Lincoln-worship is a disease. It sucks in even the most conservative individuals and turns them into cheerleaders for big government. Although in this case I am not so sure "held to ransom" is or was ever a conservative. In fact I have a strong suspicion that he may even be a previously-banned poster who signed up under that new name a few weeks ago. Only time will tell though.
After some thinking, I guess I had to agree so long as the protection was in place for either national security reasons or furtherance of competition in an otherwise closed market. Now herein lies the rub: There's no real-world mechanism for carrying it out that is not instantly subject to corruption.
In the end, it's like a time machine. It's a neat idea, and could be used for our benefit, but any notion of fair and unbiased implementation is science-fiction.
CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE
SENATE
Thursday, January 26, 1871
Mr. JOHNSTON. (offered a bill)
* * *
That all acts and parts of acts establishing the department of internal revenue, and providing for the collection on internal taxes, be, and the same are hereby, repleased, except so much thereof as provides for the issue and sale of stamps upon writings.
* * *
The war has ingrated, for the time at least, upon the country the internal revenue system. No one claims that it is a good thing in itself, or desires to retain it one moment longer than is necessary. It grew out of the war, as did many other evils, and now let it expire with the restoration of the Union and the return of peace.
* * *
How does the internal revenue system tally with these principles? Does it affect all the people equally? Is it or not injurious to any great interest? Does it foster some at the expense of others? These questions are not hard to answer. Of all the great interests of the country not one is prosperous. Ship-building has already almost become a lost art. Our commerce is gone. Our manufactures, protected as they are by a high tariff, are yet not flourishing. Agriculture struggles and affords a living to the farmer or planter, but no profit.
* * *
That this is a true picture of the condition of our country cannot be well denied. What has our internal system of taxation to do with it? How far is it responsible for this state of things? It has much to do with bringing about this deplorable result. It is the main instrument in accomplishing it. It fulfulls none of the requisites of a good financial system. It is not equal in its operation, but bears with almost destructive weight upon some parts of the country and some important interests. It is badly administered, and cannot well be otherwise. It is demoralizing in its effects, and tends to weaken the respect of the people for the Government and lessen their inclination to obey the laws; and it extends the jurisdiction of the United States courts, extends the powers of the General Government, swells the already too great patronage of the Executive, is fatal to the individual liberties of the people, and destroys the constitutional rights of the States.
* * *
Mr. MORRILL of Vermont.
Mr. President, I am not to be frightened by the bugaboo, conjured up at the last moment, about the unconstitutionality of the tax. We hear all sorts of adjectives applied to this tax as the most odious, unnecessary, inquisitorial, and unconstitutional of all taxes. Taxes, in any form, are ever odious, and yet may be necessary. Why, sir, when did the time exist when the most eminent lawyers could not be found to give a certificate that any measure was constitutional or unconstitutional? Lawyers differ, and good lawyers, too, amoung themselves as much as other people. It it to be supposed, after we have levied this tax for eight years, that it is not just found out, when we are almost ready to part with it, that it is unconstitutional? Are Senators ready to give even the slightest countenance to the idea that this tax is unconstitutional, and thereby bar ourselves for all future time from employing such a resource as this, even though the emergency should be as overwhelming for its employment as it recently has been? Our necessities compelled us even to impose this tax twice in one year during the recent war.
May not the time come again when we may experience the necessity of resorting to this tax?