There was no executive under the Articles of Confederation because the Founding Fathers feared the return of tyranny. The Founding Fathers were very cautious not to create a new "king"- that was exactly why they had separated from England. so as a result, there was no executive to carry out the laws passed by Congress. This lack of a leader caused much confusion.
The executive branch is headed by the President.
An executive branch
There was an executive under the Articles of Confederation, but he was a mere figurehead and he had no power, unlike the current President. The president under the Articles was elected by the Continental Congress instead of the Electoral College.
a independent executive branch
Every single freakin one of them. Executive, Legislative, and Judicial.
they described it as a weakness to some of the governments well to the executive branch the executive branch didnt like the articles of confederation
The Articles of Confederation did not create the executive or judicial branches.
There was no President under the Articles of Confederation.
"Articles of Confederation" OR "confederation" or "the Articles of Confederation"
There was no executive under the Articles of Confederation because the Founding Fathers feared the return of tyranny. The Founding Fathers were very cautious not to create a new "king"- that was exactly why they had separated from England. so as a result, there was no executive to carry out the laws passed by Congress. This lack of a leader caused much confusion.
Thirteen states were represented under the Articles of the Confederation.
The federal government under the Articles of Confederation did not have much direct power over the states. It could not directly tax any commerce, or regulate trade, and did not have a provision for a national army. There was also no chief executive.