Skip to main content

What was the solution to the Great Comprimise?

The rallying cry of the American Revolution was “no taxation without representation,” so when the Constitutional Convention convened in 1787, one of the first things the delegates had to do was decide representation—decide how many votes each state would get.


Large states, meaning states with a large population, believed that population should determine representation; basically, more people should equal more votes. This was the basis of the Virginia Plan, sometimes called the Randolph Plan. The Virginia Plan was favored by large states. States with a smaller population were worried that the Virginia Plan would give power to the larger states while smaller states would be powerless, so they proposed the New Jersey Plan. The New Jersey Plan, sometimes called the Patterson Plan, believed that all states should have equal representation, regardless of population.


The Great Compromise was the solution. Sometimes called the Connecticut Compromise or Sherman’s Compromise, the Great Compromise solved the problem of representation by combining the Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan. The Great Compromise created a bicameral legislature, meaning Congress would be made up of two houses. In the upper house, the Senate, all states would have equal representation. In the lower house, the House of Representatives, population would determine representation. The Great Compromise was a way to ensure that citizens in both large states and small states were able to have a voice in the federal government.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more