Can what a majority of 55 delegates did at the Federal Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 be undone? Their experiment in government was not noble and not great, and it has gone awry. The recent events of the actions of our Congress is proof of this.
The 55 delegates convened for the purpose of fixing the Articles of Confederation. What had to be fixed? Under the Articles of Confederation, our country was a union of republics from 1777 to 1787. Delegates met on the first Monday in November. Republics were represented by at least two and not more than seven, but each republic had one vote in the decision-making. Every republic retained its sovereignty and every power not given to the united republics in congress.
Instead of fixing the Articles of Confederation -- which was the purpose of the convention -- behind locked doors and shuttered windows, they gave us big government. The government they created gave us levels and levels of unneeded government. They created a national government -- a republic. They established a House of Representatives that provided for one person to represent 30,000 people. This made our country a republic -- we did not need a Senate.
Each republic had its own courts and law enforcement agencies, and its own executive. But these 55 delegates decided that we needed a national police force -- a judicial branch -- and an executive branch, creating a still-larger government. We were a union of republics under the articles of confederation.
Did we need all of the government that a majority of the 55 delegates gave us at the Federal Convention in 1787? I don't think so.