Scholars define decentralization as the process through which the federal government gives authority and responsibility of certain functions to the local government, private sector, and communities. The Articles of Confederation brought the idea of decentralization into existence. The principle of subsidiarity, which states that decisions need to be made by the populations, affected unless the genesis of the problem or the corresponding solution is out of their control. Decentralization scored well in the colonel period of 1700s. However, decentralization raised some problems for the country that the constitution addressed afterwards (Rose & Traut, 2001).Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
This paper focuses on three problems occasioned by decentralization and the corresponding solution that the constitution offers. The problems are monetary, legislative and army.
It became difficult for the nation to adopt a single currency under the Articles of Confederation. Every state had its currency and raised tariffs for imports from neighbouring states discouraging interstate trade. Congress had no mandate to tax sates. In response to this, the constitution amended the Articles of Confederation on decentralisation and centralised the monetary and fiscal function back to the federal government. The aim is to promote trade within United States of America and raise revenue (Yahoo, 2010).
Law making became difficult because every state had to agree to the proposed bill before being passed to law. The thirteen states hardly came to consensus. The operational constitution led to the establishment of bicameral house to facilitate quick law enactment process (Rose & Traut, 2001).
Under these Articles, the Congress could not raise an Army as every state wanted to dominate in the same. The constitution solved this anomaly by giving the central government the powers to control the army and matters of state security and defence.
There is continued tension concerning decentralised and centralised power in terms of environmental policy. The centralised power argues that the federal government is well placed in knowing the environmental matters affecting the nation. The decentralised power, on the other hand, claims that environmental issues are specific and hence the affected people need to address them specifically. This thus promotes the idea of decentralization.