Because of the numerous shortcomings of the Articles the convention that was held to modify the Articles wound up discarding the Articles of Confederation and starting from the very beginning once more. A weak Congress was one of the principle weaknesses of the Articles. “The Articles created a loose confederation of sovereign states and a weak central government, leaving most of the power with the state governments” (Library of Congress). The main issue with the Articles of Confederation was that it neglected to give power to the government. The new states needed to unite under one Constitution and form a sovereign central government.
Dawisha and K. Dawisha, paragraph 16). Not all provinces are guaranteed to work together and if a nation-wide issue were to arise, handling it would be difficult because the strength lies in the individual states and not in the national government. Another issue that would arise is currency and forms of trade between all units. Additionally, an issue that could be found with a confederation is there wouldn’t be a sense of unity between all the different groups, causing people to be divided and focused on individual areas rather than a whole. The United States started with The Articles of Confederation and while it was the first official unionization for the country, there were many weaknesses in it; we were unable to function efficiently as a whole.
Dred Scott Vs SandFord The case, Dred Scott vs Sandford, (1857) better known as the Dred Scott case was a crucial decision that affected America and it’s black population. Free blacks in America weren’t able to sue the court. The concept of popular sovereignty was also questioned, and blacks with ancestors were imported to America was slave could no longer become citizens. The Case ruled that slaves in free countries are still slaves. In 1857 the Dred Scott case was pulled into the supreme court.
The governing document during this time, the Articles of Confederation, had multiple weaknesses including that there was no tax authority, no chief executive, and no judicial system. The Constitutional Convention of 1787 ultimately allowed for a functional, united governing system. The Federalists argument was more valid than the Anti-Federalist 's argument because they argued for an adequate government to preserve the union, a strong and energetic government, political prosperity, and the protection of life and liberty. In order to understand why the Federalist 's argument is stronger, we must examine the Anti-Federalist 's perspective. An Anti-Federalist is someone who opposed the ratification of the United States Constitution.
This means, the states are free to govern themselves and all powers not given to Congress by the Articles of Confederation belong to the States. Article II quickly caused problems for the Congress because it had little authority over the sovereign states in terms of enforcing laws. Another weakness was, Congress didn’t have the power to tax. For example, Congress could send an invoice saying that a state needs to pay taxes, but the state could essentially just rip up the invoice and refuse to pay because Congress didn’t have the power to collect
In spite of this, not everyone was happy about the new Constitution. This broke people up into two groups: Anti-Federalists and Federalists. The Anti-Federalists were those in favor of strong states’ rights. They disliked the Constitution because they believed that there was a chance that Constitution would destroy the freedoms the colonies fought for. They were scared of tyranny, especially pertaining to the fact that under the new Constitution, the national government, or Congress, would be able to make decisions without even asking for the states’ permission.
Most notably, the three-fifths clause in Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution determined slaves to be valued as three-fifths of any free person. This helped to settle the dispute on representation because the Southern states had higher populations, mainly due to the presence of slaves, which would account for more representation in Congress. To reach a consensus, all those enslaved were considered to only be three-fifths of a free person. Finally, in Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution, the fugitive slave clause was created declaring that all slaves who escaped would be rightfully returned to their owners. If a slave escaped from the South to the North, the Northerners would by law have to return the slaves to their homes.
W. Bush, announced that the U.S. would deploy forces in a defensive operation to protect Saudi Arabia. Operation Desert Shield began. Desert Shield initiated a dramatic increase of U.S. troops and resources in the Gulf region and along the Saudi Arabia border in preparation of Iraqi forces striking the Saudis. On November 29, the United Nations Security Council gave Iraq the deadline of midnight January 16, 1991 to leave Kuwait or face forcible removal by any means necessary. The deadline came and went and the Iraqi’s continued to refuse withdrawal.
The Articles of Confederation provided the United States with a predominantly ineffective government that could not deal with problems at home and abroad. The country was unable to regulate commerce and effectively deal with foreign nations from 1781 to 1789. Although there were some advantages to the first constitution, the issues caused by the document greatly outweighed the benefits. The Articles of Confederation limited America’s ability to deal problems within its own borders and with foreign nations. The United States, under the Articles of Confederation, did not have the ability to properly deal with the problems arising within the borders of the country.
Coupled with, sometimes it is not about who is right, it is about what is best for the greater good of American citizens. Furthermore, this is where the problem lies; whom should have the say of what is best for the greater good, state governments or the federal government. Therefore, the controversy over the Second Amendment has become an issue of federalism; does the federal government have more implied power than the reserved power of the states or should the Second Amendment not be infringed upon , such as it was
As tensions in Great Britain grew economically and politically, the American colony declared themselves an independent nation. Gaining their independence was significant, however, keeping it would be the challenge. The Americans knew a stable federal republic was essential to remaining independent, thus they created the Constitution. Although, the creation of the Constitution and the equality it ensues a controversial issue, the Constitution did not fulfil the job it was designed to do. The document did not establish a fair government.
Patrick Henry was one of those famous powerful figures, patriots, who provided support for the antifederalists. Anti Federalists were in debt and they feared a strong central government who would make them pay-off their debts. They thought that it gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments, and there was no bill of rights, thus, they opposed the ratification of the constitution. As shown on Document G, even in a political system, with checks and balances, a certain branch can be too powerful, which can lead to tyranny of the common people. This document was directed towards the Federalist by the antifederalist to explain a possible problem of the checks and balances system, after the drafting of the constitution and awaiting approval.