This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Art

Confederation Articles vs. U.S. Constitution

This essay is written by:

Louis PHD Verified writer

Finished papers: 5822

4.75

Proficient in:

Psychology, English, Economics, Sociology, Management, and Nursing

You can get writing help to write an essay on these topics
100% plagiarism-free

Hire This Writer

Confederation Articles vs. U.S. Constitution

The articles of confederation and the U.S. constitution are the most fundamental documents manifested during the U.S. revolution. The article was the first constitution that came into force after gaining independence from Britain. The article organized and mobilized the initial 13 colonies of the U.S. for ten years. Before the inception of the article of confederation, all American activities were subversive to the Queen of England but were oppressive as today’s terrorism. As noted by Carswell, the article of confederation was deemed ineffective and weak and was replaced after ten years by the U.S. constitution. Even though the article has much in common, looking at details, they differ more than they resemble each other. However, the constitution is a better document than an article of confederation due to several weaknesses inherent in the article.

Key Similarities

The constitution and articles were both committed to establishing an independent and united country and gives its citizens freedom. The colonies were able to enjoy and exercise freedom from foreign powers. These documents provided a foundation for collective defense. Every state was bound to support the other in the event of an attack. A critical objective of writing the U.S. constitution was to offer a common defense against foreign invaders. The sole purpose of the article of confederation was to establish a mutual defense among states against external aggressors, particularly Britain (Maggs 85). Ideally, articles created a firm league of friendship among states for the common defense and securing their freedom and liberties. The two documents agreed on the name ‘United States of America to represent all newly united colonies.

The two documents were created based on uniting former colonies and forming a government that is representative of the people. Ideally, they both concurred that a government should run for the general welfare of its people. Both documents provide a democratic selection of people’s representatives through popular votes or delegates to congress to represent their interests. The representative served for a certain number of years in the congress to serve the interests of their people. However, even though the article of confederation and the constitution have much in common, looking at details, these documents differ more than they resemble each other. Differences in these documents are discussed in the next section.

Discussion of Fundamental Differences

The first difference between these documents relates to the powers they accorded state and federal governments. While the articles created strong and powerful states, the constitution created a powerful and robust federal government.  The former British colonies became fearful of making a government with strong powers like Britain. Under the articles, congress had no powers to collect taxes from states and enforce treaties. Consequently, the federal government was unable to pay soldiers fighting in the revolutionary war. Besides, Federal courts and the executive did not exist under the article of Federation. States were also unable to enforce or follow up federal laws and could even make their own money (Leibiger 353). On the contrary, the constitution created a stronger central government that one created under the article of confederation. It created Federalism, which divided power between Federal and state governments. Three branches were also created with checks and balances to ensure that parts of the central government were not strong. In Federalism, only the central government was mandated to make money while both governments can collect taxes. The constitution further accorded a judicial and executive branch to the central government.

Both the article and constitution recognize the United States as a sovereign nation. Both documents mandate the legislature the power to make laws. However, articles created only one house known as congress, while the constitution created two houses of congress, the house of representatives and the senate. Under the article of confederation, members of the congress ranged between 2 and 7 per each state while senate, as created under the constitution, has two members from each state subject to the population in the state. The voting was one vote per state in the congress under the article but one vote per representative under the constitution. The appointment of congress members under the articles of confederation was by legislatures while in the constitution, congress members are elected by popular votes. The constitution mandates a representative in the legislative office to serve for two years while senators serve for six years. However, congress members only serve a one year term under the article of confederation.

The executive is recognized by the articles of confederation but the presidency and is acknowledged by the U.S. constitution as an executive. Amending article laws can only be effected through an agreement of all the states making up the United States as per the articles, but only three-quarters of the states can agree to amend the U.S. Constitution. The federal government had limited powers under the article, including the inability to collect tax and regulate trade (Leibiger 351). However, the constitution gave it some strengths, including tax collection, acquisition of common currency for the states, a common leader, and an army to protect the nation. Most fundamentally, the constitution of the U.S. has been successful and remained unchanged up to date. It serves as the source of regulations and rules governing the nation, and any laws inconsistent with the constitution are declared null and void. However, the U.S. constitution has been regarded undemocratic by some critics due to the indirect election of the U.S. president and confusing elections of senators.

Conclusion

People greatly appreciated the article of confederation as the starting point towards having a constitution for the nation. It, however, had les strengths than weaknesses. The main strength of the article was the extra effort of uniting U.S. states by coming up with a strong legislature. However, the main undoing was the failure to allocate more powers to the central government. Thus, the article was deemed weak and insufficient and was replaced by the constitution. The constitution overcame the weaknesses of the article of confederation and has remained successful from inception to date. In conclusion, the U.S. constitution is a better document than an article of confederation due to several weaknesses inherent in the article.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Works cited

Carswell, Jordan. “The Insufficiency of the Articles of Confederation.” 2019 NCUR (2019).

Maggs, Gregory E. “A Concise Guide to the Articles of Confederation as a Source for Determining the Original Meaning of the Constitution.” Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 85 (2017): 397.

Leibiger, Stuart. “” We Have Not a Government”: The Articles of Confederation and the Road to the Constitution by George William Van Cleve.” Journal of the Early Republic 39.2 (2019): 350-353.

 

 

 

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask