The Pros And Cons Of The Articles Of Confederation

1386 Words 6 Pages
When establishing a brand new form of government it is necessary for a central document to be made that establishes all the rules and regulations for that government. This document was drafted at a different time in our history, “a time when the nation was a loose confederation of states, each operating like independent countries” (The U.S. Constitution, 2009). Initially this document was known as Articles of Confederation. Written by the Constitutional Congress, the articles were successful in establishing a first draft for a constitution but failed in many other aspects. For example, under the Articles of Confederation, the federal government did not have the power to tax the states and they did not have a national army. They established …show more content…
That was their initial plan, but they ended up presenting a new document completely. Among the delegates were men like Alexander Hamilton. They were all very educated, wise men who were phenomenal writers. The sessions held to draft this document were held in secret to alleviate outside pressure from the press and other people. Through hours of debate during that summer in 1787, the delegates established three branches of government; judicial, legislative and executive. The first three articles are devoted to each branch. Each article goes into detail about the powers that each branch holds. The Framers also wrote about checks and balances in order to prevent one branch from becoming overwhelmingly powerful. For instance, the president can veto a law passed by congress but then the congress can override that veto with a vote of two thirds from both houses. The Supreme Court can check the Congress by declaring a law unconstitutional. The President then checks the powers of the Supreme Court because he or she appoints the members, and the people he or she appoints have to be approved by Congress. So in summary, not only did the Constitution set up each individual branch but it also created ways to keep one branch from becoming …show more content…
During the late 1700s it was very common for a family to own a slave. Therefore, African American slaves made up a large part of the population of the United States. That created the issue that when states were counting the amount of people in their area how do they account for slaves? The southern states believed that slaves should count toward their representation in the House, but northern states argued that southern delegates could not speak for an enslaved population. As the textbook states, “if South Carolina were allotted representatives based solely on its free population, it would receive only half the number it would have received if slaves, who made up approximately 43 percent of the population, were included.” (American Government, 2015) That just shows you how important this conflict is to the states that possess large slave populations. The settlement they came up with was called the Three-Fifths Compromise. It stated that every five slaves counted as three people when counting for population. Also under article one the abolition of the foreign slave trade was pushed to the year 1808. Also, under the constitution, it was never mentioned that the domestic slave trade had to come to an end. So, states could buy and sell slaves within the country. In addition, Article IV states that any slave that was found in a free land that had escaped from its owner had to be

Related Documents