Publisher/Publication: Worldview Software Basic American History I – Pre-Columbian Years to Reconstruction
Editor: Dr. Amy Jo Baker; Editor/Consultant: Dr. Sandra Alfonsi
|
Page #/Line #
|
Quote
|
Problem
|
Fact and Source
|
Publisher Response
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: Some Americans Oppose the Government’s Financial Policies.
First Paragraph
|
Hamilton also said that the last paragraph of Article I, Section 8 (the so-called "elastic clause") gave Congress many powers which were not specifically listed in the first part of Article I, Section 8. Much to Jefferson's deep disappointment, Washington supported Hamilton's "loose" interpretation of the Constitution.
|
OF, FE
|
* Saying that Jefferson was disappointed at George Washington’s loose interpretation of the Constitution does not explain WHY he was disappointed. The text should have said that Jefferson was disappointed that the federal government had seized power not granted by article 1, section 8. Hamilton had convinced Washington to approve an unauthorized grant of power of the purse to the federal branches.
*The question to students should have been to ask, “Why did Washington sanction Hamilton’s violation of the Constitution’s restraint on federal authority, thus setting a precedent to opening the door for arbitrary expansion of federal power over the states in many other ways?” Instead, the publisher implies that the last paragraph of article 1, section 8 “gave Congress many powers which were not specifically listed in the first part of Article I, Section 8.”
* Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia & Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 & 1799, and Madison’s Report of 1800 presented the Constitution’s remedy for correcting the federal government when it overstepped its limited authority. The Alien-Sedition Act provided a classic example of how tyranny is the result of government breach of the constitution. Jefferson and Madison explained this and the remedy.
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-documents/virginia-and-kentucky-resolutions/
|
This is a question of bias in the comment: using the term “seizure of power” in the review implies that there is only one way the “necessary and proper” clause can be interpreted. However, it can be seen as either authorizing actions rationally related to one of the listed powers, or only actions "necessary" to carrying out a listed power -- a debate that has not yet been settled.
No change.
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: Some Americans Oppose the Government’s Financial Policies.
First paragraph.
|
Hamilton also said that the last paragraph of Article I, Section 8 (the so-called "elastic clause") gave Congress many powers which were not specifically listed in the first part of Article I, Section 8. Much to Jefferson's deep disappointment, Washington supported Hamilton's "loose" interpretation of the Constitution.
|
OF, FE
|
* The “necessary and proper” clause is erroneously referred to as the “elastic clause:” This clause merely delegates to Congress the power to pass laws necessary and proper to execute its declared powers (Federalist No. 29, 4th para); a power to do something must be a power to pass all laws necessary and proper for the execution of that power (Federalist No. 33, 3rd para); “the constitutional operation of the intended government would be precisely the same if [this clause] were entirely obliterated as if [it] were repeated in every article” (No. 33, 2nd para); and thus the clause is “perfectly harmless”, a “tautology or redundancy” (No. 33, 3rd para). Madison writes to the same effect in (Federalist No. 44, at 1.).
The clause merely permits the execution of powers already delegated and enumerated in the federal Constitution. No additional substantive powers are granted by this clause.
*https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2012/11/13/now-how-do-we-get-rid-of-obamacare-nullify-it-2/
|
The phrase “elastic clause” has been in use since 1805 and in widespread use since the 1890s. The phrase “necessary and proper” has been in use since 1866 and in widespread use since the 1920s. See the n-gram https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=elastic+clause%2C+necessary+and+proper+clause&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Celastic%20clause%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cnecessary%20and%20proper%20clause%3B%2Cc0
No change.
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: Arguments lead to the Rise of Political Parties.
|
Issues such as the U.S. Bank and the war in Europe divided Americans into opposing groups. Debates became stronger as Election Day approached. People wanted to elect officials who supported their opinions. This led to the creation of political parties.
|
OF, FE
|
* The text does not clarify that the political war was between
(1) Jeffersonian Federalists, i.e. those who defended the states by (a) prohibiting the federal government, from expanding its powers beyond those enumerated in article 1, section 8, and (b) emphasizing that the powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the States respectively, or the people_ 10th amendment.
(2) Monarchists (erroneously referred to as “Federalists”) i.e., those who favored (a) seizing power from the states, (b) ruling the states, (c) making the states subjects and sub-divisions of the federal government, as per the Tories and later the Lincoln Republicans, followed by the Democrat Party.)
* Note: The text does not make it clear that the two factions reversed their political ideologies after Lincoln, when (a) the Democrat Party was taken over by bitter members of the Klu Klux Klan who continued to expand federal tyranny that Lincoln had begun, and (b) the Republican Party distanced itself from its prior belief in big government, and became the advocate of states’ rights and promoted the restoration of true federalism.
*http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYKKKKTerroristArmoftheDemocratParty
*http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/157244/Democratic-Party
|
There has never been a monarchist political party in the United States of America. The Federalist Party advocated a stronger, centralized government. They did not call for the institution of monarchy.
The text does not refer to developments after the time period in question; those are dealt with in later chapters.
No change.
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: The Nation’s Money System is Strengthened
|
The Nation’s Money Supply is Strengthened. At Hamilton's urging, Congress also created a national bank.
|
OF
|
* Publisher provided no evidence to support the statement that the money supply is strengthened. He implies (without proof) that the creation of a National Bank is (a) constitutional, and (b) that without a National Bank (instead of State Banks), the money supply would not be strengthened. State Banks were not even mentioned as an alternative.
|
The paragraph in whole explains how the money SYSTEM was strengthened:
“One of the government's most urgent tasks was to make the United States financially strong. Led by Treasury Secretary Hamilton, the government acted swiftly. To provide the national government with money, Hamilton convinced Congress to place taxes on imports and whiskey. The government also began coining money. At Hamilton's urging, Congress also created a national bank. It began printing paper money which was backed by silver or gold.”
A money (or monetary) SYSTEM refers to the set of mechanisms and institutions by which a government provides money in an economy. The paragraph does not refer to money SUPPLY, which is the entire stock of currency and other liquid instruments in a country's economy at a particular time.
The debate over the constitutionality of the National Bank at this point in time are covered in factual questions #10, #13, #14, #15, and #16.
No change.
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: President Adams' Policies Anger Democratic-Republicans
|
Democratic-Republicans.
Federalists.
Washington, Adams, and Hamilton were part of the Federalist Party
Jefferson led the Anti-Federalists; later called the Democratic-Republicans
|
OF, FE
|
*The two terms Democrat-Republicans and so-called Federalists need to be clarified. They are confusing because the John Adams federalists opposed Thomas Jefferson’s definition of federalism.
(a) The Jeffersonian federalists opposed big government and favored a small, weak federal government, and strong state governments.
(b) The John Adams/Hamilton federalists favored big government with the federal powers serving as the king or ruler of the states. But, when (a) Hamilton succeeded in creating a national bank, and (b) Adams’ so-called federalists (Monarchists) passed the Alien Sedition Act, and the resultant attack on free speech began to be enforced, a constitutional crisis erupted. It became clear that John Adams and Alexander Hamilton’s bogus definition of federalism resulted in arrests for criticizing the Republican leadership that resulted in Jefferson’s Kentucky & Virginia Resolutions, Madison’s Report of 1800 being presented as the remedy to restore true federalism by bringing the federal government back into compliance with the constitution, and dissuaded states from seceding from the Union.
*http://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/primary-source-documents/virginia-and-kentucky-resolutions/, and
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/157244/Democratic-Party
|
The terms “Democratic-Republican Party” and “Federalist Party” and their primary founders are defined in the glossary. We are consistent in our description of their usage during that period, and make no attempt to ascribe contemporary definitions to these terms.
No change.
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: The Election of 1800 -- A Peaceful Revolution
|
The election of 1800 led to a major change in government policy. Some even called it the "Revolution of 1800." One group of government officials (Federalists) were replaced by another group (Democratic-Republicans). No shots were fired and no blood spilled in this change of government. Instead, it was a peaceful revolution.
|
OF, FE
|
*The publisher’s reference to Jefferson’s Presidential election victory as a “major change of government policy” erroneously defines it as a “revolution.”
*The text should point out that Washington, Adams and Hamilton had consolidated federal authority in the Executive Branch; but, after Jefferson took office, he restored the federal system to the way it was designed in 1787 at the constitutional convention by re-establishing the balance of powers. He re-separated the branches of government so that they would check & balance each other, thus prevent a repeat of the Alien & Sedition Act power grab by the Executive Branch under John Adams. Therefore, restoring the checks and balances of the constitution is NOT a revolution but a restoration.
|
The text states that “Some even called it the "Revolution of 1800."” Historians call it that after a line from Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Judge Spencer Roane in the summer of 1819: http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/election-1800
It would appear that Jefferson was as given to hyperbole as the reviewer.
No change.
|
-
|
Table of Contents:
A New Government is Organized
Title: The Election of 1800 -- A Peaceful Revolution
|
The election of 1800 led to a major change in government policy. Some even called it the "Revolution of 1800." One group of government officials (Federalists) were replaced by another group (Democratic-Republicans). No shots were fired and no blood spilled in this change of government. Instead, it was a peaceful revolution.
|
OF, FE
|
* The distinctions between the terms Democratic-Republicans and federalists are unclear. In the late 1700’s, the term Democratic-Republican referred to Jeffersonians, who were the true Federalists. The U.S. Constitution created a “Federal” system which comprised 3 branches of government that were designed to represent and protect the sovereignty, and autonomy of state governments. They were formed to serve, not to rule, thus they were created with limited powers, and were required to check & balance each other to assure they did not violate/breach the enumerated federal powers listed in article 1, section 8.
Although Washington, Adams, and Hamilton were affiliated politically with a group known as federalists, they waivered in their allegiance to limited government. They supported monarchist policies that violated the very essence of what defines a federal constitution. The creation of a national bank and passage of the Alien-Sedition Act are just two examples of monarchist politics. Tragically, by their example, these great men lead folks to believe that the constitution was a living document, elastic, progressive and arbitrary, thus a rejection of Judeo-Christian freedom-based absolutes. Without an absolute benchmark for defining the limits of federal powers, the General Welfare and Commerce clauses could be interpreted allegorically and arbitrarily to fit personal biases or whims in each generation. Jeffersonians were true federalists. Washington, Adams, and Hamilton were not. That is why the term federalism needs to be clearly distinguished apart from its misapplication to those who were not true federalists. Jefferson & Madison were true federalists because they demanded that the constitution be interpreted literally, in light of the original intent of the founders because they believed that the Judeo-Christian principles codified in the constitution were timeless human freedom codes ordained by God, and never changed.
*The enumerated powers of article 1, section 8 put chains on the 3 federal branches to prevent them from ruling the states. So, federalism is the essence of conservatism and the polar opposite of monarchies, progressivism, liberalism, Marxism, and other socialist or totalitarian re-distribution of wealth ideologies.
*The importance of an accurate definition of federalism cannot be over-emphasized. Without it, the constitution will be revised out of existence.
*http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/157244/Democratic-Party
|
The terms “Democratic-Republican Party” and “Federalist Party” and their primary founders are defined in the glossary. We are consistent in our description of their usage during that period, and make no attempt to ascribe contemporary definitions to these terms.
No change.
|
-
|
Chapter 5
|
Title: British Laws Anger Colonists
|
OF
|
* This is one of the most formative periods of early American history. While laws passed by the British toward the Colonies, the laws were not the only influencing factors leading to the Revolutionary War
* Recommend expanding scope
|
The ancillary materials expand the scope, including 6 primary source documents.
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 5, Colonists Protest Against British Control, Para 2, Line 5
|
“Colonists claimed on colonial assemblies, which they elected, had the right to tax colonists.”
|
OF
|
While the Stamp Act was important, other taxes had been levied
* The Sugar Act of 1764
* The Currency Act of 1764
Ref: www.ushistory.org
|
See ancillary materials, especially the chronology where the various actions of the British Parliament against the colonists are chronicled. Navigation Act and Quebec Act are Document Activities.
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 5
|
New British Taxes and Actions Increase Colonial Anger
|
OF
|
* Stamp Act Congress (Oct 1765) – organized attempt to gain relief from Stamp Act
* The Quartering Act of 1765 – mandated housing of British troops
* The Declaratory Act of 1766 – restricted colonial self rule
* The Boston Massacre (Mar 1770) – conflict between Colonists and British forces, three Colonists killed
Ref: www.ushistory.org
|
See ancillary materials, especially the glossary, chronology, and documents. Each of the named people has a biography in the Notable People section.
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 5, New British Taxes and Actions Increase Colonial Anger, Para 2, Line 5
|
“In 1773 a group of Bostonians, called the Sons of Liberty, dumped British tea into the harbor.”
|
OF
|
* No explanation of the “Sons of Liberty”, the members or their purpose
* Notable members that were key to American history were John Adams, Samuel Adams, Benedict Arnold, John Hancock, Patrick Henry, Paul Revere, Benjamin Rush…Founding Fathers (Except Benedict Arnold)
Ref: www.constitutionfacts.com
|
Reviewer should have used the Search Feature to see 6 references to “Sons of Liberty.” Each of the named people has a biography in the Notable People section.
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 5, New British Taxes and Actions Increase Colonial Anger, Para 3, Line 5
|
“They called these laws the Intolerable Acts.”
|
OF
|
* Greater explanation of the composition of “The Intolerable Acts” is warranted
* Boston Port Act
* Administration of Justice Act
* Massachusetts Government Act
* Quartering Act of 1774…led to Third Amendment of the Constitution
Ref: www.ushistory.com
|
See ancillary materials.
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 5, The Road to War, Para 2, Line 3
|
“On April 19, 1775, British troops marched to seize minutemen supplies at Concord, Massachusetts. Minutemen met the British at a small town called Lexington. Shots were fired.”
|
OF
|
* No mention of “the shot heard around the world”
* The “supplies” they intended to seize was stores of gunpowder…intended gun control
Ref: www.ushistory.com
|
1. This is history, not hagiography.
2. Actually, it was “military stores,” which covers a multitude of items including weapons and ammunition. (see, for example: http://www.wpi.edu/academics/military/lexcon.html)
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 6,
|
Title: Patriots Win Independence
|
OF
|
* No reference to “Founding Fathers”, key players, their roles and influence, interaction
* No mention of Valley Forge
* No mention of crossing the Delaware
* No mention of the hardships suffered by the Continental Army
* No mention of General Benedict Arnold
* No mention of General Lafayette – French General in the Continental Army
* No mention of General Von Steuben – Prussian General of the Continental Army
|
See ancillary materials. Biographies of Arnold, Lafayette, and von Steuben are all contained in the Notable People section, as are the Founding Fathers. Events contained in Chronology.
No change.
|
-
|
Chap 7
|
Title: Americans Begin Self Government
|
|
* Addresses the development of State governments without effectively discussing the foundations of the Federal government
* Again, the actions and relationships of the “Founding Fathers” are not explained. Many of these individuals were key to the establishment of the State governments
|
The section “The Articles of Confederation” addresses the first attempt at a national government. Subsequent sections detail the weaknesses of this confederal government. This experience became the foundation of the federal national government.
The Founding Fathers who were instrumental in writing state constitutions are noted in their biographies (see, for example, John Jay).
No change.
|
