Political Reasons For The Kansas-Nebraska Act
The Political Reasons for the Kansas-Nebraska Act.
The Kansas-Nebraska act is best understood as the breakup of the democratic party. It was introduced in January 1854 by Stephen Douglas. He was a democrat senator from Illinois. He was trying to help the country spread westward to place himself for national power. to figure out a way to overcome the sectional disputes that were remaining in the aftermath of 1850, trying to do so to organize the territories between Mississippian river and the pacific coast. His main goal was to overcome all the debates about the future of slavery. His solution was Popular sovereignty, this meant that the citizens of each new territory would decide whether slavery was permitted. This violated the principle of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that said all the Louisiana purchased north to the southern boundary of 36 30 line Missouri would be restricted. There were plenty of democrats in the north who hated that decision; Stephen Douglas and Franklin Pierce worked to support this legislation. The northern democratic party was decimated and many of those former democrats migrated to a new emerging republican party. Once it was in place, it became one of the preconditions necessary for what will become the breakup of the political party but the …show more content…
Northerners were against adding Missouri to the union as slave state because it would disrupt the balance of power in congress between slave and free states; Missouri should be a free state but Missouri wanted to come in as a slave state. This gave a new set up to the states and came up with the 36’30 line, an imaginary line was drawn across the southern border of Missouri. Any future added north to the line would be free and any future state on the southern side would be slave. This gives birth to the idea of sectionalism, loyalty to the state rather than to the whole
The Kansas-Nebraska act is best understood as the breakup of the democratic party. It was introduced in January 1854 by Stephen Douglas. He was a democrat senator from Illinois. He was trying to help the country spread westward to place himself for national power. to figure out a way to overcome the sectional disputes that were remaining in the aftermath of 1850, trying to do so to organize the territories between Mississippian river and the pacific coast. His main goal was to overcome all the debates about the future of slavery. His solution was Popular sovereignty, this meant that the citizens of each new territory would decide whether slavery was permitted. This violated the principle of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that said all the Louisiana purchased north to the southern boundary of 36 30 line Missouri would be restricted. There were plenty of democrats in the north who hated that decision; Stephen Douglas and Franklin Pierce worked to support this legislation. The northern democratic party was decimated and many of those former democrats migrated to a new emerging republican party. Once it was in place, it became one of the preconditions necessary for what will become the breakup of the political party but the …show more content…
Northerners were against adding Missouri to the union as slave state because it would disrupt the balance of power in congress between slave and free states; Missouri should be a free state but Missouri wanted to come in as a slave state. This gave a new set up to the states and came up with the 36’30 line, an imaginary line was drawn across the southern border of Missouri. Any future added north to the line would be free and any future state on the southern side would be slave. This gives birth to the idea of sectionalism, loyalty to the state rather than to the whole