Changes

==Drafting the Constitution==

==Drafting the Constitution==

On 29 May when [[Edmund Randolph]] proposed to replace the current government with a totally new structure. Randolph's ''Virginia Plan'' favored large states (Virginia had the largest population at the time) and increased the power of the central government. In mid June, the smaller states responded with the ''New Jersey Plan,'' introduced by William Patterson. The convention debated the New Jersey option until 19 June, when it was voted down. Therefore the Virginia Plan, much expanded and elaborated upon in the course of four-and-a-half months, formed the basis of the Constitution.

On 29 May when [[Edmund Randolph]] proposed to replace the current government with a totally new structure. Randolph's ''Virginia Plan'' favored large states (Virginia had the largest population at the time) and increased the power of the central government. In mid June, the smaller states responded with the ''New Jersey Plan,'' introduced by William Patterson. The convention debated the New Jersey option until 19 June, when it was voted down. Therefore, the Virginia Plan, much expanded and elaborated upon in the course of four-and-a-half months, formed the basis of the Constitution.

Madison, more liberal than most of the delegates, is given the major credit for shaping the key provisions, but most of his proposals were actually defeated.<ref>See Robertson (2005).</ref> Madison wanted broad national authority independent of state governments and population-based congressional representation. Delegates from smaller states opposed had other goals: to nationalize only selective public goods, to maintain most state policy autonomy, and to minimize contingencies imposed by other governments. Connecticut's delegates, particularly Roger Sherman, played a pivotal role in revising Madison's agenda. Madison's convention opponents are responsible for a Constitution that nationalized only enumerated public goods and imposed potentially high transaction costs on any further nationalization of policy authority. They helped make federalism a lasting political weapon used to win substantive policy outcomes, says Robertson.

Madison, more liberal than most of the delegates, is given the major credit for shaping the key provisions, but most of his proposals were actually defeated.<ref>See Robertson (2005).</ref> Madison wanted broad national authority independent of state governments and population-based congressional representation. Delegates from smaller states opposed had other goals: to nationalize only selective public goods, to maintain most state policy autonomy, and to minimize contingencies imposed by other governments. Connecticut's delegates, particularly Roger Sherman, played a pivotal role in revising Madison's agenda. Madison's convention opponents are responsible for a Constitution that nationalized only enumerated public goods and imposed potentially high transaction costs on any further nationalization of policy authority. They helped make federalism a lasting political weapon used to win substantive policy outcomes, says Robertson.

==Conspiracy==

==Conspiracy==

Various conspiracy theories have been proposed about the Constitution, but all have been rejected by conservative scholars. For example the Progressive historians (led by [[Charles Beard]]), as well as Marxists, have portrayed the Constitution as a conspiracy of powerful merchants to enrich themselves further and to stop the growth of democracy.  That was false, as is the notion that the Constitutional Convention was somehow illegal or in violation of the laws. (The Convention was called by the existing Congress, which unanimously sent the finished document to the states for ratification.)<ref>For a good review and refutation of conspiracy theories, see [http://www.americanrevolution.org/grassman.html Dr. Curtis E. Grassman, "Conspiracy and the Making of the Constitution" online] which concludes, "The various conspiracy theses have not been very convincing. The historical proof or evidence offered by this school of historians has almost always been found wanting upon further investigation."</ref>

Various conspiracy theories have been proposed about the Constitution, but all have been rejected by conservative scholars. For example, the Progressive historians (led by [[Charles Beard]]), as well as Marxists, have portrayed the Constitution as a conspiracy of powerful merchants to enrich themselves further and to stop the growth of democracy.  That was false, as is the notion that the Constitutional Convention was somehow illegal or in violation of the laws. (The Convention was called by the existing Congress, which unanimously sent the finished document to the states for ratification.)<ref>For a good review and refutation of conspiracy theories, see [http://www.americanrevolution.org/grassman.html Dr. Curtis E. Grassman, "Conspiracy and the Making of the Constitution" online] which concludes, "The various conspiracy theses have not been very convincing. The historical proof or evidence offered by this school of historians has almost always been found wanting upon further investigation."</ref>

==Statistics==

==Statistics==

* Banning, Lance. "Republican Ideology and the Triumph of the Constitution, 1789 to 1793." ''The William and Mary Quarterly,''  3rd Ser., Vol. 31, No. 2 (Apr., 1974), pp.&nbsp;167–188 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597(197404)3%3A31%3A2%3C167%3ARIATTO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M in JSTOR]

* Banning, Lance. "Republican Ideology and the Triumph of the Constitution, 1789 to 1793." ''The William and Mary Quarterly,''  3rd Ser., Vol. 31, No. 2 (Apr., 1974), pp.&nbsp;167–188 [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0043-5597(197404)3%3A31%3A2%3C167%3ARIATTO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M in JSTOR]

* Beeman, Richard R. ''Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution'' (2009), major scholarly study

* Beeman, Richard R. ''Plain, Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution'' (2009), major scholarly study

* Beeman, Richard R. et al eds. ''Beyond Confederation: origins of the constitution and American national identity'' (1987)

* Beeman, Richard R. et al. eds. ''Beyond Confederation: origins of the constitution and American national identity'' (1987)

* Belz, Herman. ''A Living Constitution or Fundamental Law? American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective'' (1988) by leading conservative scholar  [http://www.constitution.org/cmt/belz/lcfl.htm online edition]

* Belz, Herman. ''A Living Constitution or Fundamental Law? American Constitutionalism in Historical Perspective'' (1988) by leading conservative scholar  [http://www.constitution.org/cmt/belz/lcfl.htm online edition]

* Bowen, Catherine Drinker. ''Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, May to September 1787'' (1986), very well written narrative

* Bowen, Catherine Drinker. ''Miracle at Philadelphia: The Story of the Constitutional Convention, May to September 1787'' (1986), very well written narrative