The Most Consequential Elections in History: Andrew Jackson and the Election of 1828
Jackson's term changed the way Americans thought of the presidency
From the start of his administration, Jackson fought what he considered a profligate and selfish American aristocracy and worked on behalf of western farmers and eastern laborers. He tried to weed out corruption and incompetence from the civil service. He dismissed many government workers and installed loyalists. A backer said Jackson found "nothing wrong in the rule that to the victors belong the spoils of the enemy." He vetoed the recharter of the Bank of the United States, saying it would have made "the rich richer and the potent more powerful." His extensive use of the veto, in fact, set the precedent of making the chief executive central to the legislative process. Until that time, presidents generally exercised their veto power only when a bill seemed unconstitutional. Jackson broadened the criteria for veto to include bills he disagreed with. Most Americans liked what they saw.
One of the strongest presidents in history, Andrew Jackson insisted that federal authority must be preserved from attacks by southern states. One of his worst crises came when South Carolina leaders declared that the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 were null and void. Threatening to secede from the Union, South Carolina forbade federal officers from collecting revenues in the state. Jackson was incensed, and he promised in the fiercest of terms to strictly enforce federal laws. "If a single drop of blood shall be shed there in opposition to the laws of the United States," he said, "I will hang the first man I can lay my hands on engaged in such conduct upon the first tree that I can reach." Eventually a compromise was found—the tariffs were reduced—and the crisis passed.
Jackson easily won re-election in 1832.
More from our Most Consequential Elections series:
George Washington and the Election of 1788
Thomas Jefferson and the Election of 1800
Abraham Lincoln and the Election of 1860
Abraham Lincoln and the Election of 1864
Theodore Roosevelt and the Election of 1904
Woodrow Wilson and the Election of 1912
Franklin Roosevelt and the Election of 1932
Lyndon Johnson and the Election of 1964
Ronald Reagan and the Election of 1980
Reader Comments
2 cents
I think that he makes good points on this subject jackson did do bad things that are not forgivable but I think it was a a much needed change I would much rather have a man that knows the real world the man fought battles for a living, than to have a pamperd aristocratic chior boy
jackson
jackson sucks
Sorry to spoil you otherwise fine overview of Jackson [Paul of WA] by ending it with the incorrect
notion that Karl Rove is heading McJuans campaign.
Rove does NOT work for McJuan.
If he did the election might be closer since the MSM hasn't vetted O'Hussein out properly. The new information revealed about O'Husseins previously unrevealed or glossed over is now termed a smear simply for the fact that it is 'known' by the McJuan camp, not that it's not true, mind you, just for the fact that McJuan dares to mention it. How dare he dig up what we've been trying desparetly to keep from the public?
Dirty Politics goes way beyond the simplistic idea of mere name calling. You betcha, it does!
advertisement










