Why is Andrew Jackson criticized for racial policies?
Jackson used the power of the federal government to enforce the separation of the Native American tribes and whites. In May 1830, Jackson passed the Indian Removal Act through Congress. It gave the president the right to negotiate treaties to buy tribal lands in the eastern part of the United States in exchange for lands set aside for Native Americans west of the Mississippi, as well as broad discretion on how to use the federal funds allocated to the negotiations. The law was supposed to be a voluntary relocation program, but it was not implemented as one. Jackson's administration often achieved agreement to relocate through bribes, fraud and intimidation, and the leaders who signed the treaties often did not represent the entire tribe. The relocations could be a source of misery too: the Choctaw relocation was rife with corruption, theft, and mismanagement that brought great suffering to that people.
During Andrew Jackson's presidency the Indian Removal Act was passed by Congress. Even though this legislation was designed to give the President flexibility in negotiating with native American tribes, the President chose a harsher course of actions as a matter of course. Instead of offering voluntary relocation, there was a great deal of forced tribal relocation, as evidenced by the experience of the Cherokees and the "Trail of Tears." Other examples of unfair treatment by President Jackson including reaching agreements with leaders from tribes who often did not fully represent the tribe. A number of Native American leaders were corrupt in their dealings, benefiting individually at tremendous cost to their people. Ultimately, Native Americans in the eastern United States experienced remarkable hardships as a result of Andrew Jackson's policies and actions.
Instruction: Why is Andrew Jackson criticized for racial policies?
Context: Jackson used the power of the federal government to enforce the separation of the Native American tribes and whites. In May 1830, Jackson passed the Indian Removal Act through Congress. It gave the president the right to negotiate treaties to buy tribal lands in the eastern part of the United States in exchange for lands set aside for Native Americans west of the Mississippi, as well as broad discretion on how to use the federal funds allocated to the negotiations. The law was supposed to be a voluntary relocation program, but it was not implemented as one. Jackson's administration often achieved agreement to relocate through bribes, fraud and intimidation, and the leaders who signed the treaties often did not represent the entire tribe. The relocations could be a source of misery too: the Choctaw relocation was rife with corruption, theft, and mismanagement that brought great suffering to that people.
Response: During Andrew Jackson's presidency the Indian Removal Act was passed by Congress. Even though this legislation was designed to give the President flexibility in negotiating with native American tribes, the President chose a harsher course of actions as a matter of course. Instead of offering voluntary relocation, there was a great deal of forced tribal relocation, as evidenced by the experience of the Cherokees and the "Trail of Tears." Other examples of unfair treatment by President Jackson including reaching agreements with leaders from tribes who often did not fully represent the tribe. A number of Native American leaders were corrupt in their dealings, benefiting individually at tremendous cost to their people. Ultimately, Native Americans in the eastern United States experienced remarkable hardships as a result of Andrew Jackson's policies and actions.