I'll give brainliest to whoever reads this carefully, gives 1 short paragraph 10 sentences or less, and gives me a good answer. Who do you think had a better plan for Reconstruction—President Johnson or the Republican Congress? Why? (Explain your reasoning and be sure to explain the 13th and 14th Amendments in your answer.)
ALSO, You guys better include the 13th and 14th Amendments in your answer.

Respuesta :

Answer:

there is no such thing as reconstruction. These States have not gone out of the Union, therefore reconstruction is unnecessary. I do not mean to treat them as inchoate States, but merely as existing under a temporary suspension of their government, provided always they elect loyal men. The doctrine of coercion to preserve a State in the Union has been vindicated by the people. It is the province of the Executive to see that the will of the people is carried out in the rehabilitation of the rebellious States, once more under the authority as well as the protection of the Union." Andrew Johnson

Explanation:

Following the Union victory in the Civil War, the nation faced the uncertainty of what would happen next. Two major questions arose. Were the Confederate states still part of the Union, or, by seceding, did they need to reapply for statehood with new standards for admission?

Andrew Johnson's view, as stated above, was that the war had been fought to preserve the Union. He formulated a lenient plan, based on Lincoln's earlier 10% plan, to allow the Southern states to begin holding elections and sending representatives back to Washington.

His amnesty proclamations, however, emboldened former Confederate leaders to regain their former seats of power in local and national governments, fueling tensions with freedmen in the South and Republican lawmakers in the North.