What is the Virginia Plan?

The Virginia Plan was created by James Madison but presented to

the Constitutional Convention by Edmund Randolph, the governor
of Virginia, on May 29, 1787. This was a proposal for a new form
of government and called for the number of votes each state
received in Congress to be based on population, rather than each
state receiving one vote.
The purpose of the plan was to protect the large states' interests
in the new government, which would be stronger federally than
under the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation
was the first form of government and had weak federal control;
the states had all of the power. The Virginia Plan would change
this by creating an entirely new form of government rather than
amending the Articles of Confederation. The Virginia Plan was
countered with the New Jersey Plan, which called for one vote per
state regardless of population, since the smaller states were
worried that they would not be equal if the representation of the
legislative branch was based on population.
Supporters
Supporters of the Virginia Plan include James Madison, George
Washington, Edmund Randolph, and the states of Massachusetts,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Georgia. James Madison is known as the 'Father of the
Constitution,' because he helped frame the Bill of Rights and
much of the Constitution. Madison, along with Alexander Hamilton
and John Jay, wrote the Federalist Papers, which were persuasive
documents asking for a strong federal government.

NEW JERSEY PLAN

The New Jersey Plan was one option as to how the United States
would be governed. The Plan called for each state to have one
vote in Congress instead of the number of votes being based on
population. This was to protect the equality of the states
regardless of population size
New Jersey Plan: Explanation AND Supporters
Description:
The New Jersey Plan was one option as to how the United States
would be governed. The Plan called for each state to have one
vote in Congress instead of the number of votes being based on
population. This was to protect the quality of the states regardless
of population size.

What is the New Jersey Plan?

The New Jersey Plan was introduced to the Constitutional
Convention by William Paterson, a New Jersey delegate on June
15, 1787. The Constitutional Convention was convened to amend

the Articles of Confederation, but it became apparent that a new

government would need to be created. The Articles of
Confederation was the first form of government , but was
considered ineffective because Americans did not want to have
another tyrant like Great Britain. The states wanted the power.
One of the major debates that emerged during the Convention is
how many votes each state would have in Congress. The New
Jersey Plan was meant to be the alternative to the Virginia Plan in
regards to how the federal government would be structured.
Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Mr. Luther
Martin from Maryland created the New Jersey Plan. The New
Jersey Plan was meant to protect the interests of the smaller
states from being trampled by the larger states. The plan called
for one vote per state in Congress rather than having votes based
on representation since that would benefit the larger states. The
Virginia Plan called for two houses based on representation and
that would have nullified the power of the smaller states.
Supporters

William Paterson introduced the New Jersey plan to the

Constitutional Convention. Paterson was a lawyer and was
strongly opposed to the Virginia Plan. Luther Martin, a delegate
from Maryland, was also an author of the plan, and he spoke for
more than three hours against the Virginia Plan during the debate
portion of the Constitutional Convention. Other supporters were
not specifically named, but the states would include Connecticut,
New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, although Connecticut did
not vote for the New Jersey Plan.
Key Points of the New Jersey Plan
One criticism of the Virginia Plan was that it called for the creation
of a new government instead of just amending the Articles of
Confederation. The New Jersey Plan would amend some of the
ideas of the Articles of Confederation. The New Jersey Plan had 11
resolutions and some of the key ideas are:

- Restoring the unicameral structure from the Articles of

Confederation
- Each state was equal regardless of the size of its population
- Power to tax and regulate interstate commerce
- Gave Congress the power to tax

The Great Compromise of 1787

Perhaps the greatest debate undertaken by the delegates to the
Constitutional Convention in 1787 centered on how many
representatives each state should have in the new government's
lawmaking branch, the U.S. Congress. As is often the case in
government and politics, resolving a great debate, required a
great compromise. In this case, the Great Compromise of 1787.
Early in the Constitutional Convention, delegates envisioned a
Congress consisting of only a single chamber with a certain
number of representatives from each state.
The burning question was, how many representatives from each
state? Delegates from the larger, more populous states favored
the Virginia Plan, which called for each state to have a different
number of representatives based on the states population.
Delegates from smaller states supported the New Jersey plan,
under which each state would send the same number of
representatives to Congress.

Connecticut delegate Roger Sherman is credited with proposing

the alternative of a "bicameral," or two-chambered Congress,

made up of a Senate and a House of Representatives. Each state,

suggested Sherman, would send an equal number of
representatives to the Senate, and one representative to the
House for each 30,000 residents of the state.
At the time, all the states except Pennsylvania had bicameral
legislatures, so the delegates were familiar with the structure of
Congress proposed by Sherman.
Shermans plan pleased delegates from both the large and small
states and became known as the Connecticut Compromise of
1787, or the Great Compromise.
The structure and powers of the new U.S. Congress, as proposed
by the delegates of the Constitutional Convention, were explained
to the people by Alexander Hamilton and James Madison in the
Federalist Papers.

Today, each state is represented in Congress by two Senators and

a variable number of members of the House of Representatives
based on the states population as reported in the most recent
decennial census. The process of fairly determining the number of
members of the House from each state is called "apportionment

The first census in 1790 counted 4 million Americans. Based on

that count, the total number of members elected to the House of

Representatives grew from the original 65 to 106. The current

House membership of 435 was set by Congress in 1911.

The Three-Fifths Compromise

While drafting the Constitution, the Founding Fathers argued about how slavery and representation
could coexist. Learn here why the Founders decided to allow some, but not all, slaves to count
toward states' population.
The Three-Fifths Compromise outlined the process for states to count slaves as part
of the population in order to determine representation and taxation for the federal
government. The Southern states wanted to count all slaves toward the population for
representation purposes but did not want to be taxed on the slaves because they
considered them property. The Northern states did not want all the slaves counted
toward the population because that would take representation away from the North, but
that was outweighed by the North's attempts to shift the burden of taxation off
themselves.
The South's argument, if attempted in the modern nation, would not be far off from
counting family pets as part of the population for representation purposes but not
wanting to be taxed on Fido and Fluffy. The two sides of the argument agreed to count
three out of every five slaves toward state populations and for taxation.

Two Constitutions
The Articles of Confederation, ratified in 1781, based taxation off land value in each
state. When the Articles faltered and were replaced by the ratification of the United
States Constitution in 1789, the Founders decided that taxation should be based on
population rather than land value. This change brought the issue of slavery to the
national and political stage.
Under the Articles, states were able to undervalue their land to decrease the amount of taxes they
were responsible to pay. An underfunded Continental Congress had to look into the situation and find
a solution. Northern states wanted to count slavery in high numbers because that would put more of
a tax burden on the South and less on the North. Southern states wanted to use slaves as part of the
population for representation, but the tax issue was not very popular to the South.

James Madison offered the idea of counting three out of five slaves toward the population, which
was a compromise between the Northern idea of counting three out of four slaves and the Southern
plan of counting one out of four slaves toward the population. Counting three out of five slaves
toward each state's population was agreed to by all states except New Hampshire and Rhode Island.

The Articles of Confederation required a unanimous vote to pass an amendment, so the ruling was
shot down.

While drafting the constitution in 1787, the Founding Fathers understood that there had to be a
decision on slavery and representation if they were to change the tax code. The decision to count
three out of five slaves as members of the population greatly benefited the Southern states. Prior to
slaves counting toward the population, the Southern states occupied 38% of the seats in the House.
After slaves were counted, Southern states' representation in the House went up to 45% in 1790.
The three-fifths rule for counting slaves is often misunderstood. When the Constitutional Convention
debated the issue of how to count population for the purposes of representation,
the Southern delegates to the Convention would have been pleased if nonvoting slaves had been
counted as full persons. That way, the Southern states would have had a greater representation in
the House of Representatives. In contrast, some Northern delegates resisted counting slaves at all.