5. The document was also virtually impossible to change. The articles required unanimous approval of any amendment, so the 13 Member States would have to agree on an amendment. Faced with rivalries between states, this rule made it impossible to adapt the articles after the end of the war with Great Britain in 1783. Congress occasionally recruited troops into the states during the War of Independence. All contributions were voluntary, and during the debates of 1788, the federalists (who supported the proposed new Constitution) claimed that state politicians acted unilaterally and contributed when the continental army protected the interests of their state. The federalists said that national politicians understood their duty to the Union and helped to promote their needs. Dougherty (2009) concludes that state behaviour in general confirms federalist analysis. This explains why the articles of Confederation needed reform.  Congress was denied any tax power: it could only ask the states for money.
States often did not fully meet these requirements, so congress and the continental army were chronically short of money. When more money was printed by Congress, continental dollars depreciated. In 1779, George Washington wrote to John Jay, President of the Continental Congress, “that a shipment of money will not buy a shipment of provisions.”  Mr. Jay and Congress responded in May by requesting $45 million from the United States. In an appeal to states to comply, Jay wrote that taxes are “the price of freedom, peace and security of yourself and posterity.”  He argued that Americans should avoid saying that “America did not become independent earlier when it became insolvent” or that “its childhood glory and growing glory were obscured and veiled by broken treaties and beliefs.”  States did not respond to any of the funds they were requesting. When the war ended in 1783, some special interests were encouraged to create a new “commercial state”, much like the British people had rebelled there. In particular, war bucket owners and land speculators wanted a central government to pay Srip at face value and legalize Western lands with controversial claims. Producers also wanted a high tariff as a barrier to foreign products, but competition between states made this impossible without a central government.  On the other hand, Article VII of the proposed constitution stipulated that it would take effect without unanimity after ratification by only nine states: 3. The Congress of Articles had only one chamber and each state had only one vote.
This strengthened the power of states to act independently of the central government, even if it was not in the best interests of the nation. States have also retained sovereign rights maintained under their colonial charters. According to the statutes of the Confederacy, the President of Congress – cited in numerous official recordings as President of the United States meeting in Congress – chaired the Committee of States when Congress was on hiatus and performed other administrative functions. It was not, however, an executive body in the way in which the President of the United States became chief executive, as all his duties were under the direct control of Congress.  Modern scholars such as Francisco Forrest Martin agree that the statutes had lost their strength of commitment because many states had violated them and therefore “other states did not have to abide by the unanimous rule of approval of articles.”  On the other hand, law professor Akhil Amar suggests that there may not have been a real conflict between the statutes and the Constitution on this point; Article VI of the Confederation expressly authorized ancillary agreements between states and the Constitution could be considered incidental until all states had ratified it.  On January 21, 1786, on the recommendation of James Madison, Virginia`s legislation