Question

Which of the following reflects an argument opposing the establishment of the Bank of the United States?

A. The Constitution said nothing about chartering financial corporations.
B. A national bank would issue currency and guarantee its value.
C. The doctrine of implied powers justified issuing charters to national banks.
D. A financial community required a central bank to facilitate commercial transactions.

Answer 1

The opposition to the Bank of the United States was rooted in the strict constructionist view that the Constitution did not explicitly authorize the creation of a national bank, and represented a concentration of power and potential overreach of federal authority.

Step-by-step explanation:

An argument opposing the establishment of the Bank of the United States (BUS) is reflected in the statement: The Constitution said nothing about chartering financial corporations. This argument is rooted in the strict constructionist perspective, primarily advocated by James Madison and Thomas Jefferson in the 1790s. They believed the Constitution should be interpreted narrowly, meaning that any power not explicitly granted to the federal government was reserved for the states, and since the Constitution did not explicitly authorize the formation of a bank, creating one would exceed the powers of the federal government.

Opponents like Madison feared the concentration of economic power and the potential for such a bank to evolve into an institution reminiscent of British monarchical control, which the newly independent United States sought to avoid. Additionally, they expressed concern over the constitutionality of such a measure, preferring the chartering of several regional banks instead. The foundational argument against the BUS was that the bank charter did not directly relate to the government's enumerated powers, such as collecting taxes or borrowing money for the general welfare.