This paper examines the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution, comparing their respective strengths and weaknesses. It addresses key historical challenges including the Western Problem, the slavery debate, tensions between eastern and western states, Roger Sherman's proposal, and the Great Compromise. The paper then analyzes the conflict between Federalists and anti-Federalists, explaining how that debate shaped the drafting of the Bill of Rights. It concludes by assessing the overall success and enduring legacy of the American constitutional framework, noting that while neither document was perfect, their combined design has proven remarkably durable over more than two centuries.
This paper addresses several questions relating to the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution. The original Constitution was difficult enough to ratify, but the Articles of Confederation presented their own challenges and were crafted in direct response to the economic difficulties of the era. Key issues and weaknesses included the Western Problem, the conflict between slave and free states, tensions between eastern and western states, Roger Sherman's proposal, the Great Compromise, and more. The debates between the Federalists and the anti-Federalists are examined, as is the development of the Bill of Rights debate and an assessment of its ultimate success. While no single constitutional document can fully satisfy all parties or anticipate every future problem, the compromises and debates surrounding these two landmark texts cannot be denied their significance — a significance confirmed by the centuries that followed.
The Articles of Confederation had both notable strengths and significant weaknesses. Among its strengths: the ability to operate post offices, to engage with foreign nations and enter into treaties, to declare war or peace, and to mint and print money for public use. However, the Articles had no enforcement mechanism — no "teeth" — that allowed the federal government to compel states to follow federal law. They created no national armed forces, placed no restriction on states printing their own currency, and permitted states to levy taxes and tariffs against one another. Congress held no real authority over the states, and there was no inherent power to tax (Library of Congress, 2014).
The United States Constitution addressed many of these failings. Its strengths include a system of checks and balances, a sensible apportionment of the houses of Congress through the Great Compromise, and the power to impeach a president who abuses authority. In its original, unamended form, however, the Constitution had its own weaknesses: it contained no bill of rights, did not abolish or prohibit slavery, and left certain provisions vague or silent on foreseeable matters such as political parties. These shortcomings were addressed over time through the amendment process (Archives.gov, 2014).
Several specific problems illustrate the friction between the two documents and the era in which they were written. The Western Problem concerned how to regulate, divide, and settle the western territories as the United States expanded. The Articles left the federal government ill-equipped to manage this challenge, providing neither adequate regulatory authority nor sufficient legal force to govern westward expansion properly. As a result, these territories were explored and claimed with inadequate federal oversight (State.gov, 2014).
Another major problem was achieving consensus among the states during the ratification of the Articles, the Constitution, and later the Bill of Rights. Slave states were unwilling to accept any prohibition on slavery, so the issue was effectively postponed — only to be confronted in the 1860s under President Abraham Lincoln. Eastern and western states frequently disagreed on key matters, a conflict made worse by the weakness the Articles imposed on the federal government. Roger Sherman was among the most notable figures to propose workable solutions, suggesting that the North American colonies form a unified body. Ultimately, however, it was the Great Compromise that proved decisive in brokering the agreement necessary to move forward.
"How the rights debate shaped the Bill of Rights"
"Federalist and anti-Federalist visions of government authority"
No single system is perfect, but the ongoing continuity and staying power of the United States constitutional framework — largely unchanged in nearly two and a half centuries — is a testament to how well-designed the system is. There were glaring flaws at the outset, including the failure to abolish slavery and the difficulty of properly balancing federal and state authority, and important questions persist, including some raised in the wake of the Great Recession. Many of those questions, however, remain philosophical and context-dependent; no single answer will be universally applicable across all occasions and circumstances.
You’re 58% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.