Philosophy of Law September 13, 2006
Juan Arcila
Ten Point Paper
Constitutional Convention
In this paper I will assume that I am a member of a constitutional convention, and in front of me I have two different proposals, one identical to the New York constitution and the other identical to the Pennsylvania constitution. My position will be illustrated both arguing against the constitution that I feel would be less effective and more difficult to implement in our culture, and giving several examples that will explain why I chose the constitution I chose and why it would be a better path to follow.
First I am going to make a case for both constitutions explaining the different strengths and weaknesses that each constitution may hold. The Pennsylvania constitution was always considered as to be the most radical constitution due to the fact that it incorporated several elements such as a unicameral (single chamber as a legislative assembly) constitution, liberalized voting and office holding requirements. The constitution in Pennsylvania was to be governed by an assembly of the representatives of the freeman of Pennsylvania. The executive power is vested in the president and council, every free man of 21 years or above that has paid taxes and has been a resident of Pennsylvania for more than one year, is allowed to vote, also the sons of these free men are allowed to vote, without even having to pay for taxes.
The house of representatives of freeman of the commonwealth consisted of people with wisdom and virtue, which were chosen by freeman of every city and count ...