Respuesta :
Answer:
A federal government would best suit the United States. A federal government allows for the division of powers among the central government and the states, so each state would have power along with the limited power of the central government. The national government would focus on more pressing matters such as commerce, foreign affairs, and war, while the smaller matters such as establishing schools, building roads, and taxation. The division of powers makes for a more efficient government that is also more effective in it's purpose.
A federal government, along with dividing powers, would also make sure that the central government keeps in mind the interests of the states. States and national government have shared powers, called concurrent powers, so states also have the power to make changes best suited to their interests. It is important, however, that the national government keep in mind what is most beneficial to the states and country as a whole, and a federal government allows for this to happen.
One could claim that a confederation of states would allow states to have more power and freedom to do what benefits them most without the national government getting in the way. While this is a valid argument, it is very important that no one state attains too much power. Along with that, if one or more states were to secede, the confederation would be more vulnerable to invasion or attack by another nation. The power that each state has can be kept in check by a national government and the government is also designed to protect it's citizens, and for those reasons, a federal government is best suited to the United States.
Explanation:
Answer:
In my opinion, a federal government would be most ideal for the United States. A federal government would be best suited because this type of government allows for the fair distribution of powers within the system of the central government through checks and balances, which limits its powers. In this way, the national government would focus on external, heavier cases (e.g., international commerce, foreign affairs); the states would focus on more internal, lighter cases (e.g., taxation and infrastructure).
A federal government would take the responsibility to make sure that the central government protects the interests of and represents its people; the states could discuss with the federal government and make changes based on their needs because the two share governmental powers called concurrent powers.
On the contrary, one could argue that a confederation of states would allow the states to have access to more power and individual liberty without the interference of the national government. It is valid and true that the states would gain more sovereignty in a confederation of states. However, if the national government did not have a certain control over its states, the nation would, soon, go into a vulnerable position. For example, when the states decide to secede and the national government has no power to consolidate the states, the nation would be split up, making it an unstable country. As with the flaw of the Articles of Confederation, the national government lacked the power to suppress a violent uprising, which led to many casualties and governmental instability. Considering the possible risks of the confederation of states, a federal government is more secure. In this country, both the power of the states and the national government should, also, be limited. Therefore, a federal government best suits the United States.
Explanation:
