ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

706 Words3 Pages

The Articles of Confederation were in need of a change. The document was a failure because the United States weren't able to raise money and pay for troops. The founder’s ideas of how the country should be ran all varied. The biggest disagreement was the representation of big vs. small states, this introduced two plans, the New Jersey and Virginia Plan. The New Jersey Plan, which was supported by the Anti-Federalists, supported small states while the Virginia Plan, which was supported by the Federalists, supported big states. The Federalists were people who wanted to completely throw away the Articles of Confederation and write a new document whilst the Anti-Federalists wanted to keep the Articles of Confederation and amend it. The three debates …show more content…

The Anti-Federalists wanted the people to elect their representatives, because they believed that it would allow a sense of security for the people since the congress already had so much power over them. The people repeatedly told the state legislature that they would never submit to an authority that is not elected by themselves. They had the idea that the state legislature would elect subservient to their own desires, not the people's. If the elected representatives are representing the people, then the people should choose who they want to be represented by. The Federalists, on the other hand, wanted the state legislature to elect representatives because they believed that “politicians should elect politicians.” The Federalists thought that the people may be tricked into voting against the common good because they were not politicians; this was pretty much their only argument. The Anti-Federalists had the most reasons and evidence as to why the people should elect their own representatives. To balance the power the people now had, being able to elect their own representatives, the Congress now elects the …show more content…

Of course, the Federalists, who supported the Virginia Plan, wanted proportional representation while the Anti-Federalists, who supported the New Jersey Plan, wanted equal representation. The Federalists thought that an equal number of people should have an equal number of representatives while a different number of people should have a different number of representatives. They feared rule by minority. They also believed that no proper government could work on equal representation. The Anti-Federalists believed that if they were to have proportional representation that the small states would be “destroyed,” that the energy and stability of government would be in danger. Patterson said that it was “Striking at the existence of the lesser states”. In the end, proportional representation won because that was what everyone believed would be most fair to

Show More
Related

  • Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

    605 Words  | 3 Pages

    Following the American secession from Britain in 1776, the colonies needed to implement a form of self-governance. In the early years of the Revolutionary War, the colonies drafted the Articles of Confederation, which outlined an agreement to loosely ally the states. At the time, American colonists were extremely wary of strong central governments. Thus, under the Articles, the United States maintained a weak central government with strong state governments. With this situation in place, the success of the U.S. government was mixed.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

    462 Words  | 2 Pages

    Many main drawbacks and problems for The Articles of Confederation were seen from the beginning. The strongest fault of the document was the national government had very little power, especially with the states. The central government could not even regulate how the states enforced or created their own rules causing them to run as their own mini-countries. The local government was overpowering the national government, and if the states didn’t cooperate then it would take unnecessary amounts of time to enact important decisions such as War and military drafts. This led the

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

    746 Words  | 3 Pages

    By the year 1786, the people realized that the foundation on which our country was built on, that being the Articles of Confederation, had some major flaws that needed to be modified. The Articles of Confederation hindered Congress from taxing the people, regulating domestic affairs, and even controlling the countries commerce. With these restrictions on the power of Congress, it made it very difficult for Congress to make money. Instead, they had to rely on generous contributions from the states,which most of the states didn't partake in. The United States had no money to pay the soldiers back who served in the Revolutionary War or to pay back the money from the foreign loans that was granted to them during the war, and this resulted in the United

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

    1471 Words  | 6 Pages

    The Thirteen Colonies had now been free for a while and had grown into a nation with an abundance of land with a strong sense of responsibility. The United States of America was not like the other nations found throughout the world. It differed though its principals and morals, it radiated a sense of comfort and freedom that was hard to find anywhere else. However, it still lacked a strong government that could support such an important and developing nation. The Articles of Confederation had its achievements that supported it; however, it also had its great shortcomings that made the nation doubt its support to the large nation.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

    1203 Words  | 5 Pages

    “Nothing is more certain than the indispensable necessity of government, and it is equally undeniable, that whenever and however it is instituted, the people must cede to it some of their natural rights in order to vest it with requisite powers.” ( Federalists No. 2). As a fairly new country we are quick to abolish beliefs and ideals we create; the Articles of confederation has spawned a weak and tenderfoot government. As a lawyer with a beautiful family living in Pennsylvania, the governmental system at this moment is not granted the strength needed to refine, direct, and protect our rights and liberties. The weakness of the Articles of Confederation are showcased through: the lack of power to tax or regulate trade, an army to enforce rules,

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Articles Of Confederation

    1402 Words  | 6 Pages

    To take care of the country's aggregate activity issues, the Virginia Plan likewise gave the national government authorization power as it could make whatever laws they regarded essential. The national government had power over little states, yet the little states did not like this one bit in light of the fact that they felt they were not included in the political methodology, and thought the national government was responsible for everything. They were sorry to say they would not have a say in government or oppression. With these concerns, they aroused around the New Jersey

    Read More

  • When Was It Called The Constitutional Convention Of September 17, 1787

    1474 Words  | 6 Pages

    The anti-federalist were the opposing party of the federalist disagreeing with the strong government. The anti-federalists had wanted a weaker government and had wanted individual rights for people by adding the bill of rights to the constitution. The anti-federalists were the type of political group who wanted rights for the people and for the United States, so everyone could have their individual rights as people. The anti-federalists believed that the federalists and the constitution was granting too much power to the federal courts at any expense. The Anti-federalists were arguing that the federal courts would be to far away to have justice for each average citizen.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Anti Federalist Structure Of The Government

    678 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Anti-Federalist’s structure of the government was the right way the government should have been shaped. Their efforts clearly showed that the protection of our individual rights, and prevention of the government having too much power over the states was their main goal. Though it was viewed that the Anti-Federalists “lost” in the debate with the Federalists, they achieved a lot. The Anti-Federalists favored pure democracy, wanting a federal system where the states had more power than the government.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast The Arguments Against The Ratification Of The Constitution

    887 Words  | 4 Pages

    Federalists shared the belief that the Constitution would bring a good balance of power. While the Anti-Federalists, such as Patrick Henry, were the exact opposite; they were against the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists were concerned about their liberty and the government being given too much power.

    Read More

  • Why Is Federalism A Stronger Government

    199 Words  | 1 Pages

    The federalist want a New Constitution because Federalist want a fresh start and want to avoid tyranny. In my opinion the Anti-Federalist is the weaker government between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. The Anti-Federalist do not want states to have their own government. Not having a government in charge of each individual state

    Read More

  • Federalist Vs. Anti-Federalists

    736 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Anti-Federalist believed that the Constitution granted too much power to the federal courts and took power from the states, depriving citizens of liberties. The Federalist believed that "The smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens" (Federalist Papers, No. 10). The Anti-Federalist wanted a national representation large enough to secure a substantial representation of the middle class, but not a very large one. They did not want a large national representation because they believed it may derive liberties from local state representatives.

    Read More

  • Anti Federalist Government

    975 Words  | 4 Pages

    Since the beginning of its creation America has been known as being the land of the free. The Anti-Federalist movement was the only way America would have kept its founding principles, and prevent the monarchy like Federalist movement from occurring, thus saving Americans freedom. Those that would be representatives in government of the United States would be composed of the rich. The rich only have their own best interests in mind and thus, silence those they are meant to be representing.

    Read More

  • Articles Of Confederation Dbq Essay

    585 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Federalist main argument was stated based off the opinion that the government would never have complete power over the citizens, but the citizens would also have a little more power and a say in the things that involve them. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists believed in limited powers specifically stated, they wanted strong state governments, and wanted a Bill of Rights added to the Constitution to protect the people from the government (Document 4). This was their point of view due to the fact that they believed that the individual states know and can act more based on their people that on federal government can. They focused their argument on the rights of the citizens. For the Federalists and Anti-Federalists to agree on a new government, they created a compromise that combined each of their ideas.

    Read More

  • Ratification Of The Constitution Essay

    494 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Articles of Confederation were a document seen as the “first” constitution of the United States. This document granted the new national government power to control the military, declare war, and create treaties between the states. However, the Articles had holes in it considering the government did not have the power to tax, create laws without at least nine states’ approval, or change the Articles of Confederation without a unanimous vote. This means that the country soon fell into debt and petty arguments between state, the new government had no control. It was time for a change.

    Read More

  • Differences And Similarities Between Anti-Federalists And Anti-Federalists

    622 Words  | 3 Pages

    Federalists and Anti-Federalists had opposing views in the Constitution because of their differences; but they also had many similarities that ended up leading to the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists and Federalist had many similarities. Both were supportive of this new country and knew that they needed a government. They both wanted the congress to have power to create war and to create treaties.

    Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

Open Document