The Constitution, our nation’s living document, was and continues to be the epicenter of political arguments. Whether something is constitutional or not is usually the argument at the forefront of everyone’s mind when new laws or controversial programs pass. This was the same even in Jeffersonian Democracy. The consistency of a president’s philosophy and how he applied it as president was always scrutinized. Democratic Republican presidents, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison are among those presidents who got their philosophies picked apart and still do by Americans even today. History has painted them as hypocrites who really reflected views of Federalist’s such as Alexander Hamilton during their presidencies. However, they really were not. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison are victims of being unjustly labeled as hypocrites when in reality their intention was simply to do what was best for the country as a whole.
Hamilton was very precise with the moves he made and the people he supported. He was well-known for supporting a loose interpretation of the Constitution and promoting a strong central government. Hamilton was more interested in keeping the rich interested in the federal government at the expense of the poor. This was because as long as the poor owed the rich money the rich would do whatever they could to keep the government running so they could get their money. This was the cycle that kept government in business and arguably still does today. In terms of money Hamilton was a supporter of the Bank of the United States, which was put into effect in 1791. He wanted the bank so the federal government could issue paper money and handle tax receipts along with other government funds. Madison and Jefferson were adamant ab...
... middle of paper ...
...id what they did because it was for the good of the nation. They may have said one thing and did another but their intentions were never malicious. Their goal was never to abuse their power. It’s normal for people to change their minds. Once they got into office and realized how difficult decisions like those really were that is when they had to apply common sense. John Calhoun said it best in his speech before Congress [Doc I]. Central and state government need each other. Instead of focusing so much on the Constitution: how politicians interpret it, argue it, and apply it, how about focusing on the actual issue. All the different views of the Constitution do nothing but detour people from the real issue at hand. Instead of parties separating and the state and federal government fighting tooth and nail, government officials should be doing what is best for both.
“It’s not tyranny we desire; it’s a just, limited, federal government.” Alexander Hamilton. When Hamilton said this he was expressing the way he felt about central government. Hamilton and Jefferson both had very different views on government. Hamilton wanted a strong central government and Jefferson wanted all of the power to belong to the states. Alexander Hamilton’s views on government were better for what the United States would become.
Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton were completely at odds in their vision on how America was to develop. Hamilton wanted to concentrate power in a centralized federal government with limited access and Jefferson wished to diffuse it among all the eligible freemen of the time. Alexander Hamilton feared anarchy and distrusted popular rule while Jefferson feared tyranny and thought in terms of liberty and freedom.
On February 25th, 1793, Washington held his first full Cabinet meeting with Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of War Henry Knox, and Attorney General Edmund Randolph. Once in office the two immediately made it clear they’ll never truly see eye to eye. Hamilton, a true believer in a strong central government, felt he needed to limit democracy and make the U.S. a powerful nation “It has been observed . . . that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this.” (Hamilton, speech-urging ratification of the Constitution in New York June 17, 1788). He turned to Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the Constitution, which allows Congress to have the power "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." utilizing it to make his America; this was also known as the elastic clause or as he called it, Broad Construction. In order to expand the powers, he broadly interpreted the meaning of the Constitution. Jefferson could not contend with any of Hamilton’s ideals. He believed in Strict Construction. He
The federalist versus anti-federalist opposition to begin the political differences. Federalists were a group of people who pushed for a strong central government and weak state governments, while anti-federalists were a group of people who pushed for power in the states and not the central government. Hamilton, a Federalist, was a firm believer in the construction of a strong central government and a broad interpretation of the Constitution. A broad interpretation of the Constitution meant more government control of the people. Hamilton believed that if a government were to operate efficiently, it would have to be conducted by the educated. Although at the time period, being educated was an expectation for only white men and a limitation for men of color and women. Through Hamilton’s position as being the Secretary of the Treasury, he was able to propose the idea of a national bank. His proposition of the bank was to serve as a way to help America back onto its feet after the Revolutionary War.The bank would regulate currency, help control the American currency, and prevent any singular group from having the most power. According to the Necessary and Proper Clause located in article 1, section 8, clause 18 of the United States Constitution, Hamilton believed the government had the implied powers to use it in order to help and protect the American people.Not only would the bank
Jefferson and Hamilton both articulated admirable visions of America’s future, and both believed to be carrying out the legacy of the revolution. Hamilton favored a strong central government, a balanced market oriented economy and a national bank. Jefferson, on the other hand, desired to create strong state governments, have agriculture as the backbone of America and little government involvement within the economy. Despite the merits of each vision, implementation of only one of the plans would have led to either a very different or shortened American history. As such, it was necessary for the plans, to “blend” in an unconventional way. With both politicians insisting their plans were in the best interest of the country, an outright compromise
Alexander Hamilton exerted the most influence in the new Federalist Party. He believed that only an enlightened ruling class could produce a stable and effective federal government. The government therefore needed the support of wealthy men. Thomas Jefferson and the Republicans defended more the rights of the common man and an agrarian society with little power from the federal government. His basic principle was "in general I believe the decisions of the people in a body will be more honest and more disinterested than those of wealthy men."
Hamilton's Federalist Party and the Democratic Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson had polarized views on the majority of the important political issues. These two political parties which possessed differing opinions and views pertaining to the future of the U.S. government were persistent in their respective arguments against each other. The strongly contrasting views of these two parties are the foundation of the puissant and sometimes callous attacks by the Republicans against Hamilton and his economic plan. Although Alexander Hamilton was viewed as an arrogant self-promoting individual, the primary reason he faced fierce opposition from the Democratic Republicans against his economic plans was strictly rooted in the fundamental differences that Hamilton and the Republicans held when debating their proposed structures of the U.S. government.
The standard Democratic-Republican had many beliefs in which followed the Constitution whole heartily. Jefferson writes, "The true theory of our Constitution is surely the wisest and best that the states are independent as to everything within themselves, and united as to everything respecting foreign affairs"(Doc A). This belief that anything not mentioned within the Constitution was reserved for the states was represented the Democratic-Republican ideals a good deal. Thus, as in the Kentucky resolutions, both concluded that the federal government had exceeded its constitutional powers and that the states should not accept the Alien and Sedition Acts. Also, the Republicans strived for democracy; a weak central government; a rigid economy; the reduction of federalist office holders; state banks; relative freedom of the press and speech; concentration of agriculture in the South; minimal navy for coastal defense, which was achieved by Jefferson; and were primarily pro-French. These ideals were addressed during the Jefferson and Madison presidencies. However, in times of great crisis, the two presidents seemed to abandon their Democratic-Republican beliefs and lean towards a strong central government.
Both, Hamilton and Jefferson were founding fathers. They saw the need for a successful American government, and the need to re-write the Articles of the Confederation. Both wanted America to succeed and become a great nation. However, they had different opinions on how the nation should get there and who should be in power.
Jefferson’s agricultural viewpoint was vastly different from Hamilton’s manufacturing perspective. Though they both envisioned a great and prosperous nation, they had contrasting opinions on how this should occur. Hamilton, a Federalist, believed the rich and powerful should be the central government for all people, as they knew better how to foster and protect the em...
...ter the country as a whole. John Randolph, a Democratic Republican of the time even suggested that the Jeffersonian Republicans were taking on the old Federalism principles during Madison’s term. Document F explains how, “this government created and gave power to Congress to regulate commerce…not to lay a duty but with a steady eye to revenue…”
Hamilton is a very strong member of the Founding Fathers by founding the National Bank, and the U.S. Mint. Allowing the use of currency allows every American to trade goods for a set amount of currency. Another act Hamilton did was convincing the people of New York to ratify the constitution. Without their help, the constitution would not have a ratification at that time. The next significant act Hamilton did was become Washington’s assistant. Hamilton aided Washington by becoming the major general of the army during the Quasi War with France. The last piece Hamilton was able to be significant to the new world was his role as the Secretary of Treasury. This was important because the newly founded government needed to find ways to pay national debt that had been accumulated during the Revolution. Hamilton is significant to the new world by establishing a financial foundation for the federal
During the construction of the new Constitution, many of the most prominent and experienced political members of America’s society provided a framework on the future of the new country; they had in mind, because of the failures of the Articles of Confederation, a new kind of government where the national or Federal government would be the sovereign power, not the states. Because of the increased power of the national government over the individual states, many Americans feared it would hinder their ability to exercise their individual freedoms. Assuring the people, both Alexander Hamilton and James Madison insisted the new government under the constitution was “an expression of freedom, not its enemy,” declaring “the Constitution made political tyranny almost impossible.” (Foner, pg. 227) The checks and balances introduced under the new and more powerful national government would not allow the tyranny caused by a king under the Parliament system in Britain. They insisted that in order achieve a greater amount of freedom, a national government was needed to avoid the civil unrest during the system under the Articles of Confederation. Claiming that the new national government would be a “perfect balance between liberty and power,” it would avoid the disruption that liberty [civil unrest] and power [king’s abuse of power in England] caused. The “lackluster leadership” of the critics of the new constitution claimed that a large land area such as America could not work for such a diverse nation.
This article discusses a feud between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Alexander was the first Treasury Secretary of the United States and “…he advocated a vigorous central government marked by a strong president” (Chernow 22-23). Hamilton also believed in independent judiciary and a liberal reading of the constitution. He supported that money borrowed by the U.S. from citizens for the Revolutionary War should be paid back at face value with no interest. Hamilton is described as “a crypto-monarchist” (Chernow 81), which is a person who secretly supports government rule by the King. On the other hand, Jefferson was the first Secretary of State and “believed that liberty was jeopardized by concentrated federal power” (Chernow 24-25). He believed in state rights, a central role of congress, and a weak judiciary system. In opposition to Hamilton’s stance, Jefferson believed that the individuals, who loaned the money to the U.S. to support the Revolutionary War, should earn interest. Ironically, Hamilton was an abolitionist and Jefferson owned slaves which is contradictory to their predominant belief system. Even more ironic, in 1801 Hamilton helped in Jefferson’s bid for President citing that Jefferson was the “lesser of two evils” (Chernow 185-186), when running against Aaron
Both men (Jefferson and Madison) as well as both parties were steadfast to their views of interpretation in words, but when it came to action, they strayed from their political conceptions about the Constitution. Both political figures reinstated time after time that the nation rested solely on the states, but when the time came, with it was the second war with Britain or the trade with France, the two men broke from strict constructionism, in order to serve the public interest. In general, both presidents took the views of either party when it suited him best.