ipl-logo

Difference Between The Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution

1012 Words5 Pages

Articles of Confederation vs. the Constitution The intent the framers had of the executive was reflected in the Articles of Confederation. There were several problems with the Articles of Confederation, that Han and Heith mentioned in chapter two of “Presidents and the American Presidency, due to a lack of insight and political effectiveness. Since, the document did not allocate a head of state it caused the articles of confederation to be extremely weak. The confederation could not enforce laws, coordinate national defense, or handle foreign affairs. The states remained sovereign and independent meaning, that it had the authority to govern itself. States were clearly more powerful than the central government which often created conflict. …show more content…

A republic is a form of government in which rulers are elected by the rule and based on the principle of representative government. The framers referred to writings of Greek and Roman philosophers, to understand historical governments. The Constitution depended advancement and adjustment of these regimes ,and also taught the framers about excessive power within a single institution. One major goal of the framers of the constitution was to reverse the weaknesses of the Articles of the Confederation. Framers began to focus on a presidency with sufficient authority to enforce laws, create national security, direct foreign policy and promote international commerce. The president was able to promote these duties by enacting federalism. Federalism ideology is the sharing of political powers between the national and state government. It promoted state specific duties more effectively. Furthermore, they limited popular sovereignty, the idea that people hold power and the government is subjected to the will of the people, by creating the electoral college with the goal of limiting the peoples power and creating constitutional stability. Similar, to the Articles of Confederation the framers intended to create a limited executive authority. This type of authority is specific powers that the executive have. The framers thinking behind this concept is that this would prevent any tyranny, because it would allow …show more content…

I believe the framers make a strong argument that the constitution will create a stronger government compared to the Articles of Confederation. Throughout the federalist papers the framers give various reason on why this constitution would be beneficial to the nation. First, Madison described the system of checks and balances and separation of powers, that would create a strong government, but not overly powerful Furthermore, during his paper he finds a problem of Congress becoming too strong. So he finds a solution to this issue by creating, bicameralism that will divide the power into separate houses. Madison goes into more detail about the checks and balance system describing how the president would be able to utilize this concept by vetoing legislation. However, there were several framers who were against the ratifying of the constitution. They argued that there were several problems. These Antifederalist papers contain complaints about the process of electing the president, the amount of representation each state received in the legislature, and the organization of the court system. One of the most notable is that the central government would be too strong. In the pacificus debate, there was controversy over the limits of the constitution after the Constitutional Convention failed to include in which legislative and executive authorities would share their divided

Show More
Related
703 Words | 3 Pages

“The different governments will each control each other at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” (Doc A, Madison,James, Federalist Paper 51, 1788). Each part of the government had there own jobs to do, for example the central government has the power to regulate trade, conduct foreign relations, provide an army and navy, while the state government set up local governments, holds elections,

Read More
200 Words | 1 Pages

Constitution vs. Articles of Confederation Comparing the Constitution to the Articles of Confederation is really easy. To start off with the articles didn’t have executive branch, meaning no president. The Constitution has a executive branch, and introduced the legislative and judicial branches. National debt was a big threat after the revolutionary war, during the article period it wasn’t payed well, until the constitution the federal government helped pay the national debt, by passing taxes. The voting process was also introduced in the Constitution, compared to the articles the states vote in secret forms.

Read More
490 Words | 2 Pages

The Constitution, unlike the Articles of Confederation, was made into a new system by popular vote. Those who supported the Constitution called themselves Federalists. They followed classical notions of republicanism. They supported a central government system saying, that a carefully constructed government would get rid of any chance of possible tyranny. A republic could be large if the government's design prevented one group from having too much control.

Read More
1017 Words | 5 Pages

With the hopes of unifying the sovereign states under one government that would better protect the rights of its citizens and protect the nation, the Framers of the Constitution met up to revise, but inevitably alter the premises of the Articles of Confederation. After much debating and compromising, the Framers set up the Constitution that gave the national government enumerated powers and reserved powers for the states, with some powers being shared among both spheres of government. Federalism is the separation of powers among the different levels in government (i.e., the national and state governments) along with the restrictions placed on each level of government to avoid tyranny. Some citizens, called the Antifederalists, feared the national

Read More
404 Words | 2 Pages

The Federalists wanted a representative democracy under which there would be a strong central government. Under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government had little power other than to declare war, borrow and coin money, and regulate trade with Native Americans, along with a few others; it lacked the authority to regulate commerce among states, levy taxes, create a standing army, or prevent discrimination among states (Lowi) . The issues caused by the lack of authority of the central government quickly called for the need for change. This sculpted the Federalists’ objective to create a strong national government which had concrete governmental power strong enough to create unity among the states. One main focus for the Federalists

Read More
778 Words | 4 Pages

The Articles of the Confederation was the first government constitution that the United States used, and, although there were strength like the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, there were major weaknesses of the Articles of the Confederation like the following: requiring 9 out of the 13 colonial votes from the representatives from different states to pass a law; having no executive and judicial branch; and the federal government being unable to impose tax revenue onto the states. Such flaws would eventually lead to the Constitution and the repeal of the articles, for the Constitution was a measure to fix the problems of the articles with a stronger government that allowed them to impose taxes and and implement new laws for a more effective government.

Read More
1018 Words | 5 Pages

After the Articles of Confederation failed because they failed to give enough power to the national government and congress, our founding father’s needed to reflect on its flaws for a new system to be set in place. Their new creation, our Constitution, was then set into place, and was created from a basis of the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation directly influence the Constitution by its failure by changing some of the responsibilities of the federal and state governments. The Articles of Confederation gave too much power to the states, and the Constitution changed that.

Read More
784 Words | 4 Pages

In one hand, the Articles of Confederation had a weak central government, differing form the strong central government in the Constitution. The Constitution’s government had a structure of three different branches; the legislative, executive, and judicial branch; unlike the Articles of Confederation that had no structure whatsoever. The Articles of Confederation had many problems like, the poor international trade, poor foreign relations and a weak economy in contrast to the Constitution that only had one problem, the struggle over the ratification. the Articles of Confederation achieved the Northwest Ordinance and the Northwest Territory and according to a history website, the Constitution achieved that we had a system of checks and balances, that we had a bill of rights, and, eventually, the survival of a bloody civil war intact. Lastly, the Constitution had three compromises: the Great Compromise, the Three-Fifths Compromise and the Slave Trade compromise.

Read More
984 Words | 4 Pages

Before the Revolutionary war beginning in 1775, the thirteen American colonies were controlled by the British without serious issues. Each colony had its own representative for its local government in terms of making and practicing laws with being supervised by the governor dispatched by the British. Moreover, all thirteen colonies were required to comply with the laws made by the British Parliament. It is possible to say that the colonial settles were proud of being the British citizens.

Read More
479 Words | 2 Pages

The Constitution had a much stronger centralized government, which enforced democracy. The Constitution was created for the people, to secure the natural born rights, like the freedom of speech. In 1787, the Constitutions final text was finished and was said to have been about 4,200 words in length and on the final day of the Constitutional Convention in 1787 Benjamin Franklin said “I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such because I think a central government is necessary for us… I doubt too whether any other Convention we can obtain may be able to make a better Constitution.” Soon after the colonies including Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut ratified the constitution, but many states including Massachusetts opposed the constitution because it was said to have lacked reserved undelegated powers to the states and constitutional protection of basic political rights.

Read More
478 Words | 2 Pages

Indeed, the first written form of government was a great idea for the colonies, but due to the weak central government, the states were granted almost every power; as if every state was their own country. Defense, general welfare,

Read More
1033 Words | 5 Pages

The most important difference between these documents was that the Articles of Confederation gave very little power to a central government and the Constitution created a strong central government. The Article of Confederation was written to unite states after the American Revolution. People had the fear of the government having too much power. This document established

Read More
784 Words | 4 Pages

Some of the obligations that needed to be discussed were federalism, the division of powers, checks and balances, and the power of small and large states. Federalism is a government that is made up of one or two pieces. The two governments are state and federal government. The different governments control each other, at the same time each is controlled by itself. The central government was given the powers to keep the well-being of the country, and to help protect the U.S. from other countries.

Read More
494 Words | 2 Pages

The Articles of Confederation were a document seen as the “first” constitution of the United States. This document granted the new national government power to control the military, declare war, and create treaties between the states. However, the Articles had holes in it considering the government did not have the power to tax, create laws without at least nine states’ approval, or change the Articles of Confederation without a unanimous vote. This means that the country soon fell into debt and petty arguments between state, the new government had no control. It was time for a change.

Read More
823 Words | 4 Pages

Articles of Confederation vs. U.S. Constitution The Articles of the Confederation and the U.S. Constitution are two articles that where written and accepted by the United States as a foundation for their new government. They are both very important documents that have similarities and differences. Some of the main things the Articles of Confederation and the U.S. Constitution have in common is that they addressed the needs of its constituencies.

Read More

More about Difference Between The Articles Of Confederation And The Constitution

Related Topics

Open Document