Which work argues that the Articles were too weak and the nation needed stronger federal authority?

• A. Federalist 39
• B. Federalist 10
• C. Brutus 3
• D. Federalist 15

Answer: (D)

The main idea here is identifying which writing argued that the Articles of Confederation were too weak to govern effectively and that a stronger federal authority was needed. Federalist 15 is the one that makes this case directly. In this essay, Alexander Hamilton critiques the Articles as insufficient for national needs and argues for a new framework that gives the central government real power to tax, regulate commerce, and handle national defense. This emphasis on strengthening the national government to address common concerns—something the Articles could not do—fits the question perfectly.

The other options don’t fit as tightly. Federalist 39 discusses how power is distributed between state and national levels under the Constitution, rather than making a direct critique of the Articles themselves. Federalist 10 focuses on controlling factions in a large republic. Brutus 3 is an Anti-Federalist piece arguing against a strong centralized government. Federalist 15 is the one that explicitly centers on the weaknesses of the Articles and the need for a stronger federal authority.