What is the most compelling argument the United States made in the Declaration of Independence? Should the US have added anything to the Declaration or left anything out?
Part 2 of 2:
Did the United States need a new constitution in 1787? Compare the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan. Which was the better plan?
(ALSO PLEASE RESPOND TO ANOTHER STUDENTS COMMENT BELOW )
The most compelling argument of the Declaration of Independence is putting the power back into the peoples hands and out of big government. It states over and over and in many different forms that if the general public is unhappy with the government, they have the right to overthrow that said government. One thing I have noticed as our still young country grows is that our Congress grows in power and in corruption as they do not have a term limit like the rest of the government. I do with that the Declaration stated something about a term limit to the members of Congress so we do not have career politicians that get set in their corrupt ways. Also, it has been said that politicians do not become rich. As seen today, practically all politicians are rich and there should be some kind of limit on their salary.
I do believe the U.S. needed a new constitution in 1787. This revision included more states and more view points on the government and how it should be constructed. It also showed how cooperation is supposed to be practiced in achieving a common goal. As for which plan was the better, I side with the New Jersey Plan. It gives more power to the individual state and breaks up big government and the possibility of corruption. Although I do like the idea of popular vote, I can see the reasoning of the state vote.