Comparing The Constitution To The Articles Of Confederation

Before the U.S. Constitution there was the Articles of Confederation. The document could declare war, negotiate treaties, and control foreign affairs. It couldn’t enforce laws, tax, and raise its own army. What the Articles Of Confederation lacked was a strong central government. Alexander Hamilton called for a constitutional convention in 1786, and it took place in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787.

Unit 3 Test After the Revolution and the failure that was the Articles of Confederation, the nation needed order. Thus the nation’s leaders came together during the summer of 1787 at the Philadelphia Convention to draft the Constitution of the United States. The constitution was ratified in 1788. The Federalist Party had to gain nine of the thirteen states’ approval of the constitution to ratify it despite the goals of the Declaration of Independance. After the tyranny of the British rule, the new citizens of the United States wanted a severely limited government.

Some similarities that the Articles of Confederation and the US constitution have are that they were written by the same person, both were the official government of the United States, and both were the laws of the United States. The articles of confederation and the US constitution were considered official laws. Which means, it was obeyed by

The article of confederation were laws that the 13 states in the United States accepted and signed; while the U.S constitution is a set of rules that govern the nation's citizens. The articles of confederation has a lot of flaws with weaknesses like no power to tax, no national executive, no judicial/national court, no checks and balances; which all resulted in no money, no enforcement of laws, unequal representation. In comparison, the U.S constitution creates equal representation, meaning that small states have an equal voice. The U.S constitution also keeps disagreements from happening, allowing a better transition of power. In the 5th and 14th amendments, the constitution says that "the government shall not deprive anybody of life, liberty,

On the other hand, the US Constitution introduced the structure wherein every illustrative or congressperson was given one vote. The Constitution furthermore masterminded setting up the official organization branch, something which Articles of Confederation didn't energize. Thusly, the official, that is, the President was picked by an appointive school. Right, when the Articles was the law that must be clung to, government courts did not in the photo and all laws were actualized by state courts. The Constitution switched this by setting up a state court structure, which was designated the task of settling question between the occupants and furthermore the states.

This question concerned democracy, as democracy had a different meaning in 1787, to the majority of Philadelphia, it meant mob rule (Shay’s Rebellion) and giving power to people was considered as giving invitation to anarchy that is why a debate started on the issue of people electing national lawmakers. George Mason of Virginia argued for popular elections. "The people will be represented," Mason said, "so they should choose their representatives." James Wilson agreed. "I wish to see the power of the government flow immediately from the lawful source of that power.

Some of the major differences between the Articles of Confederations and the Constitution were: 1. A congress divided into The House of Representatives and the

This made them create the law that to pass any amendments, or to change any, it needed to have 2/3 of congress to vote on it and 3/4 of the states approval, unlike when they had the articles of confederation. The Articles of Confederation had to have all the states agree on an amendment. The only problem with this was that the states had different opinions and views, which resulted in nothing changing.

Following the Revolutionary War, America had just gained independance from Great Britain and needed to form a new government. The Articles of Confederation were established as an attempt to create a government that was unlike Britain’s. Unfortunately, the Articles of Confederation had several weaknesses. When in the process of repairing those weaknesses, the Federalists and the Anti-federalists formed. The Articles of Confederation were very weak as well as useless to America and because of this, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists could not agree on a new type of government.

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.

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

To start off, the Articles of confederation, was in essence, the first constitution that gave more power to its states rather than the central government. It based its principles off being a union, and placed the building blocks to the constitution we have today. States were give the authority to rule over their affairs as they see fit. The constitution and the articles of confederation have  a lot of similarities. Both articles gave the US a system of government.

The Articles of Confederation was an agreement among the thirteen original states of the United States that served as the first constitution. The Articles had first been introduced by Richard Henry Lee in the Second Continental Congress. Although the Articles of Confederation has made its contributions throughout history, the Articles, however, did not last very long and had been proven inadequate from the very start. I agree with this statement based on the examples and analysis of the Constitution I will soon provide. The Articles of Confederation were written during a time when the American people feared a strong national government.

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.

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.