Why did supporters of the Virginia Plan believe it was the best way to create a new government?

Why did supporters of the Virginia Plan believe it was the best way to create a new government?

• A. They believed that in their plan the government protected the rights of states and individuals, yet also functioned as a strong national government
• B. It created a loose confederation of states
• C. It guaranteed religious freedom
• D. It eliminated federal power

Answer: (A)

The key idea here is building a government that is strong enough to govern effectively across the whole country while still respecting state roles and protecting individual rights. Supporters of the Virginia Plan argued that a powerful national government was needed to fix the problems the Articles of Confederation couldn’t solve—like how to raise revenue, regulate trade, and provide for national defense. By creating a two-house legislature based on population, the plan would give the people a direct say in shaping national policy and ensure the government could act decisively in the nation’s interests. At the same time, a well-structured national government with checks and balances was seen as a way to protect rights by making lawmaking more uniform and preventing state-level abuse or instability. The other options don’t fit because they describe a looser confederation, a focus on religious freedom, or eliminating federal power, none of which align with the aim of forming a stronger central framework.

The key idea here is building a government that is strong enough to govern effectively across the whole country while still respecting state roles and protecting individual rights. Supporters of the Virginia Plan argued that a powerful national government was needed to fix the problems the Articles of Confederation couldn’t solve—like how to raise revenue, regulate trade, and provide for national defense. By creating a two-house legislature based on population, the plan would give the people a direct say in shaping national policy and ensure the government could act decisively in the nation’s interests. At the same time, a well-structured national government with checks and balances was seen as a way to protect rights by making lawmaking more uniform and preventing state-level abuse or instability. The other options don’t fit because they describe a looser confederation, a focus on religious freedom, or eliminating federal power, none of which align with the aim of forming a stronger central framework.