The Incumbent: Crockett's Second Term (1829-1831)

“I am yet a Jackson man in principles, but not in name”

 Following his first term in Congress, Crockett shifted his attention to re-election.  He faced a familiar foe in Adam Alexander who had the support of Polk and his allies.  Crockett’s campaign style remained similar, although his newfound Christian faith added a twist.  He was able to maintain his backwoods persona while at the same time commanding the respect that a traditional congressman possessed.[1]  When the votes were cast, Crockett again defeated Alexander by about three thousand votes.  This large margin of victory may have encouraged Crockett to continue in his independent congressional endeavors.[2]  In his second term, Crockett was involved with more issues than the land bill and his positions reveal a politician who tried to advance his constituents interests when his conscious allowed him to.  

 Again, the land bill took center stage initially.  There was a conflict between Polk and Crockett over which committee would handle the issue: Polk’s standing committee or Crockett’s new select committee which included many easterners.  Crockett’s eventually won out.[3]  The committee passed a revised bill that Crockett did not necessarily endorse fully due to the provision that allowed for more North Carolina warrants to be fulfilled. The bill did not get voted on until May 3, 1830 where it did not pass despite the support of the Tennessee delegation.[4]  Crockett quickly went rogue again and offered a revision of the bill the next day that completely excluded the state of Tennessee from land sales and shifted the sales directly to the federal government.  This, too, failed and would mark the end of any cooperation between Crockett and his delegation over the land issue.[5]  Crockett’s continual effort and willingness to compromise, however, show his deep devotion to his constituents in west Tennessee and his passion to resolve the land issue.

 Crockett also became somewhat of an advocate of internal improvements during this time and pushed for them to happen in his district.  For example, he supported the National Road from Washington to New Orleans and even offered his own amendment that would have the road stop in Memphis (the amendment was rejected).  When Jackson vetoed the Maysville Road Bill, Crockett voted to override the veto.[6]  This was the issue that ultimately led to Crockett’s open split with Jackson. Crockett believed that Jackson had abandoned the principles and political stances that he had campaigned on (like internal improvements) and was being led astray by Van Buren.[7]  

 In relation to the military Crockett advocated for the abolishment of West Point because he saw it as an elitist institution that only favored the upper class and was funded on the backs of poor people who were forced to buy heavily taxed goods.[8]  He also opposed a pension bill for Revolutionary War veterans because, as he argued, many did not need the money and it failed to include volunteers and militia.[9]  Both of these instances show the common man was never far from his mind.  Crockett witnessed the capabilities of poor soldiers to lead without a West Point education in the Creek War and was a volunteer himself.

 The one instance when Crockett broke with his own constituency was over his opposition to the Indian Removal Bill.  On May 19, 1830 Crockett is believed to have given a speech that explained his views. He was not opposed to removal itself, but he did not agree with the forced removal that was being advocated for.  Crockett said he would support removal if a legitimate treaty was agreed upon with the tribes.  Crockett was a constitutionalist in this instance and believed in the precedent that had been set regarding the semi-sovereignty of Native American nations.[10]  In this instance it could be argued that he did not put the common man’s interests first. However, it is possible that Crockett viewed the displacement of Indians in the same light he viewed the displacement of his constituents because of the North Carolina land warrants.[11]  This clear split with Jackson and his party, however, would have ramifications in the upcoming election.