Triumph of the Constitution over the Articles of Confederation
The United States’ history is filled with political events that, in one way or another, have contributed to the democracy it has become. Before the adoption of the Constitution, the country had tested other unifying documents that failed to be sustainable. The Articles of the Confederation was formulated after the declaration of independence and may be referred to as a ‘mini-constitution’ because it was used to run the country for up to a decade. Its utilization only exposed numerous loop-holes that eventually led to the development of the Constitution, the latter which, although was severally amended, was more successful in stabilizing government.
The Articles of Confederation, compared to the Constitution, was very conservative in the distribution of power. It was initially created to limit the power of the central government (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 37). With a weak national government, the states would have control over their own affairs. The ambition to reserve power to the individual states is traceable to a fear of domination (Lecture 2.2). Understandably, these states were just from a period of colonization by Britain, and perhaps, the desire to be free from any more overarching powers, even at a national level, was the drive for change. The federal government was incapacitated in many areas; for example, it was ripped its mandate of levying taxes (Lecture 2.2). It is hard to imagine such a reality today when the federal government is directly involved in taxation, but it was the situation at the time. The limitations were extended to the Congress, whose composition was limited to the number of legislatures from the individual states (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 37). This arrangement also supported the voting policy of a single vote per state. Besides, the Article of Confederation did not provide a slot for other branches of government, such as the Judiciary or the Executive (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 38). Simply put, the Article of Confederation ensured the country remained just that, a collection of states each with an unlimited level of sovereignty. The state-centered approach was the early stages of the nation’s construction of power. As seen, it managed to decentralize power successfully for some time, which may not have been the best decision moving forward.
Although the Articles of Confederation seemed to be putting the interest of the states into consideration, consensus would be hard to achieve during decision making in matters approved in the Congress or those requiring a national response. This barrier means that the provisions under the Article of Confederation brewed trouble for the existing national leaders more than it was anticipated. On one of the occasions, a rebellion broke in Massachusetts that was led by a former army veteran called Daniel Shay (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 39). The plan of this militia action was to sabotage a federal makeshift arsenal at Springfield (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 39). Logically, the sober step to take was to stop the group of rebels, but due to the limitations, Congress was supposed to be asked to restore order, which was time-consuming. The solitary arm of the government was not able to act promptly in the situation. George Washington expressed the failure of the Article of Confederation through this event by saying “I am mortified beyond expression that in the moment of our acknowledged independence we should by our conduct verify the predictions of our transatlantic foe, and render ourselves ridiculous and contemptible in the eyes of all Europe” (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 40). He was referring to the shameful image that the nation had created by encouraging states to do anything they wanted. Other nations from Europe would start perceiving America as a weak country, unable to solve its internal affairs. The local conflicts were so harmful that they negatively affected trade. The countries that were initially exporting goods to the new United States proceeded to make economic relations with each state since the confederates were clearly not working together (Lecture 2.2). It gave the national leaders a hard time trying to build a good reputation for the country and in trying to ensure security.
Given the above adverse outcomes of the Articles of the Confederation, leaders were more determined to change the framework, whose efforts led to the establishment of the Constitution-making process to seal the loop-holes in both the national and state governments. The first steps towards this direction were meetings that were dubbed Constitutional Conventions (Lecture 2.2). The idea was to get state representatives from all the 13 states to these conventions to discuss the way forward. This process was not by any means easy. In the first meeting that was scheduled for Annapolis, only five states sent their representatives, hence unsuccessful (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 39). In the end, the indicators of the poor state of affairs slowly convinced the confederates to assemble and make changes to the governing framework. The framers of the Constitution negotiated their interests on different matters over time. The most fundamental change that appeared in the new document was the separation of powers. As opposed to the old system, the new government structure would include three arms of government that is the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary. The legislature was Bicameral with the Senate and House of Representatives; the Executive added the position of the President and the Judiciary was established at the federal level to be headed by the Supreme Court (Ginsberg et al. 2019: 45). The assignment of responsibilities in this manner was very strategic. The framers of the Constitution wanted to ensure power was balanced such that all the stakeholders were satisfied. In some cases, it was apparent that the framers of the Constitution wanted to establish a powerful government, but issues raised against it were addressed through amendment. An excellent example is the Tenth Amendment that stipulated that power was reserved for the people and not the national government (Ginsberg et al. 2019:46). From this illustration, the Constitution offered avenues for negotiations and strengthened the new United States government.
In conclusion, the Articles of the Confederations was marred with insufficiencies that eventually led to the establishment of the Constitution. It decentralized power and encouraged the sovereignty of individual states, which led to poor security and trade relations. Constitutional Conventions provided a leeway to improve the state of affairs. The framers of the Constitution provided reassurance to the states that, although the federal government would be empowered, they would still have the supreme power through the Tenth Amendment.
References
Lecture notes. Module Two, Lecture Two.
Ginsberg, B., Lowi, T., Weir, M., & Tolbert, C. (2019). We the People (Essentials Twelfth Edition) (12th ed.). W. W. Norton & Company.