Differences Between The Constitution And The Articles Of Confederation

There were many different beliefs in the Constitution and the Articles of Confederation. Many people did not want the Constitution to be ratified because of the fact that it gave the majority of the power to the central government. Others wished for the Constitution to be ratified so that the United States would have a strong central government. The group of people who were happy with the ratification of the Constitution were called federalists. The group of people against the ratification of the Constitution were called the anti-federalists. Although, the federalists felt that the Articles were doing a good job protecting the people, economy and over all structure of the company, that Articles of Confederation were actually failing the country.
The Articles gave congress the power to pass laws but no power to enforce them. That means, if a state did not support or believe in the federal law, than they did not have to follow it, they could just ignore it. Also, congress had no power to levy taxes or regulate trade. The Articles of Confederation failed because of the lack of a strong central government. It also produced money under the Articles of Confederation and it did not hold its value. The Articles brought the economy way down to eventually collapses. In order to amend the Articles of Confederation, it required a unanimous decision and was extremely difficult. On July 21, 1788, the Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation. The new Constitution was an improvement from The Articles of Confederation. It provided a universal and solid government for the entire country. The United States Constitution provides the authority to regulate disputes, trades, and to enforce the rights of the citizens. It also gave the central government power to defend the people of the United States from malicious