Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation Dbq

544 Words3 Pages
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. As written to George Washington by a delegate from the Continental Congress, troops that had fought in the American Revolution were discontent because they were not receiving their payments and Congress did not have the capacity to pay off the country’s debts. (Doc C) The government was unable to pay off the debt of the country because the Continental Congress did not possess the ability to regulate commerce. Rhode Island rejected the proposal of a universal tariff, which would have helped to pay off the debt of the new nation. (Doc A) This rejection showed the issues with requiring unanimous support for an amendment, since a small state could decide the fate
…show more content…
For example, the Continental Congress was able to effectively deal with the western land claims of the United States. (Doc E) However, George Washington feared that the first constitution was ruining the “better people” living in the country. (Doc G) Meanwhile, antifederalists living in the country believed that the Articles of Confederation should just be revised. (Doc H) The general consensus seemed to be that something needed to be done to fix the document, even if it did deal with the western land claims of the country in an effective
Open Document