Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chapter 2
Chapter 2
Vocabulary/Definitions: AP Government is a vocabulary-heavy class. As such, you are expected to have working
definitions – preferably in your own words - of all of the words listed for each chapter.
Using the Content: Write a response to the prompts for each section of the reading. Each of the following is written in
the style of an AP prompt, and – when responded to appropriately – will require you to utilize the content of the
associated section. Make sure to correctly use the vocabulary and content from the book in your responses.
Section 2.1:
1. Explain how specific weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation led to the proposal for a new, stronger
federal government.
Weaknesses in the Articles of Confederation led to fear among the elite and the people that the government was
not strong enough to actually do anything. For example, Shay’s rebellion illustrated how the government was
incompetent when attempting to raise an army. When the farmers initially rebelled, they made it quite a long way
through the countryside of Massachusetts, with little to no opposition. The elites were fearful that they would
cause enough harm to incite another revolution, so they put them down with their large amounts of money. This
was quite frightening for the national government, as their inability to do anything put on display their
incompetence. Another example of how the AoC was too weak can be found in taxes. They couldn’t enforce tax
collection at all. The national government was not able to receive an adequate amount of taxes. This is problem is
self-explanatory, and after the 5 years that the AoC existed, they only received 1/6 of the amount they asked for.
Section 2.2:
1. Using examples from the reading, explain how the Constitution was shaped by negotiation and compromise.
At the constitutional convention, the constitution was constantly argued about and debated over, and this led to
the extreme amounts of compromise that is in it. For example, the great compromise came to be through the
arguments from those who believed in the New Jersey plan and the Virginia plan. After debating and arguing for
many days, the grand committee was able to incorporate the most important ideas from both sides of the
argument, and thus was able to shape the constitution. Another example is the 3/5 compromise. It states that a
slave shall be worth 3/5 of a person in terms of representation for the house of representatives. This number,
although odd, was determined by the likes of negotiation and compromise between slave states and free states.
Similar to the great compromise, they debated about this for days, and were eventually able to agree on a number
to be added into the constitution, thereby shaping it.
Section 2.3:
Checks and balances and separation of powers are both actions that attempt to reduce the chance of tyranny
occurring in the US. For example, in congress when they pass a bill, they need approval from both houses first. Just a
simple majority, then it goes to the president to sign it into existence. If he decides to veto it, then the houses can
override the veto with a super majority. This idea of checks and balances also applies to the separation of powers.
When the legislative branch creates a law, their job is done. It now falls to the executive branch to enforce it, but if
people start questioning the law, then the judicial branch has to affirm that it is constitutional.
Section 2.4:
1. Compare and contrast the arguments presented by the Federalists and Antifederalists during the ratification
debates.
Federalist and anti-federalist arguments were similar in the way that they both called for a stronger national
government, as that was the obvious flaw in the Articles of Confederation at the time. The fact that the national
government had literally zero power was something that both parties wanted to change. However, the arguments
presented by both parties were mostly contrasting. The federalists wanted to swing the pendulum of national
power closer to the strong side, where they believed that having a strong national government was central to how
a republic would function, whereas the Anti-federalists thought the opposite. In Brutus I they argued that a
country like the United States was too big to have a republic function properly, and that the states needed to be
strong in order to keep the union together.