How did Federalists and Anti-Federalists differ on centralized power and the Bill of Rights?

How did Federalists and Anti-Federalists differ on centralized power and the Bill of Rights?

• A. Anti-Federalists favored stronger national government, Federalists feared central power
• B. Both wanted no Bill of Rights
• C. Federalists favored stronger national government; Anti-Federalists feared central power; compromise produced the Bill of Rights to protect individual liberties
• D. Anti-Federalists favored central government with no protection of liberties

Answer: (C)

The idea being tested is how a strong national government and protecting individual rights can be reconciled. Federalists argued that a stronger national government was needed to bind the states, regulate commerce, provide defense, and handle national problems, and they insisted that a system of checks and balances would prevent tyranny. Anti-Federalists feared that concentrating power in a national government would threaten liberty and state sovereignty, unless explicit protections for rights were written into the framework. To win ratification, supporters of the Constitution agreed to add a Bill of Rights—explicit protections for fundamental liberties—which addressed Anti-Federalist concerns while preserving a capable federal government. This combination explains why the described answer is correct: it captures the Federalist push for a stronger national government, the Anti-Federalist fear of centralized power, and the Bill of Rights as the compromise that protected individual freedoms.

The idea being tested is how a strong national government and protecting individual rights can be reconciled. Federalists argued that a stronger national government was needed to bind the states, regulate commerce, provide defense, and handle national problems, and they insisted that a system of checks and balances would prevent tyranny. Anti-Federalists feared that concentrating power in a national government would threaten liberty and state sovereignty, unless explicit protections for rights were written into the framework. To win ratification, supporters of the Constitution agreed to add a Bill of Rights—explicit protections for fundamental liberties—which addressed Anti-Federalist concerns while preserving a capable federal government. This combination explains why the described answer is correct: it captures the Federalist push for a stronger national government, the Anti-Federalist fear of centralized power, and the Bill of Rights as the compromise that protected individual freedoms.