Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

784 Words4 Pages

It is 1787, and the Framers of the Constitution have a daunting decision to make. The United States of America is a free nation, but a new system of government needs to be established. The first attempt has already failed; the Articles of Confederation has proven to be too weak to govern the nation and deal with its problems. This new government should be strong enough to rule over all the States while allowing each of the States to maintain sovereignty. Eventually, the Framers decide on a federal government, which divides power between the central government and regional governments. The National Government would have certain delegated powers, the States would have certain reserved powers, and sometimes these powers would overlap. Federalism ensures that States are able to manage local affairs by creating interstate compacts, adhering to the Full Faith and Credit Clause, and aiding each other with extradition without involvement from the central government. One of the ways that States help each other develop their own sovereignty is through the creation of interstate compacts. States are prohibited from making alliances and treaties, but interstate compacts are an excellent way for States to collaborate and problem solve without the aid of the National Government. Today there are over two hundred interstate compacts in effect, and one of …show more content…

There is no discrepancy between one state’s driver license and another’s. Because of Full Faith and Credit Clause, Jim Bob’s Californian license is valid in all fifty states. There is no specific national standard for driver license tests, but each state simply needs to give full faith and credit to the other, trusting that the license does indeed signify that Jim Bob is competent on the road. The States trusts the other States’ legal