Pros And Cons Of The Great Compromise

Words: 508
Pages: 3

The Great Compromise, which was a reached during the U.S. Constitutional Convention in 1787, was an agreement met by the states to honor each sides needs in the U.S. Congress. There were 2 sides, the party who were in favor of the Virginia Plan and the party who was in favor of the New Jersey Plan. The 2 sides who were in argument were the small and large states. The large states wanted the Virginia Plan because it made representation in the House of Representatives based on population. The Virginia Plan had three branches, legislative, exectutive, and judiciary, the legislative branch could override state laws. It had two houses, both houses would have representaion based on population rather that a set amount of votes for each state, it had ratification by the people. The small states however rejected this plan because it did not favor them, since they were small, and didn't have a large population, they wouldn't have a lot of representatives …show more content…
Its main purpose however was in determining the appointment of the senate. It was dubbed the Great Compromise. Instead of having its power derrived from one source, it came from the people ( Virginia plan) and the states ( New Jersey plan), the House of Representatives was based on population and the Senate was equal, giving each state 2 seats in the Senate. It was a bicameral legislative branch. It had a single executive branch, people who were elected could be removed by majority if voted upon. And it held ratification conventions in each state, allowing both sides, the people and that states to be involved. The larger states got representation in the House of representatives based on population and the small states got the senate to have an equal number of seats. Soon enough, it was accepted and everyone got what they wanted, truly a great