Anti-Federalist: The Constitutional DebateThe road to accepting the Constitution of the UnitedStates was neither easy nor predetermined. In fact duringand after its drafting a wide-ranging debate was heldbetween those who supported the Constitution, theFederalists, and those who were against it, theAnti-Federalists. The basis of this debate regarded thekind of government the Constitution was proposing, acentralized republic. Included in the debate over acentralized government were issues concerning the affect theConstitution would have on state power, the power of thedifferent branches of government that the Constitution wouldcreate, and the issue of a standing army.One of the most important concerns of theAnti-Federalists was that the new form of government wouldstrip the states of their own power. The Anti-Federalistsfeared that by combining the previously independent statesunder one government that, "...the states, once sovereign,would retain but a shadow of their former power..."(Main120). The Anti-Federalist claimed that if the sovereigntyof the states was to be maintained then the states must begranted the vital powers of government and the power ofCongress limited. However, they claimed that this was notso under the Constitution. The Constitution gave Congressunlimited power and did not explicitly detail any controlthat the states would be able to exercise over the Federalgovernment. The Anti-Federalists stated that since both thestate and Federal government would frequently legislate onthe same matters, if a conflict among their decisions arosethe Federal government would win out because of itsconnection to the Supreme Court (Main 124). They fearedthat "the result of (this connection) might be eventualabolition of the state governments"(Main 124).In Federalist Paper No. 46, James Madison addressesthese concerns about the well being of the state governmentsunder the Constitution. Madison argues that the interestsof ...
