Compare And Contrast The Articles Of Confederation Dbq
636 Words3 Pages
Between 1781 and 1789, the Articles of Confederation failed to provide the United States with a competent government. The Articles of Confederation were feeble because it gave more power to the states rather than the federal, central government. There were little to no foreign affairs, and currency was a major issue due to each state have their own. Granting the power to the states turned out to be a senseless approach to creating a strong and functional nation. Due to this placement in power, the states did not follow other state rules as a result of each state having enough power to have their own set of rules and agree to what they individually wanted. Rather than uniting the nation, The Articles created a motivation for individuality.…show more content… Because of this, the nation's economy began to fall as the Article’s shift of power went from the central government to the states. This meant that there was no longer an executive branch to enforce laws. Consequently, the country had to now be run by congressional committees. This, at the time, seemed like a rational, fair idea. In reality, with the states being granted so much power, they decided that they would not pay each other’s taxes. Not only that, but the states were disorganized. They had been claiming and overlapping the same lands since the New York and Virginia Articles failed (Doc 5). The Massachusetts legislature on the other hand, begun to adopt stronger, more efficient economic policies. Massachusetts rebelled against the new constitution and began to centralize the government, which in return led to higher taxes, regulation on a commercial scale, and an animate court system. This however, caused a chain reaction of problems between the states and the government throughout the building of