Final answer:
The argument for a stronger central government during the debates was primarily based on the need to address the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation, such as the inability to tax, maintain an army, and regulate commerce effectively. The framers aimed to create a government that could protect the nation and ensure its functionality while avoiding the forms of tyranny they had rebelled against.
Step-by-step explanation:
During the debates surrounding what came to be known as the DC Heater, especially those concerning the restructuring of the American government following the Articles of Confederation, the predominant argument in favor of a stronger central government revolved around the numerous weaknesses of the Articles. The arguments made were multifaceted and addressed various concerns including national defense, economic stability, and political coherence.
The Articles of Confederation were deemed too weak as they did not allow the national government to tax, pay down debt, or raise an army effectively. After the economic struggles post-Revolution and events like Shays's Rebellion, it became clear that a stronger government was necessary. The federal government needed the power to maintain the nation's defense, regulate trade, and ensure the functionality of a new nation amidst foreign powers still present in North America.
The framers of the Constitution aimed to create a federal government that could both protect liberty and prevent tyranny while ensuring that the states did not fall prey to foreign exploitation. The need for a stronger central government was emphasized to preserve the work of the Revolution, maintain order, and facilitate effective governance of the United States. Additional powers such as the ability to veto state legislation were also proposed to uphold national integrity.