• Identify the views expressed by large and small states at the Constitutional Convention about how to determine legislative representation.
• Explain the impact that the Great Compromise had on the structure of the legislative branch.
- Use details and examples to support your response.
Put in claim, evidence and reasoning response
Claim: The large states at the Constitutional Convention believed that legislative representation should be based on population, while the small states believed in equal representation for all states.
Evidence: During the Constitutional Convention, several large states such as Virginia and Pennsylvania argued that legislative representation should be determined based on population. The Virginia Plan proposed by James Madison called for a bicameral legislature where the number of representatives in each house would be determined by the population of each state. This plan would give more power to the larger states, as they would have a greater number of representatives in the legislature.
Reasoning: The large states supported population-based representation because they believed that it would give them a fairer share of power in the legislative branch. They argued that since they had larger populations, they should have more representatives to accurately reflect their size and interests. This viewpoint was motivated by their desire to have a stronger voice in shaping national policies and legislation.
Claim: The small states at the Constitutional Convention believed in equal representation for all states in the legislative branch.
Evidence: The New Jersey Plan, proposed by William Paterson, advocated for a unicameral legislature where each state would have an equal number of representatives. In this plan, irrespective of their population, each state would have the same number of representatives. This approach would ensure that smaller states had an equal say in the legislative process.
Reasoning: The small states argued for equal representation because they believed it would protect their interests and prevent larger states from dominating the legislative branch. They feared that if representation was based on population, their voices would be drowned out by the larger states. The small states were concerned about potential tyranny of the majority and sought to maintain their influence and autonomy in the new government.
Claim: The Great Compromise, also known as the Connecticut Compromise, had a significant impact on the structure of the legislative branch as it combined elements of both population-based representation and equal representation.
Evidence: The Great Compromise proposed a bicameral legislature, with the House of Representatives having representation based on population, while the Senate would have equal representation with two senators for each state. This compromise satisfied both the large and small states to some extent, as it ensured that both population size and state equality were taken into account in determining legislative representation.
Reasoning: The Great Compromise was a crucial turning point in the Constitutional Convention as it helped bridge the divide between the large and small states. It recognized the importance of both population-based representation and equal representation, thus satisfying both sides. The compromise ensured that the larger states would have a greater say in the House of Representatives, where decisions were made based on population, while the small states would have equal representation in the Senate, providing them with a voice and protection against potential domination by larger states.
Overall, the views expressed by large and small states at the Constitutional Convention regarding legislative representation were fundamentally different. The large states favored population-based representation, while the small states sought equal representation. The Great Compromise played a pivotal role in shaping the structure of the legislative branch by incorporating elements of both population-based representation and equal representation, thereby finding a middle ground that satisfied both sides. This compromise helped to establish a fair and balanced legislative system that embodies the principles of representative democracy.