Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparison of the federal form of government to the articles of confederation
Articles of confederation federalist and anti federalist
Limitations and strengths of the articles of confederation
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The unpredictable failure of the Articles of Confederation to the continental congress was a huge problem. The Articles of Confederation was made so the states would have more power, And limit the powers of the national government. Main contributors for this action was the fear that the national government will gain too much power and overstep its authority.This would have a negative effect on the nation, because tensions will start to rise for the ineffectiveness of this new system of government. A Rebellion best known as Shays rebellion, took place shortly after The adoption of the Articles of Confederation. The states, in which shays rebellion has taken place, were becoming unjust/unfair the way in which the state collected taxes. Since the Articles of Confederation was a complete failure According to article 2 “The state's government will retain all powers that are not specifically given to the national Congress.. ” (Williamsburg, 2009) In other words the states will have all the powers that are not appointed to the national government, by the Articles of Confederation. According to article 9 “ The national congress will have the power to declare war, negotiate foreign treaties, settle disputes between states, regulate currency, direct the operations of land and naval forces, borrow money from the states.” (Williamsburg, 2009) A elaboration of this is that, The national government is limited to the powers, that are stated above, and has no control of anything else. Since the national government had little to no control over any of the state's, laws that were past inside of these states became unjust and faced little repercussions from the national government, because of the limitations that were put into place by the articles of
In the Summer of 1787, fifty-five delegates representing 12 out of the 13 states in Philadelphia to fix the Articles of Confederation. They met in philadelphia because the Articles of Confederation was too weak. Shay’s rebellion was the end of the Articles of Confederation bringing down the whole network calling for a change of government. They did this to prevent a tyrant or tyranny. A tyrant/tyranny is when someone or a group abuses their power. The Constitution guarded against tyranny through Federalism, Separation of powers, Checks and Balances, and The Great Compromise.
Although not widely known, Shays’s Rebellion greatly impacted the debate on sovereignty and led many to conclude that the only possible solution was the centralization of power in a national authority. Historian John Garraty notes, “The lessons became plain: Liberty must not become an excuse for license; and therefore greater authority must be vested in the central government.”[1] While this effect was not the “rebels’” intended goal, Shays’s Rebellion helped shape the construction of the U.S. Constitution and the American political thought that has since followed. An analysis of both the causes and effects of Shays’s Rebellion highlights its contribution to the demise of the Articles of Confederation and the ratification of the Constitution.
The Articles of Confederation, the perfect republican government, was not a perfect government. It was faulty and ineffective in providing a central government with tax revenue to pay off debts, which caused the discontent of mobs that the central government would fail to control. The Articles created a weak government that would be easily pushed around by its people and by foreign countries. The reliance on civic virtue was successful in organized land policies that spread republicanism ideals; however, it failed to aid the Congress of the Confederation in tax revenue and controlling mobocracy. The Articles of Confederation was ineffective and faulty with is roots planted solely in republicanism.
In an effort to limit the power of the national government, Congress created one without enough power to govern effectively, which led to serious national and international problems. One of the main weaknesses under the Articles of Confederation was its incapability to regulate trade and levy taxes. The states controlled all of their “cash flows.” Sometimes, the states were in debt because of tariff wars that they would engage in with one another.
1) Shays' Rebellion, the post-Revolutionary clash between New England farmers and merchants that tested the precarious institutions of the new republic, threatened to plunge the "disunited states" into a civil war. The rebellion arose in Massachusetts in 1786, spread to other states, and culminated in an abortive attack on a federal arsenal.
Eric Foner claims the definition of Federalism refers to the relationship between the national government and the states. Unlike the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation came with many weaknesses. Some provided by our powerpoint include that the Federal government had no power to make the states obey the Articles and laws that were passed by the legislature. The states also had the power to tax, and the opportunity to print their own money. Our powerpoint focuses on the $10 million Congress owed to other countries, as well as the $40 million it owed to the American veterans. The Constitution differed. Foner states that not only did the Constitution enhance national authority, but it also permitted Congress to levy taxes, conduct commerce, confirm war, deal with the foreign nations and Indians, and rent and help the “general welfare”. According to the powerpoint, Federalists focused on the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation.
Under the Articles of Confederation each state had its own sovereignty. And the central government was to provide thing such as national security, treaties, courts, and currency. However the government could not tax. If the states didn't pay their bills to the government there was nothing the government could do about it. This is just one of many reasons why the Articles didn't work. In 1786 Virginia tried to get the Articles modified by holding a meeting known as the Annapolis Conference. This meeting failed because only five states sent delegates. A few months later another meeting was held in Philadelphia.
The Articles of Confederation were approved by Congress on November 15, 1777 and ratified by the states on March 1, 1781. It was a modest attempt by a new country to unite itself and form a national government. The Articles set up a Confederation that gave most of the power to the states. Many problems arose and so a new Constitution was written in 1787 in Independence Hall. The new Constitution called for a much more unified government with a lot more power. Let us now examine the changes that were undertaken.
The Articles of Confederation were developed after the Revolutionary War, and were a good idea to help set standards for America. However, they had some major problems that needed to be solved in order for America to become a strong nation. After these problems were addressed the Constitution was developed.
“In the first years of peacetime, following the Revolutionary War, the future of both the agrarian and commercial society appeared threatened by a strangling chain of debt which aggravated the depressed economy of the postwar years”.1 This poor economy affected almost everyone in New England especially the farmers. For years these farmers, or yeomen as they were commonly called, had been used to growing just enough for what they needed and grew little in surplus. As one farmer explained “ My farm provides me and my family with a good living. Nothing we wear, eat, or drink was purchased, because my farm provides it all.”2 The only problem with this way of life is that with no surplus there was no way to make enough money to pay excessive debts. For example, since farmer possessed little money the merchants offered the articles they needed on short-term credit and accepted any surplus farm goods on a seasonal basis for payment. However if the farmer experienced a poor crop, shopkeepers usually extended credit and thereby tied the farmer to their businesses on a yearly basis.3 During a credit crisis, the gradual disintegration of the traditional culture became more apparent. During hard times, merchants in need of ready cash withdrew credit from their yeomen customers and called for the repayment of loans in hard cash. Such demands showed the growing power of the commercial elite.4 As one could imagine this brought much social and economic unrest to the farmers of New England. Many of the farmers in debt were dragged into court and in many cases they were put into debtors prison. Many decided to take action: The farmers waited for the legal due process as long as them could. The Legislature, also know as the General Court, took little action to address the farmers complaints. 5 “So without waiting for General Court to come back into session to work on grievances as requested, the People took matters into their own hands.”6 This is when the idea for the Rebellion is decided upon and the need for a leader was eminent.
The Articles of Confederation were incapable of providing the United States with an effective form of government. The Articles of Confederation presided weakly over the government as it allowed little or no power to tax, control trade, and branches of government were missing. In addition to this, the thirteen states acted as separate nations and the national government had little control over them.
However, the Articles of Confederation did few of these things. The Articles of Confederation were ineffective because they provided a weak central government, did not give the authority to settle boundary disputes, and eventually led to civil unrest which included incidences such as Shays’ Rebellion. Other countries did not give the United States of America respect because they had not established a strong central government. Under the Articles of Confederation, the government was restricted in what it could actually do.
The Articles of Confederation was the first government of the United States. The Articles had created a very weak national government. At the time the Articles were approved, they had served the will of the people. Americans had just fought a war to get freedom from a great national authority--King George III (Patterson 34). But after this government was put to use, it was evident that it was not going to keep peace between the states. The conflicts got so frequent and malicious that George Washington wondered if the “United” States should be called a Union (Patterson 35). Shays’ Rebellion finally made it evident to the public that the government needed a change.
Theoretically, in a Federal system the sovereignty is shared between the national government and the local government but the ultimate sovereignty lies on the people. The federal government does not have the power to be involved in the states laws as they are only able to deal with national security, taxation and foreign affairs. The States however, deal with public welfare, education and justice. For instance, in different States there are different laws in executing criminals implemented as such in California death sentence is applied. However, it differs in practice whereby in the recent events the federal government is heavily involved in the public welfare especially when it dealt with major crises.
The Articles of Confederation gave too much to the states, and put too much faith in them to heed the national government’s suggestions. The States remained unresponsive to the words of the national government many times.The Constitution gives more power to the national government by endowing it with more rights and abilities, and removing some powers from the state governments. By doing this, the Constitution repositions the balance of power of the states and the national government by giving the national government more power than the state government. This allows the national government to make sure that certain aspects of American life are static across the entire nation, and are not subject to change in one particular region for those certain political concerns such as