DIVUS IVLIVS

To draw a very loose analogy as to the importance of the Louisiana Purchase to assessing a Thomas Jefferson's effectiveness as president, a comparison could be drawn with his impact on it and the impact of President Dwight D. Eisenhower on the Interstate Highway System. Just as the LP may well have happened if someone other than Jefferson was president, the IHS may well have happened just as well if Adlai Stevenson was president as if Ike was. But as it was, through his involvement in it the IHS became one of the defining features of Eisenhower's administration.

crossroadclarence

"Believing... that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."


--Thomas Jefferson to Danbury Baptists, 1802. ME 16:281

DIVUS IVLIVS

^^

An interesting point, we do indeed owe much in the way of the legacy of intellectual freedom that the Founding Fathers gave us to Thomas Jefferson. And that does lead to a very positive point about his presidency that has gone unmentioned thus far, but which ought not to - Jefferson's commendable work to undo the Aliens and Seditions Acts that were almost beyond doubt the darkest spot on the Adams presidency that he succeeded. Full marks can justly be accorded to the president there.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________

Another interesting point about Jefferson's presidency that I would say is worthy of discussion, but has gone unmentioned thus far, is the attempts that he made to reform the judiciary - aka purge the last branch of government that remained an outpost of Federalist political leanings. This attempt, which can be paralleled interestingly by the efforts a century and a half later by Franklin D. Roosevelt to pack the Supreme Court, culminated in Jefferson's backing of a movement in the Senate to impeach one of the Chief Justices of the Supreme Court, and attempt to assert the political momentum of the Democratic Republican party against the Judicial Branch of government. In a rather shocking rebuff to a president who had just been overwhelmingly reelected and who enjoyed large majorities in both parts of Congress, the Chief Justice in question - Federalist Samuel Chase - was aquitted of all charges. It was one of the landmark developments in the concept of seperation of powers, reaffirming the principle that the judiciary ought to be independent from the power of Congress.

Greyter

Jefferson had to sell it to Congress amid cries regarding the consitutionality of the act. Jefferson had authorized the ministers in France to purchase New Orleans only. James Monroe made the unilateral decision to agree to the purchase of the entire territory and the treaty was signed in France before Jefferson even knew about it. Yes, it happened under his watch so the credit should go to him.

Greyter

I fail to see the negative part of this policy. Jefferson's spending agenda did directly reflect the wishes of those that put him in office. Those that rejected the spending policies of the Federalists. If for some reason he had proposed spending to continue the naval expansion of the previous administration he would not have received approval from Congress to spend the money.

And, what specific part of government did he remove other than cuts in military spending ? I really am curious about this.

DIVUS IVLIVS

^^

The negative part of the policy is that it was bad economic policy. Wishes are all well and good, and especially important to listen to if they are coming from the people who put you important, but the popularity of a policy does not always translate into how sound it is as fiscal practice. The basic gist of it is that whether it was popular or no, Hamilton had it correct in the policies that he advocated. Jefferson's philosophy of minimalist government was one that in the long run was only ever going to do harm to the American economy.

tjadams

There's no doubting the one stain on Jefferson's administration was his fourteen month Embargo Act. At the time it seemed the right course in collaring a war that Jefferson wanted to stay out of. Besides, Congress passed the Act and they share in the blame as well. But before Jefferson is historically burned in effigy over this one disaster, his act is no different than any president who acts in good faith to protect the country, in this case Jefferson was wrong. He discovered just how much the US was tethered to British goods.
Jefferson was advised by Gallatin not to proceed with it, as the bill was full of holes or as John Randolph called it, "a milk and water bill, a dose of chicken broth.", (1) but then as today, an uncompromising president has ways of twisting arms in getting what he wants.
Jefferson Legacies, by Peter S. Onuf (University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1993.) 384

Greyter

Jefferson made the Lewis and Clark expedition his personal project. Its difficult to make an assesment of the value gained but I think it was important. It served to conclude that there was no all-water route, or one of limited portage requirements, to the Pacific. There was considerable scientific value with the discovery of new species of animals and plants. There was some speculation that out in the wilderness there might have still existed some wooly mammoths or saber toothed cats. The way he took Meriwether Lewis under his wing and provided personal training in the areas of botany and astronavigation demonstrate something of the depth of his personal knowledge and persona.

Alexander H

I continue to marvel at how Thomas Jefferson continues to be placed in the top spots on so many presidential lists.
Let me first state that the Alien and Sedition acts were a terrible mistake by John Adams... It has been widely accepted that Abigale Adams urged JA to finally do it... also Hamilton advised against it (not that Adams was listening to him by then)
Hamilton's quote to Adam's (by letter)... "let us not creat a tyranny..."

Now we must look at how Jefferson gained the office.
During the Washington administartion he hires a newspaper man (fraudulantly as an interpreter) on the govt. payroll, to start a campaign against the Washington admin. and Hamilton's policies.
After resigning the attacks grew... First, toward the Wash. admin. then the Adams' admin.(as he was vice pres)
Some simply lump these newspaper wars into a simple Hamilton did it as well... so it's even situation... and yet Hamilton ran a mostly defensive campaign against attacks on the first administration of the young nation.
Hamilton understood that this grand experiment had no chance to even get off the ground if not for his policies, whether they angered Jefferson or not.
Jefferson's attacks consisted of continually accusing Hamilton and the Federalists of wanting a Monarchy and making policies to achieve just that. (ridiculous claims, without merit, that were continually refuted by the accused)
Argued against the Bank ( a bank that, after attaining office, he kept )
Argued against "implied powers" ( but used them to accept the offer of the LP )
Blasted Hamilton's financial system (a structure that, after he attained office, he basically kept)
Continually claimed that everything was going against the original purposes and inspiration of the original revolution ...
One that he didn't fight in... nor was he inspirational in bringing on the independence vote itself (that was Adams and the vocal leaders at the Second Continental Congress)
Nor did he experience the national, bankrupt, situation during the Articles of Confederation.
Concerning the Shays rebellion, he wrote (from France)
"god forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion ... the tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. it is it's natural manure." (apparently inspired by the beheadings in Paris)
It must also be pointed out that Hamilton helped convince the (then) Federalist congess to not attempt the vindictive power grab that voting for Burr would have been... thus, allowing Jefferson to even begin his presidency.
Also if the news of the Treaty of Morfontaine had come earlier, Adams could have easily won a second term.
Also without the 3/5 clause in the constitution Adams wins in 1800.
(but we'll call it our second revolution anyway)

While in office
his lack of understanding of finances and international affairs were brought out. The 14 month Embargo was a misguided disaster... one that even his advisors new, and told him, was not going to work
His constant fear of a standing army (one Madison also subscribed to)
Led to a ridiculous war that could have EASILY ended us for good.
(one that we most certainly did not win)
It was also a good thing we even had those 6 ships left to even allow Jefferson to mismanage the Barbary conflict.
I will also echo some of the statements from this thread in pointing out that the Louisiana Purchase was basically a gift from Napoleon... an unexpected one... agreed upon by James Monroe... brought on by events that Jefferson had nothing to do with.

Here I must point out (or simply remind) that Thomas Jefferson was a relitively silent participent at the Second Continental Congress... and wrote a document for independence that any number of men there could have written... it was widely accepted what would be in the document... and the 5 man commitee assumed that John Adam's should have written it... Adams asked Jefferson to write it... and so he did...
Then it was chopped and edited by the commitee...and then also by the congress.... and the authorship remained a mystery to all not present, for years. (Iv'e always found it oddly convienient that the authorship of said document came to public light during the Adams administration)

Now I shall also remind everyone that Jefferson basically sat out The War of Independence entirely... and whether he was finally exonerated for his conduct as Virginia Governor (by Virginians by the way) or not... he performed badly as such... admitting that it would have been better to have been a military man.

Also, Jefferson had nothing to do with the Annapolis Convention or the call to the states to have a convention in Philadelphia to address the Articles of Confederation.
Nor did he have a single thing to do with the debates concerning the Constitution... the writing of the Constitution... or the ratification of the Constitution... or the writing of the Federalist papers.

I also believe that Jefferson infused in our political fabric the theory that if you blast the adminstration that's in office... and claim to be for the people... you can attain office. (I guess "for the people" means preventing them from trading with the rest of the world thus sending them into financial ruin)

I won't even mention the KY and Virg. Resolutions because they are even more polarizing then what I have already written here. (but I would imagine that everyone knows where I stand on them anyway)

I left some things out (because this was turning into a book, not a post)... but I would suggest going back and reading this thread... it fills in a few gaps in my post.

Mandate of Heaven

Wow, the Thomas Jefferson you described is a little like Chairman Mao.