從1830年開始,美國政府發行法定紙幣也與美國學派有關。該政策的根源可以追溯到美國殖民地時代,當時一種稱為殖民地代幣的貨幣是交換媒介。早在1837年,約翰·C·卡爾霍恩 (John C. Calhoun)就呼籲由政府發行和控制無債務貨幣。這樣的政策會減少銀行的利潤,作為回應,銀行機構支持英國學派,在整個1800年擁護金本位制。
在美國南北戰爭中,硬幣短缺導致發行了這種法定貨幣,稱為美國紙幣或“美元”。1865年3月南北戰爭即將結束時,林肯的經濟顧問亨利·C·凱里 (Henry C. Carey)發表了一系列致眾議院議長的信件,題為“不與英格蘭作戰而戰勝英格蘭的方法”。凱里呼籲即使在戰後也要繼續實行美元政策,同時還將銀行的準備金率提高到50%[20]。這將使美國能夠獨立於外國資本(主要是英國黃金)發展其經濟。凱里寫道:
1920年沃倫·G·哈定 (Warren G. Harding)和共和黨的當選代表了通過恢復高關稅而部份回歸美國學派。隨後,赫伯特·胡佛總統通過簽署《斯姆特-霍利關稅法》對1929年的金融危機以及隨後的銀行倒閉和失業作出回應,進一步實施了回歸,一些經濟學家認為該法案加深了大蕭條,而其他人則不同意[26]。
Lind, Michael: "Lincoln and his successors in the Republican party of 1865–1932, by presiding over the industrialization of the United States, foreclosed the option that the United States would remain a rural society with an agrarian economy, as so many Jeffersonians had hoped." and "...Hamiltonian side ... the Federalists; the National Republicans; the Whigs, the Republicans; the Progressives." — "Hamilton's Republic" Introduction pp. xiv–xv. Free Press, Simon & Schuster: 1997. ISBN0-684-83160-0.
Lind, Michael: "During the nineteenth century the dominant school of American political economy was the "American School" of developmental economic nationalism ... The patron saint of the American School was Alexander Hamilton, whose Report on Manufactures (1791) had called for federal government activism in sponsoring infrastructure development and industrialization behind tariff walls that would keep out British manufactured goods ... The American School, elaborated in the nineteenth century by economists like Henry Carey (who advised President Lincoln), inspired the "American System" of Henry Clay and the protectionist import-substitution policies of Lincoln and his successors in the Republican party well into the twentieth century." — "Hamilton's Republic" Part III "The American School of National Economy" pp. 229–30. Free Press, Simon & Schuster: 1997. ISBN0-684-83160-0.
Richardson, Heather Cox: "By 1865, the Republicans had developed a series of high tariffs and taxes that reflected the economic theories of Carey and Wayland and were designed to strengthen and benefit all parts of the American economy, raising the standard of living for everyone. As a Republican concluded ... "Congress must shape its legislation as to incidentally aid all branches of industry, render the people prosperous, and enable them to pay taxes ... for ordinary expenses of Government." — "The Greatest Nation of the Earth" Chapter 4, "Directing the Legislation of the Country to the Improvement of the Country: Tariff and Tax Legislation" pp. 136–37. President and Fellows of Harvard College: 1997. ISBN0-674-36213-6.
Boritt, Gabor S: "Lincoln thus had the pleasure of signing into law much of the program he had worked for through the better part of his political life. And this, as Leonard P. Curry, the historian of the legislation has aptly written, amounted to a "blueprint for modern America." and "The man Lincoln selected for the sensitive position of Secretary of the Treasury, Salmon P. Chase, was an ex-Democrat, but of the moderate variety on economics, one whom Joseph Dorfman could even describe as 'a good Hamiltonian, and a western progressive of the Lincoln stamp in everything from a tariff to a national bank.'" — "Lincoln and the Economics of the American Dream" Chapter 14, "The Whig in the White House" pp. 196–97. Memphis State University Press: 1994. ISBN0-87870-043-9.
Howe, Daniel Walker "The policies of tariff protection, federally sponsored internal improvements, and national banking that were later to be known as the “American System” took coherent shape in the years between 1816 and 1828 and were coherent with the “national” wing of the Republican party." - "The Political Culture of the American Whigs, pp. 48-49. University of Chicago Press, 1979. J.L.M. Curry, "Confederate States and Their Constitution", The Galaxy, New York, 1874 cornell.edu.
Howe, Daniel Walker "The policies of tariff protection, federally sponsored internal improvements, and national banking that were later to be known as the “American System” took coherent shape in the years between 1816 and 1828 and were coherent with the “national” wing of the Republican party." - "The Political Culture of the American Whigs, pp. 48-49. University of Chicago Press, 1979. J.L.M. Curry, "Confederate States and Their Constitution", The Galaxy, New York, 1874 cornell.edu.
Gill, William J. "By 1880 the United States of America had overtaken and surpassed England as industrial leader of the world." — "Trade Wars Against America: A History of United States Trade and Monetary Policy", Chapter 6, "America becomes Number 1" pp. 39–49. Praeger Publishers: 1990. ISBN0-275-93316-4.
Earle, Edward Mead: "It is one of the ironies of history that Hamilton's political opponents Jefferson and Madison did more than Hamilton himself to give effect to his protectionist and nationalist views of economic policy. The Embargo, which Jefferson initiated in December 1807, the Non-Intercourse Act, and the succeeding war with Great Britain, upon which Madison reluctantly embarked, had the practical result of closing virtually all avenues of foreign trade and making the United States dependent upon its own resources for manufactures and munitions of war. The industries which were born under the stress and necessity of the years 1808 to 1815 were the infants to which the nation gave protection in 1816 and in a succession of tariff acts thereafter.... Jefferson in January 1816 wrote an exceedingly bitter denunciation of those who cited his former free trade views as 'a stalking horse, to cover their disloyal propensities to keep us in eternal vassalage to a foreign and unfriendly people [the British].'" — Makers of Modern Strategy: Military Thought from Machiavelli to Hitler, Chapter 6, "Adam Smith, Alexander Hamilton, Friedrich List: The Economic Foundations of Military Power", pp. 138–139. Princeton University Press: 1943, 1971. ISBN0-691-01853-7.
Lind, Michael: "Free Trade Fallacy" by Michael Lind, New America Foundation. "Like Britain, the U.S. protected and subsidised its industries while it was a developing country, switching to free trade only in 1945, when most of its industrial competitors had been wiped out by the Second World War and the U.S. enjoyed a virtual monopoly in many manufacturing sectors." New America Foundation, – "Free Trade Fallacy" January 2003
Dr. Ravi Batra, "The Myth of Free Trade": "Unlike most of its trading partners, real wages in the United States have been tumbling since 1973, the first year of the country's switch to laissez-faire." (pp. 126–27) "Before 1973, the U.S. economy was more or less closed and self-reliant, so that efficiency gains in industry generated only a modest price fall, and real earnings soared for all Americans." (pp. 66–67) "Moreover, it turns out that 1973 was the first year in its entire history when the United States became an open economy with free trade." (p. 39)
Lind, Michael:"The revival of Europe and Japan by the 1970s eliminated these monopoly profits, and the support for free trade of industrial-state voters in the American midwest and northeast declined. Today, support for free-trade globalism in the U.S. comes chiefly from the commodity-exporting south and west and from U.S. multinationals which have moved their factories to low-wage countries like Mexico and China." New America Foundation, "Free Trade Fallacy" January 2003