey plans presented at the Constitutional Convention was written and submitted by user Kade England to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.