preview

Significant Differences Between The Articles Of Confederation And The New Constitution

Decent Essays

Introduction
There were significant differences between the governance system under the articles of confederation and the new constitution. The weaknesses of the later caused bad experiences and the clamor for a new constitution. For instance, under the articles of confederation, congress had no power over interstate or foreign commerce (Constitution Society, n.d). States made their decisions that were not always in the best interest of the whole nation. In addition, all federal laws were enforced by the states because congress did not have the capacity to implement them. The outcome is that some laws were ignored or misinterpreted (Ablavsky, 2014). This paper compares and contrasts the form of governance under the Articles of Confederation …show more content…

For instance, all federal laws were enforced by state courts because Congress had no way of enforcing them. Therefore, states could just ignore them without fear of retribution (Ablavsky, 2014). Furthermore, the constitution could only be amended with the approval of all countries, which made it possible for some states to block legislation. Also, only state governments could act directly on the people. The states were sovereign, and there was no independent executive. Lack of a presidential figure meant that the U.S had no person to conduct foreign affairs. At one point, Britain complained that there was no one to contact so as to initiate diplomacy (Clark, 2013). The emergence of the Shay rebellion also demonstrated the weakness of the articles of the confederation because it was attributed to the lack of a national army to respond to both internal and external aggression. The national government was not allowed to raise an army and had no resources to finance a state militia. Therefore, the rebellion demonstrated the need for a strong central government. These weaknesses made it necessary for the U.S. to change its

Get Access