How Did Andrew Jackson Corrupt

Andrew Jackson, seventh president of the United States of America, can be debated as either a good president or bad president. But if one were to weigh out the positives and negatives of Andrew Jackson’s presidency, one would realize that his positives outweigh his negatives for a variety of historic facts. Andrew Jackson was a good president because he represented the majority of America’s people by being a common, prevented a civil war when South Carolina threatened to secede from the nation, and because he technically found or instigated the two major parties used in America today (Democratic and Republican). Many Jackson oppositionists despise him because of he is a hypocrite, however America was founded on hypocrisy so as an

Andrew Jackson, seventh president of the United States and founder of the Democratic Party, was elected President in 1828, after he lost in the election of 1824 because of the Electoral College. He was a believer in true democracy, built a party that was representing what the people wanted and did everything he could to close the deep divisions between rich and poor. But he was not always correct in how he acted. In some ways, Andrew Jackson was like Thomas Jefferson: He never really liked the Bank of the United States. When it was time to renew the Bank’s charter, he sent a veto message saying that the Bank needed to be abolished. Jackson thought that it was not a good thing to have the national’s financial strength in a single institution, that the Bank only helped the rich people to become even richer, and that it had too much control over members of the Congress and favored the northeast over the southwest. Jackson was

Jackson also encouraged the spoils system, which gave jobs in public office to the supporters of the successful political party. Was this democratic of him? As

Andrew Jackson was probably one of the most powerful and influential presidents during his time at the white house. He was hated, yet loved by many. Jackson was an American soldier, who gained fame as a general in the U.S and served in both houses of Congress. He was soon elected the seventh president of the United States. After Jackson took charge, he wanted immediate change as to how the government was being run. For starters, he came with a new idea of voting. Allowing the common people to vote for whom they believe was the right person for the job. Before the introduction to

Moreover, Andrew Jackson greatly facilitated the transfer of power from “the few” to “the many” in the US. In Jackson’s Bank Veto Message to Congress in July of 1832, he stated that the rich were monopolizing the country’s domestic exchange by “bending the acts of government to their selfish purposes.” (Document 4). Jackson argued that with so much money and power, the corrupt rich were influencing the government to allow them domination over the many people who could not match their authority. The few, selfish rich citizens felt no duty or responsibility to their country so they committed great evils to promote their own status. For this reason, Jackson wanted the Bank of the United States vetoed so that this corruption could be ended at once and the rich would not be able to use the Bank for their egotistic intents. The BUS had been standing since Alexander Hamilton proposed it in the early 1800s, so it was outlandish for Jackson to propose its veto, but he was truly doing it for the people. The following day after Jackson’s message, Daniel Webster issued a reply to it. In his reply, Webster claimed that Jackson was controlling the poor and arousing them against the rich (Document 5). While this does seem like an immoral action for one to

Samuel Swartwout had “criminal tendencies” but Jackson ignored Van Buren’s advice because “he [Swartwout] had been an early support” and ultimately Swartwout stole $1,222,705.09. Jackson’s bad judgment and refusal to listen to his own council, because of his own selfishness cost the country,

The Whigs would have supported this depiction of Jackson due to Jackson’s views on nullification, economics, and expansion. Jackson was a tyrannical ruler and abused his power often. The Whigs saw his strengthening of the executive branch monarchical and unfair. Jackson also wanted to limit the role of the federal government in economic affairs and worked to destroy the Bank of the United States (BUS). Jackson faced the nullification crisis of 1832-1833, where the convention declared the tariffs of 1832 unconstitutional. In 1833, President Jackson urged Congress to pass the Force Bill that authorized him to use military force in order to collect tariff duties. Southerners, along with the Whigs, became more conscious of their minority position. Jackson also wanted Indian tribes to move out of the way of expanding white settlement, which the Whigs were opposed to.

When Jackson first ran for president in 1824, he got the most popular and electoral votes, but sadly not the majority. So, by default, the House got to choose the president and it ended up being John Q. Adams. Jackson ran again in 1828, and he finally won. Was Andrew Jackson a democratic supporter, someone who believed in political and social equality for everyone, of the people, or a tyrant, a cruel and oppressive leader? Andrew Jackson was a tyrant because he disregarded the principle of checks and balances, treated Native Americans brutally, and enforced unfair tariffs.

Corruption happened in almost every government at that time and still some goes on today like in the Mexican government. Jackson came into office and cleaned some house you might say. People feared he would fire everyone that held government positions, but he didn’t, only about 10 percent was fired, but that was still a huge number compared to new presidents in the past. He only replaced the officers that were largely inept, corrupt and were politically against him. Jackson called this “the principle of rotation in office,” or the spoils system. A spoils system is a practice in which a political party, usually after an election wins, gives government jobs to supporters. Mostly these people were friends and relatives as a reward to for working hard toward victory. Once Jackson was in office, he

Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson both claimed to represent the interests and ideas of the “common man.” However, Andrew Jackson had a better claim to the title as he helped to represent the interests and ideas of the “common man” in more ways than Jefferson. Firstly, Jackson’s background helped to boost his claim to the title as he was originally an orphan as well as the first President that came from a state other than Virginia and Massachusetts. The other reason why Jackson had a better claim to the title was that he helped to pass acts that were more suited towards the “common man.” Although Jefferson and Jackson both claimed to represent the interests of “common man,” Jackson had a better claim to the title due to his background and his presidency.

The Villa Academy 8th Grade U.S. History students traveled to the Federal Courthouse in downtown Seattle to try former president Andrew Jackson for his alleged crimes against humanity, which occurred in the 1830’s as Americans moved west. Reason 3: The law authorized the president to negotiate with southern Native American tribes for their removal to federal territory west of the Mississippi River in exchange for their lands. Andrew Jackson was an American soldier and statesman who

Andrew Jackson, one of the presidents of the United States, claimed that he was pro-democratic and that he was for the people, but was he really? The Age of Jackson was not an age of democracy because of how Andrew Jackson controlled the Indians, the way he went about voting laws, and how he was viewed as a “king”. Jackson told the colonies that he had given the Indians options in which they so cooperatively agreed to give up their

In the well disputed election of 1828, Andrew Jackson took the lead over John Quincy Adams to become the President of the United States, creating what he thought was a democratic government. Democracy in the Jacksonian era was defined as being something that allowed the people to have a say on things that went on in the government as well as majority, but Jackson himself did not demonstrate this in his two terms in office. Jackson forced the Indians out of their lands disregarding the treaties the Native Americans had set in place with the United States. In addition, Andrew Jackson repeatedly vetoed bills and enforced laws that he thought were necessary for a successful union. Most significantly, President Jackson did not allow states to have the rights to declare a national law null, believing

Andrew Jackson was the seventh president of the United States, elected in eighteen twenty-eight. Prior to his presidency Andrew Jackson was well known and favored for his success against the British in the war of eighteen-twelve. Upon election, Andrew Jackson became known as the people’s president gaining the majority of electoral votes over his opponent John quincy Adams.Throughout his presidency many events occurred that would shape America as a nation. During his time as President Andrew Jackson was both favored and hated by many individuals. His actions pleased certain groups of people, but would also cause for a loss of support amongst Americans. Jackson’s legacy would leave behind a strong willed group of supporters, known as the Democrat party, and the creation of opposed individuals known as the Whig party as well. His presidency would be viewed as time of improvements to some, but to others who strongly opposed his presidency, it would be seen as a time for unjust tariffs and conflict. Jackson’s presidency would be characterized by key events such as the Indian removal act, the nullification crisis, and the dispute known as the war against the bank, that would alter the nation forever.

The Bank of the United States was technically the second bank of the U.S. since the first bank’s charter ended in 1811. The second bank held a monopoly over federal deposits, provided credit to growing enterprises, issued banknotes that served as a dependable medium of exchange, and used a restraining effect on the less well-managed state banks. Jackson didn’t trust the bank and thought it had too much power, so Jackson sought out to destroy it. There were two different groups when it came to opposition, “soft-money” and “hard-money”. Soft money supporters were progressive, they believed in economic growth and bank speculation. They supported the use of paper money and were mainly made up of bankers and allies to bankers. Hard money supporters were against expansion and bank speculation. They supported coinage only and rejected all banks that used paper money, which included the federal bank. Jackson was a hard money supporter although, he felt sympathy to the soft money supporters. Jackson could not legally end the bank before its charter expired. By removing the