Pros and Cons of the Virginia PlanIf the Virginia Plan had won ratification in 1787, it would not have provided a better governmental system and the U.S. would not be much better off today. The Virginia Plan gives a single political party the power to suppress minority rights and democratic responsiveness on both state and national level, and allow for tyranny of larger states over smaller ones. Large states would enjoy greater representation and power in the legislature, leading to a one party dominance in both houses of Congress and the executive branch. The Virginia Plan sets up an oligarchy system of government under which a few large states would control the rest of the states under the guise of a national government with powers superior to the states.
After the Revolutionary War, one of the main concerns for the members of the constitutional convention was a tyrannical government unable to limit itself. Madison stresses the importance of having a government that can “control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself”. The Virginia Plan does not propose an adequate system of checks and balances to control the government it sets up since it does not structure “each department…a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the other.” The Council of Revision is allowed to veto legislation passed by the national legislature, but the veto can be overridden by a majority vote. Due to the structure of the Virginia Plan and the emphasis on party loyalty for promotion, there will always be a majority able to override any veto issued by the Council of Revision. Additionally, the council would most likely consist of members from the majority party, and in order to be reelected the council will be obliged to please the majority party and its policies. Because the judiciary branch is also elected by the legislature it will not fully enforce the constitution if any of the cases in question goes against partisanship since the majority party elects justices. The Supreme Court would rarely make controversial decisions such as Brown v. Board of Education, as it would present backlash for congressmen from their constituencies .
The process of electing the upper house through the lower house adds another level of political favoring susceptible to corruption behind the scenes since it is so far removed from citizens’ questioning. By putting the upper house away from direct votes by the people, the Virginia Plan is reducing democratic responsiveness as the upper house does not have to fully answer to the people that they govern. In an ideal republican government, the remedy to legislative authority is to divide the legislature into two different branches and to render them with as little connection with each other. Corruption could extend to the executive branch that is elected by the upper house without grassroots
The legislature in the Virginia Plan is being used to get elected to the Statehouse by the minority of legislators in the upper house. The majority, on the other hand, is elected by a majority of elected members, whose name includes only a few minority members. This system, for instance, means that even if a minority has a majority in the upper house, it is always able to vote in the legislature based on some combination of the following three criteria: (1) a majority in the legislature, which results in (2) a majority in the lower house (which means it is unlikely the minority will vote on a deal; and (3) some party is behind that deal); (4) a majority in the legislative body under review or to the decision of a representative, which means it is unlikely the majority of people on review is committed to a political deal; and (5) political influence. The legislature is also trying to have a more stable party in the legislature since a minority in the upper house is unlikely to be interested in a political deal. It should be noted, however, that this would take into account more than just what happens in the legislature right now.
“Our purpose in having a new governor be elected so we can run a system of voter disenfranchisement is because we want to have our people having control of government as well as to have an independent judiciary.
In order to have a stable government we will have to have the ability to create democracy and a sense between the citizen and the government,” Dr. G. William Jackson said in the press release. “In a democratic system, every step you take would be a step you would have to commit to do before making it to the next election. That is just something we will be doing.”
The legislative body is currently preparing an appeal to the House of Delegates to amend the Virginia constitution to give it more power with less judicial power.