ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION vs. THE CONSTITUTION
There are major differences between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution.
The Articles of Confederation had been in effect sine 1781. They established what could be referred to as a "league of friendship" and a quasi-constitution for the states that were sovereign and independent subsequent to the American Revolution. Those articles appeared to be "woefully inadequate" to James Madison. Madison believed that the central government had little power, while the states had considerable power. The central government was not able to tax, or set commercial power, nor could a war effort be effectively supported. It did not have the power to
settle disputes between the states. The central government was considerably weak in all aspects in light of the Articles of Confederation.
Something had to be done about this before a great economic disaster occurred. Congress attempted to function with a treasury that had been drained. Inflation was at an all time
high. Many people were in debt. In fact, quite a few of them were thrown into prison, while land was being confiscated and sold for taxes.
James Madison felt that something had to be done quickly, and he opined that there should be a strong central government so that order and stability could be provided to the nation. The
Constitutional Convention was the means to fashion the new government of America into Madison's mold. The Constitution would become a revision of the Articles of Confederation.
When the delegates of the states met in Philadelphia, it was a momentous occasion. In fact, many were optimistic of the Constitutional Convention. What Madison had in mind was the
production of a central government that would be powerful with state governments becoming subversive.
Had I been alive in the year the Constitution was submitted to the states, I can honestly say that I would have supported the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document