Reasons Why Articles Of Confederation Need To Be Replaced
As all historians and anybody who has studied the brief period between the end of the revolutionary war and the ratification of the constitution, there was total chaos. That chaos can be attributed to the Articles of Confederation. The Articles of Confederation were like the law book of the United States of America.
The articles, however, were very weak. They needed to be replaced by a much better entity which, we now know, was the constitution of the United States. The Articles of Confederation had to be replaced because of all their inability to control trade, their inability to tax, and the disunity their decision-making process.
The biggest weakness the Articles of Confederation had was their inability to control the trade in the states, international and interstate. Trade is probably the most important thing for a country to survive. Controlling trade is essential for a country to survive. The Articles of Confederation could not do that. How could the country survive? The federal government could say to ban all items from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland but the states, usually it was the New England state of Rhode Island, could say no and the articles could not do anything about it.
That also applied for interstate trade. If a ship crossed too far along the Potomac River or the Delaware River, you could be taxed for entering a different state. That was a horrible system were states were competing with each other for dominance and to get out of debt by hurting other’s economy with tariffs and taxes. Truly, the inability to control the trade in the nation and out of it made the Articles of Confederation a bad system that needed to be replaced.
Another reason why the Articles of Confederation were a truly horrid system was their inability to tax the people of the United States of America. The Articles of Confederation could not tax the people or the states. They could only ask for donations and only about twenty-five percent of their requests were fulfilled meaning they only got about twenty-five percent of what they needed. That was a horrible system since they couldn’t keep going. We were in debt to France in particular, but also to other countries.
Since we were only making about twenty-five percent of what we needed, we could not even pay the interest on the loan which was horrible. We were digging ourselves deeper and deeper into debt and France got angry so they blocked their West Indies ports to us, crippling our economy even more than it was already failing from the treatment from the Spanish Empire and especially from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Clearly, the Articles of Confederation’s inability to tax destroyed the nation and kept making it worse and worse.
Lastly, another big reason why the Articles of Confederation needed to be replaced was due to their decision making. First, was how the Congress was set up. Every state got one vote. That would be fine if all states were the same size, but they are not. In that form of government Virginia’s six hundred and eighty thousand people had the same amount of power ar Rhode Island’s sixty-eight thousand. That is just simply unfair for all those people. Virginia and New York had the same amount of power as Rhode Island and Delaware. After that, to create a new law or to change an existing one, the Congress needed a complete agreement.
All thirteen states had to agree. As you can clearly guess, nothing got done. Twelve states could agree on something but one, usually Rhode Island, could disagree and the law would not pass. Rhode Island would never agree with the rest. They were wild and so did whatever they wanted and nothing got done in the Congress of the United States. Truly, the Articles of Confederation needed to be replaced due to their inability to come to a decision due to bad decision-making rules.
The Articles of Confederation had to be replaced because of all their inability to control trade, their inability to tax, and the disunity their decision-making process. The inability to control the trade in the nation and out of it made the Articles of Confederation a bad system. The Articles of Confederation’s inability to tax destroyed the nation and kept making it worse and worse, and they needed to be replaced due to their inability to come to a decision due to bad decision-making rules. Very clearly, the Articles of Confederation was a horrible system that needed to be replaced quickly.
Society of the Cincinnati
After the revolutionary war for the cause of independence, democratic and republican ideals were spread and common people were getting more and more rights. A society formed by former continental officers from the revolutionary war, known as the Society of the Cincinnati, was mocked and ridiculed by most Americans.
The Great Compromise
The large states and the small states disagreed on how the government should be run and put forth two plans. The two sides compromised to form a bicameral system where the upper house, Senate, gave 2 votes to all states, and the lower house, the House of Representatives, gave each state a number of representatives based on its population.
Articles of Confederation
This was the form of government established in 1781 to lead the United State. It was a very weak system with a weak judicial and executive branches and very strong legislative. It had two major weaknesses: its inability to control trade and its inability to tax the people. Combined with an ineffective and unfair voting system, it was eventually replaced by the constitution.
This was a system meant to help be a safeguard for conservatism. The people choose electors for them which will vote for the president. The people do not directly vote since the founding fathers were worried that the masses were too dumb to vote for a competent president so they put in this system just in case.
Land Ordinance of 1785
It was one of the only good things to come out of the Articles of Confederation. It called for the organization of the territory west of the Appalachians into townships the size of 36 square miles. Each township was divided into 36 different sectors and the money made from the purchase of the sixteenth would go toward education.
After the Great Compromise, a census was set for every ten years to check the number of people to determine the number of representatives to the house, the issue of if slaves should be counted popped up. The North said no since they didn’t have rights while the South said yes since it was a big part of the population. In the end, they agreed that a slave will be counted as ⅗ of a person.
It was a good thing to come out of the Articles of Confederation. Created in 1787, it made the way we still use today to become a state. It had three stages. First was to be an unorganized recognized territory. Second, was to be an official territory which occurred once your government was stable. The third stated that once you have 60,000 you can apply for statehood.
People in the United States of America who were strongly opposed to the ratification of the constitution due to its awfully strong and centralized federal government. They ultimately lost to the Federalists in the state conventions which determined the ratification of the constitution in the states. A famous anti-federalist is Aaron Burr.
People in the United States who were the exact opposite of the anti-federalists, meaning they were for the ratification of the constitution because they supported its strong centralized government. In the state conventions that decided on the ratification of the constitution, they eventually won in all of the states.
New Jersey Plan
Also known as the Small States Plan, it was set forth by New Jersey resident William Patterson. This plan called for a unicameral, meaning one house, system where each state would get one representative, and therefore, one vote. This was the exact same way that the government was set up under the Articles of Confederation.
Also known as the Big States Plan, it was offered by native Virginia politician James Madison. The plan called for a bicameral, meaning two houses, system in both of which the number of representatives is in exact correlation with the population of that state. This system clearly favored the bigger states and made the smaller states angry.
Cite this Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below