Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities and differences in the uk and us constitutions
The creation of the us constitution
United states government federalism and seoeration of powers
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Articles of Confederation (AC) had to be replaced mainly because they granted too much power to the states. Also, too much democratic liberty among the lower classes was a threat to the private property, especially after Shay’s rebellion. The main differences between both documents are the power granted to the federal government. Under the Constitution, the government has the right to collect taxes, regulate interstate commerce, create a single currency, and forbid the use of religious tests for holding office. On the other hand, under the AC, the states were afraid of excessive power and as a response, they heavily limited the scope of the national government. To the states, the government should only protect the security of its citizens.
The unpredictable failure of the Articles of Confederation to the continental congress was a huge problem. The Articles of Confederation were made so the states would have more power, And limit the powers of the national government. Main contributors for this action was the fear that the national government will gain too much power and overstep its authority. This would have a negative effect on the nation, because tensions will start to rise for the ineffectiveness of this new system of government. A Rebellion, best known as the Shays rebellion, took place shortly after the adoption of the Articles of Confederation.
With these different balances to control the powers throughout the new government, the problem of tyranny wasn’t as such of a problem as it was when the Articles of Confederation were in place. The states were now represented justly, the national and state levels of government fairly empowered, and the three branches within the national government were balanced. Even the three branches within balanced each other out, so one wouldn’t become too under or over powered. The new government created by the Constitution was a good answer to protect against
There were many differences between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution. At the end of the American Revolution the free states needed some sort of control that would generate to a unified country. Issues arose such as: How should power be divided between local and national governments? How should laws be made, and by whom? Who should be authorized to govern those laws? How could the government be designed to protect the unalienable individual rights? Their first attempt at solving this issue was the Articles of Confederation, which was a failure for the most part, but not completely. After the failure of the articles, the state delegates tried to revise the articles, but instead, constructed the Constitution. There were so many changes made and very little remained the same.
On a final note, both Constitutions were created for the same purpose namely, to withhold the fundamental principles of a nation. They are governed by a group of people who limit and regulate the basic rules. Texas has had a constitution for each political condition of its history.
One of the key differences between the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation is in the way that they set up the Legislature. In the Articles, it is established as a unicameral legislature which it refers to as a Congress. The Constitution on the other hand establishes a bicameral legislature with an upper house, the Senate, and a lower house, the House of Representatives. The reason for this change was because different states wanted the number of representatives to be selected in different ways. Under the Articles of Confederation all States were represented equally and the bigger states felt that they should be getting more say in the decisions that the Country would be making. Needless to say the smaller states did not readily agree to this.
The Articles of Confederation were developed after the Revolutionary War, and were a good idea to help set standards for America. However, they had some major problems that needed to be solved in order for America to become a strong nation. After these problems were addressed the Constitution was developed.
In comparing the Articles of Confederation with the U.S constitution that was produced by the federal convention in 1787, it is important to note that the U.S operated under both documents. During March 1, 1781, the Articles of Confederation went into effect when it was ratified by Maryland. However, the U.S constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation as soon as it was ratified on June 21, 1788 by New Hampshire. The main difference between the Articles of Confederations and the U.S Constitution is that the constitution didn’t force the laws, but established the why of the constitution. In establishing the why, it warranted the farmers to work on the government being better than the Articles of Confederations. They wanted the government
Researching and reading about both documents entirely enforces the notion that to govern is to control, influence, or regulate. All these laws and rights make for a controlled environment to live in which is being constantly questioned and infracted unpin everyday. The Founding Fathers put forth an amazing document that will live on for years and years to pass.
First, the formation of the Articles of Confederation was the first constitution in the United States. The Articles of Confederation was not the best constitution out there since congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. There was a requirement for unanimous approval before any modifications
Soon after the Revolutionary War in America, a new government was started when the Articles of Confederation were adopted by the Continental Congress. The Articles set up a democratic government that gave the States the power to make their own laws and to enforce them. However, the Articles were ineffective and failed to provide a strong government. During this critical period in the history of the United States, pandemonium and anarchy were growing due to: controlled public, nothing in the Articles that gave Congress the power to enforce laws, no solid monetary system, and also the country lacked unity and strength
The Articles of Confederation was a plan of government that was based on the principles that were fought for in the American Revolutionary War. Even though The Articles of Confederation were based upon principles we fought for, it contained major flaws. The government had no power of national taxation and had no power to control trade. The biggest weakness of The Articles of Confederation was that it had no direct origin in the people, the states were in control. Each and every state had the power to collect its own taxes, issue currency, and provide for its own military. The Articles of Confederation was a transition between the Revolutionary War and the Constitution. Without The Articles of Confederation it would have been impossible to create the United States Constitution, mistakes were made with the first, and fixed later with the Constitution.
The United States Constitution and the Articles have several ever present difference that some considered to be too radical. In terms of levying taxes, the Articles Congress could request states to pay taxes while with the Constitution; the Congress has the right to levy taxes on individuals. The Articles government had no court system while the Constitution created a court system to deal with issues between citizens and states. The lack of provisions to regulate interstate trade the Articles possessed created large economic problems, leading into a depression in the mid 1780's. The Constitutional Congress has the right to regulate trade between states. The Constitution has a strong executive branch headed by our president who chooses cabinet and has checks on power of the other two branches; the Articles had no executive with power. The president merely presided over Congress. The Articles took almost 5 years to ratify due to the fact that 13/13 colonies needed to amend the Articles before it could go into affect, with the Constitution, 2/3 of both houses of Congress plus ¾ of the states legislatures or national convention had to approve. During the years under the Articles, foreign soldiers occupied US forts during our early years, we were unable to force them out due to the fact that Congress could not draft troops, and they depended on the states to contribute to the forces. Under the Constitution we have the ability to raise an army to deal with any sort of military situations. In terms of passing laws, under the Articles 9/13 states needed to approve legislation while under the Constitution, 50% plus 1 of both houses plus the signature of the president is needed to pass a law. The Articles had a huge problem when it came to state representation. Under the Articles every state only received one vote, regardless of its size, this hindered the power of the larger states. With the Constitution, the upper house (Senate) has 2 votes and the lower house (House of Representatives) is based on population. When two states had disputes the Articles had a complicated system of arbitration to go through before any resolution was reached, under the Constitution, the federal Court system handles disputes between states.
The United States Constitution and Texas Constitution are similar, but not indistinguishable. One can see that the constitution was made to prevent tyranny in the states from the idea of the federalists who wanted to build a strong form of government that gave people rights without giving their representatives too much power. In the U.S. Constitution, the elites made the decision that they would form a representative government with a Bill of Rights in order for the anti-federalists to agree to sign. The constitution established a stronger form of government, which helped the economic and social tensions. The constitution consists of: the preamble, which states the general principles for a government, the Bill
Eric Foner claims the definition of Federalism refers to the relationship between the national government and the states. Unlike the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation came with many weaknesses. Some provided by our powerpoint include that the Federal government had no power to make the states obey the Articles and laws that were passed by the legislature. The states also had the power to tax, and the opportunity to print their own money. Our powerpoint focuses on the $10 million Congress owed to other countries, as well as the $40 million it owed to the American veterans. The Constitution differed. Foner states that not only did the Constitution enhance national authority, but it also permitted Congress to levy taxes, conduct commerce, confirm war, deal with the foreign nations and Indians, and rent and help the “general welfare”. According to the powerpoint, Federalists focused on the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation.
The Articles of Confederation was the first government of the United States. The Articles had created a very weak national government. At the time the Articles were approved, they had served the will of the people. Americans had just fought a war to get freedom from a great national authority--King George III (Patterson 34). But after this government was put to use, it was evident that it was not going to keep peace between the states. The conflicts got so frequent and malicious that George Washington wondered if the “United” States should be called a Union (Patterson 35). Shays’ Rebellion finally made it evident to the public that the government needed a change.