Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

In September 1777 on November 15th the Articles of Confederation were adopted by congress. This would be a decision that shaped america for better and worse. In essence the articles of confederation was created because a constitution was needed to link the 13 colonies of America. This planned backfired however, leaving the government and congress without power. Citizens of the U.S were quick to to ratify the Articles in 1779 on may 5th.

“James Madison’s idea of the division of power between central and state governments is known as federalism.” (James Madison, Federalist Paper #51, 1788) The state governments have the power to make local decisions such as establishing schools, passing marriage and divorce laws, and to hold elections. Whereas the central government has the power to make decisions that affect the country such as, to provide an army and navy, set up post offices, and regulate trade. As James Madison said, “The different governments will each control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.”

The Constitution came to fruition as an answer for the issues and numerous shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation. Not every person concurred with the Constitution or even the said issues emerging from the Articles of Confederation. These people were called Anti-Federalists and their thoughts would not be as effective as the thoughts of the Federalists, since Anti-Federalist thought's reflected numerous qualities of the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution should have been endorsed with a specific end goal to conjure change and solvethe issues of the Articles of Confederation. The Federalists had the plans to make the country the best is could be, and also sufficiently giving rights to citizens.

The Articles of Confederation also known as the, Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, was an earlier document between 1776-1777. That was approved over many months of debate and is known as the 1st constitution of the United States between the first thirteen colonies. It was then to be ratified by all the 13 states that took nearly a full 4 years to do so. The idea of this constitution was to give sovereignty of all 13 states while the federal government only received powers that the states recognized were given to the King and Parliament, similar almost to the British. The Articles were inarguably terrible and had very little positive outcomes, most consider it to reap no benefits whatsoever and caused many conflicts between the states.

After fighting for America’s independence the nation was faced with the situation of developing their own government; with that idea the Articles of Confederation were made as a way to define the government’s structure. With the articles came dysfunction, and a lack of authority. Consequently the dysfunction caused division in the nation, separating the people into two political parties, Federalist and anti-federalist. The parties developed over time and discord, with the development of the Constitution into the Federalist Party and the Democratic Republican Party. The two parties, the Federalist, and the Democratic Republicans, based on their backgrounds and means of income, opposed each other with differing political and economic views.

The Articles of Confederation was the first constitution since the United States of America was formed. This constitution wasn’t helping the states and was causing many arguments between them. After Shay’s Rebellion, when the farmers got mad about having high taxes and heavy debts, even though Shay’s Rebellion didn’t succeed it proved that something has to be done to the Articles of Confederation. What do you think the conclusion will be after the states do something about the Articles of Confederation? The Virginia Plan and the New Jersey Plan helped create the constitution.

All the citizens of the states have the right to citizenship, and any citizen of any state does a crime but flees to other states must be

Not so long after, problems arose with the governmental system and our founding fathers gathered and started considering different ideas to improve the governmental structure. Large and small states had different suggestions on what should be done to solve the problem. Yet, two things remained clear; Americans feared the British system and wanted nothing similar to it and, the Articles of Confederation had proved inefficient due to the restricted power of the federal government. Two main plans were the reason of debate, the battle was between the federalist and the antifederalist. The powers vested on the executive were a big part of the discussion and the arguments were sustained through a series of publications called the Federalist

of the Constitution to the states for consideration. To amend the Articles of Confederation had required unanimous approval of the states. The delegates agreed to change the approval process for the Constitution so only nine of the thirteen states had approved. After this, the new government of the United States would come into existence.

Did you know that the president doesn’t get to create anything that the Supreme Court doesn’t approve of? I am a Federalist. I am living in the 1700’s in the brand new United States of America. Federalist, like me, believe in different rights and different ways of life than an Anti-Federalist. A federalist is a person who supports the Constitution.

As it applies to the Articles of Confederation there were many weaknesses in the way it went about governing the United States. For one, the loose federation of the states was too weak to act as a foundation to be considered or act as a central government. In addition the state legislatures had too much power and in turn had the ability to influence economic issues of all kinds. This strong legislature is the same one that allowed for mob ruling and actions by debtors. The Articles of confederation were also weak because the required congress to have all 13 colonies in agreement when a new tax was to be passed.

“Federalism is a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority (national government) and constituent political units (states). Within the sovereignty of the national and state government, they directly governs the residents within their own assigned territory. They have authority that is not subject to the other’s approval and is constitutionally protected. Abolishment of each other is prohibited” (Patterson, 2013, p. 59). Federalism of 1787 and today divides the responsibilities of government between the nation and states, restraining the influence of both.

The Articles of the Confederation was written in the beginning, because the citizens of America feared the government. The people wanted a new system that was organized and protected its people from Wars, attacks, and most importantly a stronger and reliable economy. In my opinion, there were more weaknesses than strengthens: 1. Congress lacked the power to collect taxes. 2.

The Articles of Confederation was an agreement among the thirteen original states of the United States that served as the first constitution. The Articles had first been introduced by Richard Henry Lee in the Second Continental Congress. Although the Articles of Confederation has made its contributions throughout history, the Articles, however, did not last very long and had been proven inadequate from the very start. I agree with this statement based on the examples and analysis of the Constitution I will soon provide. The Articles of Confederation were written during a time when the American people feared a strong national government.

Federalism Federalism is a system of government in which power is divided between federal government, state government and provinces government. While federalism has many benefits, among them is checks and balances between the federal and state government, thus reducing the chances of one party getting too powerful and abusing their power. Preventing one party from being too powerful and abusing their powers is a good thing. However, it comes with a price that federal and provinces (state and local) governments do not always see eye to eye and agree with each other, which turns into conflict.