History, 03.08.2019 09:30, Quidlord03

Explain the reasons for the rise in partisan politics in the early republic

Answers: 1

Show answers

Answers

When Washington became president, he named Alexander Hamilton as his secretary of treasury. Hamilton was considered a strong mind in politics, and his first project was to deal with the debt the public had amassed. He created a plan that made the wealthy the ones to made sure the government survived due to them holding all the money. He called it the Report on Public Credit. Congress would combine the debts of the state and on a national level and then fin a away to offer safeties that would cover the unpaid interest. Hamilton then requested to create a national bank, one that would be modeled after Bank of England. It would collect and disperse money into the national treasury. Hamilton also worked to promote industrial development and them to try to tax whiskey. A group called Republicans led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison opposed these plans and state that Hamilton was undermining the values of the country. Hamilton believed those republicans were trying to tear apart the new nation. This led Hamilton and his followers to become labeled the Federalists, which began the separate partisan political groups of the time.

answered: Guest

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is

answered: Guest

us court of appeals for the 11th circuit