[1] Proponents of internal improvements, such as the development of roads and bridges, argued that the federal government had an obligation to harmonize the nation's diverse, and often conflicting, sectional interests into an "American System."
The veto has been attributed to a personal grudge against Henry Clay, a political enemy and resident of Kentucky, as well as to preserve the trade monopoly of New York's Erie Canal, in Van Buren's case.
Additionally, the road connected the interior of Kentucky to the Ohio River, and therefore served as the main artery for the transportation of goods.
President Thomas Jefferson employed a broad view of the spending power when he carried out the Louisiana Purchase and the construction of the Cumberland Road.
In contrast, President James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution”, viewed this type of spending as unconstitutional, as evidenced by his veto of the Bonus Bill of 1817.
It was understood that Congress could only fund projects which benefited the nation as a whole, but the Maysville project was a "purely local matter:" It has no connection with any established system of improvements; is exclusively within the limits of a State, starting at a point on the Ohio River and running out 60 miles to an interior town, and even as far as the State is interested conferring partial instead of general advantages.
For Jackson, this decision underscored his belief that the construction of roads and canals lay more within the realm of the states rather than the federal government.
In 1846 President James K. Polk, an admirer and follower of Jackson, vetoed the Rivers and Harbors Bill on similar grounds.
Henry Clay and his Whig Party, in contrast to Jackson, supported both the 1830 and 1846 bills because they believed the national government had a responsibility to promote trade commerce and economic modernization.
[9] While Henry Clay and the Whig Party lost the argument, the two positions represented by the Maysville Road veto continued to face each other into the future.