Main content

Course: Constitution 101 Sandbox > Unit 1

Lesson 4: The Compromises at the Convention: The Great Compromise and the Electoral College

Info Brief: The Great Compromise

Learn about the compromise that resulted in the structure of the Legislative Branch.

The Great (or Connecticut) Compromise

One of the biggest debates at the Constitutional Convention was between large states and small states over congressional representation.

Two of the most important delegates at the Convention—James Madison and James Wilson—were at the center of this debate. But their vision didn’t prevail.

James Madison’s approach was deeply influenced by his own experience in government—both in Virginia and in Congress. From his experience as a state legislator in Virginia, he concluded that the early state governments didn’t do enough to check the power of the lower houses of their legislatures—the most democratic parts of their governments. While Madison was committed to republican government, he didn’t believe that the government should be driven by the immediate preferences of the people. Instead, he preferred a government that slowed politics down, promoted deliberation, refined public opinion, and spurred principled compromises. In Madison’s view, this approach would lead the government to enact better policies—policies driven by reason, not passion, and promoting the public good, not factional self-interest.

At the same time, from Madison’s experience in Congress, he concluded that the Articles of Confederation created a national government that was too weak to govern America. Instead, Madison came to support the creation of a stronger national government, one with the power to address genuinely national problems, but also one of limited powers.

Turning to the debates over congressional representation at the Convention, Madison and Wilson supported a Congress split into two houses, with representation determined by state population—in other words, proportional representation. With this approach, the larger the population of the state, the more representatives that state would have in each house of Congress. This represented an important departure from the Articles of Confederation, which was comprised of a single house of Congress that was organized under the principle of equal state representation. Under the Articles, regardless of a given state’s population, each state received one vote in Congress.

The Madison-Wilson vision of congressional representation was at the core of the Virginia Plan. Introduced near the beginning of the Convention by Virginia’s Edmund Randolph, the Virginia Plan would help frame many of the delegates’ debates over the structure of Congress. The Virginia Plan itself was largely crafted by Madison.

The Virginia Plan

The legislative branch would be split into two houses.
Representation in both branches of the legislature would be determined by state population.
The Constitution would grant the national government the power to address genuinely national problems—those that the states themselves couldn’t handle separately.
The Constitution would grant the national legislature the power to veto state laws that didn’t serve the national interest.

But the small states fought back. Concerned that large states like Virginia and Pennsylvania would dominate a new government organized around the Virginia Plan, New Jersey’s William Paterson and his allies countered with the New Jersey Plan.

The New Jersey Plan

The legislative branch would be comprised of one house organized around the principle of equal state representation. No matter its population, each state would receive only one vote.
The New Jersey Plan would still grant new powers to the national government—addressing some of the widespread concerns that the delegates shared about the inadequacy of the Articles of Confederation. However, the New Jersey Plan would create a national government that was weaker than the one envisioned by the proponents of the Virginia Plan.

The issues of congressional representation and congressional power dominated the early days of the Convention—and nearly tore the Convention apart. On congressional representation, Connecticut’s Roger Sherman and Oliver Ellsworth eventually brokered the Connecticut (or Great) Compromise.

The Connecticut Plan

Congress would be split into two houses—a House of Representatives and a Senate. (This structure is known as bicameralism.)
The House would be organized on the basis of state population. States with larger populations would get more representatives in the House. This is consistent with the Virginia Plan.
At the same time, the Senate would be organized around the principle of equal state representation—consistent with the New Jersey Plan and the Confederation Congress. No matter the population, each state would receive two senators.

In the end, the delegates passed the Great Compromise by a single vote. Madison and Wilson won the battle over representation in the House, but lost that battle in the Senate. It was a bitter defeat.

But Madison and Wilson didn’t quit. They continued to fight for their vision for the Constitution on a range of issues. Interestingly, they would even go on to defend the Senate—and its commitment to equal state representation—during the fight over ratification.

Want to join the conversation?

Sort by:

No posts yet.