The seventh presidency of the United States held by Andrew Jackson was monumental and memorable for several reasons. Jackson’s unprivileged background, personal efforts at acquiring wealth, loss of a wife shortly after his first victory to the White House, and a successful military career that gained him nationwide recognition represent the social challenges and triumphs that characterized his persona. On an official level, Jackson outnumbered his six predecessors combined on the number of vetoes he exercised during his tenure. Some of the vetoes included’ fighting the Bank of America, entrenching democracy and overseeing the forceful relocation of vast numbers of Native American tribes, expanding American territory, and paying off federal debt during his second term (Adams, 2013). One singular aspect for which Jackson is most famous, however, is his defense of the will of the common people, which he believed was his primary purpose. He encountered significant opposition and became quite a controversial figure (Cayton, 2008). Andrew Jackson’s brand of politics was different from what the maturing American democracy had been accustomed to, setting him apart from his predecessors in his redefinition of presidential power and unique concept of democracy.
Firstly, Andrew Jackson created a reputation during his service in the military that proved his belief in the American experiment. It was one of the most influential factors that helped him capture the presidency about a decade and a half later. Having joined the army in 1812, Jackson led a five-month campaign in 1815 against Creek Indians who were friendly to the British that culminated in a resounding American victory (Murrin, Johnson, McPherson, Fahs, & Gerstle, 2013). The recognition he acquired eased him into the hearts of ordinary Americans (Brown, 2015). It is unclear whether he developed a distaste for native Americans through this initial confrontation with them and as a result oversaw their controversial relocation later in his tenure. However, he had proved that he was effective and could do whatever is necessary to achieve a particular objective for which he had sufficient grounds. Nonetheless, Jackson’s army exploits already set him far apart from anyone else who had occupied the highest office in the country hence, enhancing his legacy through his successes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Secondly, Andrew Jackson’s presidential campaign and the succeeding few years in office were marred with personal attacks targeted at his marriage. It was the first time that such criticisms that focused on one’s personal life reached such levels. To put this into context, Jackson married Rachel Donelson Robards before she was legally divorced from her first husband (Remini, 2013). She was a huge part of the personal attacks Jackson's opponents leveled against him. Jackson believed that Rachel's death in 1828 was directly influenced by the negative publicity that surrounded their marital union (Remini, 2013). Even though the loss of his wife shocked him, he remained committed to his policies and implemented them without fear of opposition (Brown, 2015). The intense political campaign that spurred Andrew Jackson to presidential victory involved the murky politics of personal attacks that painted Jackson’s wife in the negative light in the eyes of the people. However, the president's strong personality meant he was not distracted from his course and continued to exercise his role unabated.
Thirdly, President Andrew Jackson's policies were useful to the US's economic standing internationally. The president introduced spending controls that regulated government expenditure. In 1835, he paid off the national debt, and his country remained debt-free for the rest of his tenure (Adams, 2013). It is the only time in the country’s history that the federal government has been without debt. He also vetoed a road bill that he argued would benefit only a small section of the country and was too costly (Brown, 2015). Jackson also made France pay the money owed to the US to which they had agreed in 1831 (Murrin et al., 2013). He threatened them with war if they failed to do so. It was Britain’s intervention that nipped the escalation and division that was gradually increasing. Eventually, France agreed to pay the indemnities (Heidler & Heidler, 2003). Although a controversial way to collect liabilities, it was effective nonetheless. Through force and strict control, president Andrew Jackson’s policies and actions were a central part of his fresh brand of politics that enhanced the country’s economic position globally.
Andrew Jackson also fought against the entrenched system of corruption that was benefiting only a small number of people at the expense of many. He replaced close to ten percent of government positions during his term, making it the highest in the nation’s history (Adams, 2013). It is worth noting that the very reason that he had been elected was to counter the forces of corruption that had been powerful in the nation’s political and economic scene. The government officials he replaced were largely associated with corruption, ineffectiveness, and strong political opposition (Heidler & Heidler, 2003). As mentioned above, Rachel Donelson was attacked strongly during and after the campaign. Some of these attackers went on to oppose his political appointments and the president consequently changed them to ensure his policies would encounter minimal confrontation (Murrin et al., 2013). From the outset, Jackson was somewhat autocratic in some of these moves but the positive impact of reduced corruption and a debt-free status they produced outshone their negative aspects.
One of Andrew Jackson’s most contentious part of his legacy was the displacement of Native American tribes to the west of Mississippi River. Jackson appeared altruistic in the ratification of the Indian Removal Act of 1831, which would remove the native tribes from the lands that white settlers desperately desired. He argued that the native American way of life had refused to change despite efforts to assimilate them into American culture (Brown, 2015). As a result, separation was the preferable means to coexist with them. Jackson won the vote in Congress by a small margin and the Act was implemented two years after his departure from office (Adams, 2013). Known as the “Trail of Tears,” the removal process led to thousands of deaths resulting from the forceful nature of its implementation and insufficient supplies (Guay, 2006). Arguably, the Trail of Tears represented the most noteworthy scar on his otherwise positive career. Not only did it show that the president could turn a blind eye to the suffering of other people within his territory, the displacement put into question Jackson’s reputation as the people’ s president.
Jackson also sought to control the Bank of the United States to ensure that it could no longer hold the power to ruin the US economy at will. The primary factor that may have led Jackson to consider this course of action was the performance of Nicholas Biddle in the management of the Bank. Prior to Biddle’s time, the US Congress had chartered the Second Bank of the United States (SBUS), a private entity, to manage the entire country’s money, control circulation of legal tender, and provision of loans (Guay, 2006). The result was heightened corruption and accumulation of profits within a small circle of stockholders. However, the corruption and inadequate management led to significant problems in the US’s economy. Jackson thought the banks were too powerful and needed to be controlled (Guay, 2006). Jackson rose to become the Bank’s most powerful ‘enemy’ when he opposed its re-chartering proposed by Henry Clay. He was censured in the Senate. The Bank’s charter was not renewed (Brown, 2015). The singlehanded manner in which he confronted the Bank is as admirable as it is unique for the executive of which Jackson was in charge. The different strategy of attacking a financial institution with such immense muscle as the Bank of the United States was unprecedented for a president but Jackson proved effective and defended what he considered to be the powers of the people.
The attack on the Bank of the United States may have appeared altruistic to him, but one struggles to understand whether such a move should be encouraged. To date, economists are divided on the impact of government intervention in the economy. Proponents argue that it promotes equality by enforcing improved redistribution of income, enhance local production of specific goods, and reduce proneness to recessions and prevalence of unemployment (Free, 2010). Opponents claim that government intervention is susceptible to mistakes such as the occasional expenditure on inefficient projects (Free, 2010). Also, intervention means the government makes personal decisions on expenditure away from the people, as well as the strength of market forces to control production (Cayton, 2008). Jackson believed his efforts were aimed at protecting individual freedoms by encouraging the benefit of the public rather than a minority of stockholders. However, he was not interested in considering an alternative point of view of, perhaps, ensuring people like Biddle were in charge more frequently in place of corrupt officials instead of intervening himself. The SBUS situation is an additional piece of evidence on the autocratic style of leadership for which Jackson is famed due to his one-sided look at the situation despite his apparent altruism.
Finally, Andrew Jackson defended the unity of American states. He opposed nullification characterized by John Calhoun’s refusal to honor and his subsequent invalidation of the Treaty of 1832 (Guay, 2006). Calhoun, Jackson’s former vice president, argued that the Treaty was intended to benefit only the northern manufacturing states while damaging the spoils of the south (Guay, 2006). The main economic activity of southern states was agriculture, whose products they exported to the north. In rejecting the Treaty, Calhoun threatened the South Carolina secession, leading President Jackson to warn him with force if Calhoun would break the law (Brown, 2015). A bill compromising both positions was later passed (Adams, 2013; Brown, 2015). An independent look at the South Carolina situation shows that the concerns Calhoun was raising were valid – he did not want his state to be unfairly treated in trade. However, Jackson’s response was hostile and somewhat contradictory to the ideals he had defended. Nonetheless, it was an effective response. Besides ensuring the Union remained united, President Jackson laid the constitutional grounds for a similar intervention by President Abraham Lincoln later.
In conclusion, Andrew Jackson’s style of politics was quite unique because he put a lot of effort into striking a balance between the liberties of the people and control by stronger institutions. He was somewhat autocratic because he did not easily change his plans to accommodate alternative views. However, his exploits in the economic sphere and international policy pushed him to political legendary status. Nonetheless, although Jackson had his fair share of challenges and questionable decisions, he left an indelible mark on American politics for which he continues to be remembered.
References
Adams, S. P. (2013). A companion to the era of Andrew Jackson . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, W. (2015). Andrew Jackson . Scotts Valley, CA: Createspace Independent Publishing Platform.
Cayton, A. (2008, November 14). Book Review | 'American Lion: Andrew Jackson in the White House,' by Jon Meacham. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/books/review/Cayton-t.html
Free, R. C. (2010). 21st-century economics: A reference handbook . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Guay, A. (2006). Andrew Jackson and the Nullification Crisis, Indian Removal and the Bank War . Munich, Germany: GRIN Verlag.
Heidler, D. S., & Heidler, J. T. (2003). Old Hickory's War: Andrew Jackson and the quest for empire . Louisiana, CA: LSU Press.
Murrin, J. M., Johnson, P. E., McPherson, J. M., Fahs, A., & Gerstle, G. (2013). Liberty, equality, power: A history of the American people, concise edition . Boston, MS: Cengage Learning.
Remini, R. V. (2013). Andrew Jackson: The course of American freedom, 1822-1832 . Baltimore, MA: JHU Press.
