How was the conflict between supporters of a strong federal government and champions of states’ rights charact

Question

How was the conflict between supporters of a strong federal government and champions of states’ rights characterized then as opposed to now?

my dad told me this:

the conflict then was charactorized primarily in the sense that given the colonies relationship with England some were still inclined to lean towards a massive governing unit, and were fearful of too many individual states' rights and the risk of maverick type acitivity.

today, the conflict is more directly associated with the cost of various programs and who is going to get stuck with the bill.

but i do not really understand what he means....if anyone could elaborate

Answer 1

well basically when the constitution was being written there was the conflict between the federalists(wanted strong federal government powers) and anti-federalist(wanted weak federal government with strong individual states powers).

The federalists said that after the articles of confederation had failed a strong national or federal government was needed to keep the young country together. The anti-federalists said that a strong federal government would be tyrannical like the King of England they had just fought to free themselves from. The anti-federalists wanted to preserve the individual states rights because they were closer to the people and understood thier own people better than the federal government could.

You are correct about today most interaction like this is debate over things such as g*y marriage, smoking bans, and paying for various different programs and who exactly does it.