Jeffersonians Vs Jacksonians Essay Research Paper The

Jeffersonians Vs. Jacksonians Essay, Research Paper The Washington administration was the first to bring together in the cabinet of the United States, the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and the Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and Hamilton began to take different views when the government began to address the issue of the old war debts and the worthless paper money left over from the days of the Confederation. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the Bank of the United States, which would be a public-private partnership with both government and private investors. The Bank of the United States was to handle the government?s banking needs. Jefferson protested because this was not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and stated that the Constitution?s writers could not have predicted the need of a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank of the United States was stated in the ?elastic? or the ?necessary and proper? clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. ? This began the argument between the ?strict constructionists? (Jefferson) who believed in the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond its clearly expressed provisions, and the ?loose constructionists? (Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it said?. Hamilton and Jefferson began to disagree more and more. Hamilton wrote nasty anonymous articles in John Fenno?s Gazette of the United States and Jefferson responded to him in Philip Freneau?s National Gazette. Jefferson?s Notes of the State of Virginia in 1787 stated that rural life was beneficial to the government because cities and other areas of large population created poverty, disease, and corruption. Jefferson believed that the small farmers where the backbone of the United States. While in the Report on Manufactures of 1791,Hamilton stated that the government should be used to develop cities, industries, and trade Hamilton believed that ?government’s function is to maintain order in a potentially chaotic society. It needs to be remote and secure from the people’s emotional uprisings?.Jefferson believed the government ?needs to be limited in its powers and completely responsive to the needs and desires of the people?.Hamilton was strongest among merchants in the cities and throughout New England while Jefferson was strongest among artisans in the cities and throughout the South. These conflicting views would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects, Hamilton?s views would be the more reasonable because Jefferson?s views were idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution. The Jeffersonian beliefs were extremely idealistic. Jeffersonians? supported a country of farmers which in theory would end famine and the spread of disease that was commonly found in cities. However, without the development of cities and industries there would not be a trade industry which would allow the farmers to trade and prosper. With no trade, farmers would not be able to market their surplus and the surplus in the American economy would cause prices to fall. This situation would produce little profit for farmers and eventually an stagnant economy. An economy totally based on farming would also encounter problems if droughts and other natural disasters interfered with their harvests. The Hamiltonian belief is more realistic. Hamiltonians? supported the expansion of economic endeavors in cities, in areas such as trade and other crafts. This would help keep the economy stable and growing if the farming lands were not up to their potential. Jefferson?s belief that the decisions in government should be made by the people is very unrealistic and perhaps even naive. It is sometimes human nature to change one?s views and beliefs in a wince and citizens might follow the views of an irrational and incompetent person which would lead the country to ruin. Hamilton said that some of the power should be kept out of the hand of the people in order to protect the people from making a change in government that would cause possible disasters. Jefferson?s view would only would have worked in an perfect world. Jefferson?s ideals for the government were too strict as it pertains to the interpretation of the Constitution. Jefferson did not realize that the Constitution was written in a broad manner. The Constitution was written in such a broad way that not the laws, but the interpretation of them would change according to the times. The interpretation was for the government of turn to recognize what the laws are and to enforce them. The Constitution called for freedom of speech, religion, and press. It only applied at the time to white males while in the present it applies to men and women of all races. Jefferson?s ?strict constructionism? would have led to the downfall of the government because the Constitution does not have the denotative solution for every problem that the government would have encountered. Hamilton?s view that the Constitution could not have anticipated the details to deal with different crises, and that a wide interpretation of the Constitution was necessary in order to carry out the government?s duties. The Hamiltonian views were much more effective in dealing with the government. The Hamiltonian broad interpretation ensured that the Constitution is not considered as a 200 year old body of rigid and inflexible laws, that make no room for improvement in an ever changing American society.The Washington administration was the first to bring together in the cabinet of the United States, the Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and the Secretary of Treasury Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson and Hamilton began to take different views when the government began to address the issue of the old war debts and the worthless paper money left over from the days of the Confederation. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the Bank of the United States, which would be a public-private partnership with both government and private investors. The Bank of the United States was to handle the government?s banking needs. Jefferson protested because this was not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and stated that the Constitution?s writers could not have predicted the need of a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank of the United States was stated in the ?elastic? or the ?necessary and proper? clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. ? This began the argument between the ?strict constructionists? (Jefferson) who believed in the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond its clearly expressed provisions, and the ?loose constructionists? (Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it said?. Hamilton and Jefferson began to disagree more and more. Hamilton wrote nasty anonymous articles in John Fenno?s Gazette of the United States and Jefferson responded to him in Philip Freneau?s National Gazette.. Jefferson?s Notes of the State of Virginia in 1787 stated that rural life was beneficial to the government because cities and other areas of large population created poverty, disease, and corruption. Jefferson believed that the small farmers where the backbone of the United States. While in the Report on Manufactures of 1791,Hamilton stated that the government should be used to develop cities, industries, and trade Hamilton believed that ?government’s function is to maintain order in a potentially chaotic society. It needs to be remote and secure from the people’s emotional uprisings?.Jefferson believed the government ?needs to be limited in its powers and completely responsive to the needs and desires of the people?.Hamilton was strongest among merchants in the cities and throughout New England while Jefferson was strongest among artisans in the cities and throughout the South. These conflicting views would develop in two political parties, the Federalists led by Hamilton and the Democratic-Republicans led by Jefferson. Although both political parties presented enticing aspects, Hamilton?s views would be the more reasonable because Jefferson?s views were idealistic and too strict in reference to the constitution. The Jeffersonian beliefs were extremely idealistic. Jeffersonians? supported a country of farmers which in theory would end famine and the spread of disease that was commonly found in cities. However, without the development of cities and industries there would not be a trade industry which would allow the farmers to trade and prosper. With no trade, farmers would not be able to market their surplus and the surplus in the American economy would cause prices to fall. This situation would produce little profit for farmers and eventually an stagnant economy. An economy totally based on farming would also encounter problems if droughts and other natural disasters interfered with their harvests. The Hamiltonian belief is more realistic. Hamiltonians? supported the expansion of economic endeavors in cities, in areas such as trade and other crafts. This would help keep the economy stable and growing if the farming lands were not up to their potential. Jefferson?s belief that the decisions in government should be made by the people is very unrealistic and perhaps even naive. It is sometimes human nature to change one?s views and beliefs in a wince and citizens might follow the views of an irrational and incompetent person which would lead the country to ruin. Hamilton said that some of the power should be kept out of the hand of the people in order to protect the people from making a change in government that would cause possible disasters. Jefferson?s view would only would have worked in an perfect world. Jefferson?s ideals for the government were too strict as it pertains to the interpretation of the Constitution. Jefferson did not realize that the Constitution was written in a broad manner. The Constitution was written in such a broad way that not the laws, but the interpretation of them would change according to the times. The interpretation was for the government of turn to recognize what the laws are and to enforce them. The Constitution called for freedom of speech, religion, and press. It only applied at the time to white males while in the present it applies to men and women of all races. Jefferson?s ?strict constructionism? would have led to the downfall of the government because the Constitution does not have the denotative solution for every problem that the government would have encountered. Hamilton?s view that the Constitution could not have anticipated the details to deal with different crises, and that a wide interpretation of the Constitution was necessary in order to carry out the government?s duties. The Hamiltonian views were much more effective in dealing with the government. The Hamiltonian broad interpretation ensured that the Constitution is not considered as a 200 year old body of rigid and inflexible laws, that make no room for improvement in an ever changing American society.