These two projects became the key issues of the elections. The main difference between them was that in Roosevelt’s the government should control the bad trust, leaving the good one alone and free to operate while Wilson’s objective was to break up all trust and basically shun social-welfare proposals. Wilson won manly because the Republican party devided, because of this he’s also called a Minority President. During his ministry he tackled the “triple wall of privilege”: the tariff, the banks and the trusts. This benefited the American public.
On the other hand, the single-issue parties, they only focus on only one public policy matter. The chapter also talks about President’s party is almost always more solidly united and better well-organized compare with other major party. However, competition often caused the leadership group in the party out of power. Federalism is a major reason for the decentralized nature of the two major political parties and also the nominating process is also a major cause of party decentralization. Often, the parties will fight with each other and compete with each other within their party during the nominating process.
They disagreed on virtually all aspects of domestic and foreign policy and much of the President's energies were spent in mediating their differences. The Federalist Party; was a party of individuals that include leaders like Alexander Hamilton who advocated for a strong central government and had great business interests. The Federalists beliefs were that they supported the new Constitution of the United States, they believed in a strong national government with powers over the states, also they favored protective tariffs to enable American industry to develop, favored collection of taxes from the states and favored a strong military to protect the nation. However, the Democratic – Republican party led by Thomas Jefferson believed that the Constitution should be strictly interpreted and that the individual states and citizens should retain as many of their powers and rights as possible. These two parties got into many debates about who had the better ideas for the government and say that which party should be dominant or to have total power in the government.
If I had to choose a type of government, I would support the Federalists. The Anti-Federalists did not want to ratify the Constitution. Basically, they argue that the constitution gave too much power to the national government at the expense of the state governments, there was no bill of rights, the national government could maintain an army in peacetime, Congress, because of the `necessary and proper clause,' wielded too much power and the executive branch held too much power. The Antifederalists, were generally farmers, debtors, and other lower class people who were loyal to their state governments. Antifederalist leaders, including Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry, typically enjoyed more wealth and power than the people they led.I am sure these seemed like legitimate claims at the time, however, they are really fears unfounded by any proof.
Liberals are probably the strongest advocates of democracy. Democracy solves a problem described by an old adage: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." When power or wealth concentrates too heavily in too few hands in society, democracy is useful for dispersing much of that power back to the people. In other words, when enough voters become discontented with the status quo, they vote to change it. Of course, those already in power bitterly resent this; that is why there is such a strong anti-democratic streak in wealthy conservatives and business owners.
Branches of Government Jefferson said it best, “My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government” (The Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc., 1996-2012, para. 1). After the ultimate control while under rule of the crown, the founding fathers sought to create not only a government that provided for rights and liberties of the people, but also to ensure that government interaction and authority was spread amongst various branches. This distribution of power would provide checks and balances to guarantee reduced influence, while allowing each section to operate independently. However, agreement of each party would be problematic to achieve when needing to enact new laws and regulations.
The Townshend Acts were similar to the Stamp Act but they taxed different items, and they were put in place after the tax was repealed. Another important difference that the colonists overlooked was that these taxes were a customs duty that could be paid at American ports. All of these parliamentary laws caused uproars in the colonies. They believed that they were not fair because of the no representation of colonists at parliament meetings. The British, to colonial dismay, told them that they were represented because they had Virtual Representation because all parliament members represent all British citizens.
So the tug-of-war between the president and Congress is a special part (271). The framers had never envisioned that the presidency of the United States of America would become such a democratic office. They were afraid of tyranny and the pressure of the public opinion and made the Electoral College in a way that its members would be chosen in a manner decided by the state legislatures (270). They realized that the instead of letting the people elect the members, the state legislatures would elect the members by themselves. The electors from the states would than elect the country’s president from the leading citizens.
Issues like the role of the government, the people’s rights, and international affairs were some of the more major aspects that prompted the evolution of the first American political party system. The administration of Washington and Adam’s dueled it out with their contributions to the solving of these national problems in the midst of deciding whether such things as state power and people’s rights were dangerous to the state of the national government. After all these things forming throughout their legacy, factions known as the Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian transformed into political parties that gave opposing views on our nation. As the new American government began to form, because of the division between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, Washington realized there needed to be a President in charge who could balance the nation with power and release to the people. He stood for a strong federal government because he strongly struggled with giving states too much power, thinking they would start a rebellion in which could not be controlled.
are having their constitutional rights being kept from them which is a serious violation of the inalienable rights guaranteed to every American citizen. With the right to vote being the most important right in a free country, having the right taken away due to the complications of bureaucracy and the polarization of our political parties should make any responsible citizen confused or disgusted. Washington D.C. should be granted statehood because it passes all the requirements for it besides approval from corrupt and broken legislative body. However, there is hope, since we are a democracy, know your next congressman’s stance on this debate and maybe we can restore the American way of life to 600,000 silenced citizens. Works Cited Davis Jr., DeWitt.