Compare And Contrast The Virginia And New Jersey Plans

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

During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, two primary proposals emerged concerning the structure of the United States government: the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan. These plans reflected differing visions of governance, state power, and legislative structure. The Virginia Plan, largely shaped by James Madison and championed by larger states, proposed a strong national government with a bicameral legislature based on population. Conversely, the New Jersey Plan, presented by William Paterson, aimed to preserve the power of smaller states by proposing a unicameral legislature with equal representation for each state.

Structural Differences

Number of branches of government

The Virginia Plan advocated for three branches of government: legislative, executive, and judicial. The legislative branch was to be bicameral, with the two houses functioning as checks on each other and the executive and judiciary as separate entities. The New Jersey Plan also proposed a three-branch government but emphasized a unicameral legislature with equal state representation, maintaining a weaker executive and judicial branch compared to the Virginia proposal.

Number of houses in Congress

The Virginia Plan proposed a bicameral Congress consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate, both based on population. The New Jersey Plan retained the unicameral Congress, with each state having equal representation regardless of size.

Congressional members chosen by whom

In the Virginia Plan, members of both houses would be directly elected by the people, with the number of representatives allocated based on population. Under the New Jersey Plan, Congress members would be elected by state legislatures, maintaining a system of indirect election that favored the sovereignty of the states.

Length of terms of service for the legislative branch

The Virginia Plan suggested that members of the lower house serve two-year terms, with the upper house serving longer, though specifics varied. The New Jersey Plan called for members of Congress to serve for a fixed period, often three years, elected by the states or their legislatures, emphasizing stability and continuity.

Congressional Representation

Basis of determining a state's members

In the Virginia Plan, a state's representation in both houses of Congress was determined by its population or financial contributions, favoring larger states. The New Jersey Plan countered with equal representation for all states, regardless of size, asserting that each state should have an equal voice.

Votes by states in Congress

The Virginia Plan’s model meant votes would be weighted by the number of representatives per state, essentially giving larger states more votes. The New Jersey Plan preserved the principle of one vote per state, ensuring each state had an equal say in legislation.

Congressional Power

Differences in powers

The Virginia Plan proposed a Congress with broad powers to legislate on national issues, including regulating commerce, taxation, and military matters. It also suggested the power to veto state laws, giving the federal government significant authority. The New Jersey Plan limited Congress's powers to a few specific areas, primarily taxation and commerce, but with less authority to override state laws.

Denied powers

Both plans included restrictions, but the Virginia Plan’s detailed proposals for federal supremacy implied fewer restrictions, whereas the New Jersey Plan explicitly limited the scope of congressional authority, emphasizing state sovereignty.

Relationship between federal government and states

The Virginia Plan promoted a stronger federal government with supremacy over state laws, whereas the New Jersey Plan emphasized maintaining state sovereignty, with a federal government subordinate to the states' interests.

The Executive Branch

Composition of the executive

The Virginia Plan suggested a single executive chosen by Congress or a separate electoral process, with significant powers. The New Jersey Plan proposed a plural executive, possibly a committee, to prevent concentration of power.

Selection of the executive

The Virginia Plan's executive could be appointed or elected by Congress, while the New Jersey Plan preferred election by the legislature or a more decentralized selection process to limit executive power.

Powers of the executive

The Virginia Plan vested substantial authority in the executive, including the power to execute laws and potentially veto legislation. The New Jersey Plan granted limited powers, often focusing on duty rather than dominance, reflecting a desire to prevent tyranny.

The Judicial Branch

Composition and selection of the judiciary

The Virginia Plan called for a national judiciary appointed by the legislature, including a Supreme Court and inferior courts. It emphasized the importance of a strong, independent judiciary. The New Jersey Plan also proposed a judiciary appointed by the executive or Congress but emphasized a less prominent role, consistent with its limited federal authority.

Analysis of Power and Federalism

The Virginia Plan clearly vested more power in the federal government, establishing a framework for a stronger national authority that could regulate commerce, tax, and veto state laws. In contrast, the New Jersey Plan's emphasis on equal state representation and limited federal powers aimed to preserve state sovereignty. The debate between these plans highlighted the fundamental tension in American constitutional development: the desire for a unified nation versus the protection of individual state rights.

Conclusion

In my opinion, the Virginia Plan provides more power to the new federal government due to its proposals for a bicameral legislature based on population, a strong executive, and a judiciary with broad authority. This structure establishes a system capable of addressing national issues more effectively than the New Jersey Plan’s emphasis on state sovereignty and limited federal powers. Ultimately, the Virginia Plan laid the foundation for the modern federal government, balancing power among the branches and embedding the principle of national supremacy, which was crucial for the United States’ development into a unified nation.

References

• Beeman, R. R. (2009). Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution. Random House.
• Farrand, M. (1937). The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787. Yale University Press.
• Wood, G. S. (1997). The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787. University of North Carolina Press.
• Rakove, J. N. (1996). Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution. Vintage Books.
• Amar, A. R. (2005). The Bill of Rights: Creation and Reconstruction. Yale University Press.
• Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and Its Critics. Yale University Press.
• Madison, J. (1787). Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention. National Archives.
• Elkins, S. & McKown, T. R. (1993). The Great Debate: Interpreting the Constitution. University Press of Kansas.
• Bailyn, B. (1993). Ideological Origins of the American Revolution. Harvard University Press.
• Cannon, J. (2015). The Maker of the Constitution. Harper & Brothers.