How Did The Articles Of Confederation Not Advocate For A Strong Central Government

462 Words1 Page

The United States Articles of Confederation were the nation’s First Constitution that had been drafted after the American Revolution. Due to the limited powers granted to the central government, the articles of confederation federal government was very weak and unable to put the union of 13 states under proper control. The articles of confederation provisions did not advocate for a strong central government because it provided all legislative powers to be held by the states governments. E.g. the states had control over finance, trade and defense, and thus this meant that the union was economically and politically crippled. Under the articles of confederation, the executive was limited in its powers to enforce policies and furthermore, there was no court system to interpret the laws in case of a misunderstanding. (Hoffert, Robert W). …show more content…

The articles of confederation had many loopholes, for instance, the congress had the mandate of declaring war but had to rely on the states to provide the army, and could not force the states to contribute the required arms or armies for the war. In order to finance its activities, the congress was supposed to rely on the states and if the states decided not to contribute, the congress could not punish them. Taxation was also the role bestowed upon the states and each state could issue its own currency. Though the congress acted as the mediator in disputes between the states, it could not force the states to accept its deliberations and as a result, many unresolved boundary disputes existed between the states ("Avalon Project - Articles Of Confederation : March 1,

Open Document