Describing the Diagram
In this diagram, nullification is a subset
of interposition. That is, “nullification” is “interposition”, but
“interposition” is not necessarily “nullification”. “Nullification” and
“interposition” themselves are not seen as specific actions, but rather
as categories into which actions fit. The various ovals in the diagram
are color-coded to represent the “strength” of the measure and
positioned within the lines to reflect the branch of state government
which can execute them.
The royal blue ovals represent forms of
interposition which are not nullification. The turquoise ovals are
passive forms of nullification where the state declares a federal action
invalid, but doesn’t actively resist federal efforts at enforcement or
implementation. The red ovals are the confrontational forms of
nullification where the state says that a federal action is invalid and
the state will prevent the federal government from enforcing or
implementing its program.
More @ Tenth Amendment Center
========================================
Via Charlie
Q&A on Nullification and Interposition
Q. What can I read that can give me a serious overview of the true impact of the tariffs of 1828 and 1832 on South Carolina
A: I think the question of the impact of the protective tariff on South Carolina is the wrong question to ask. It is something of a diversionary tactic, for reasons I will try to explain below.
The questions to ask about that period of American history are 1) was the protective tariff just?; 2) was it good policy?; 3) was it constitutional?. A believer in free markets and constitutionally limited government can only give a resounding NO to all these questions.
It was not just South Carolina that objected to the tariff. From the earliest national period John Taylor's writings and John Randolph's speeches, along with many other Southern spokesman, were eloquent and firm on the unjustness of the "protective" tariff. From 1824 on, every Southern legislature strongly condemned the tariff. The only difference was that only South Carolina was willing to go to the extent of actual nullification.
This was not because South Carolina had suffered any more than others, but because South Carolina was the only State in which decisions could be made without the input of national party leaders who wanted to avoid hard issues.
From 1824 on it was apparent that the manufacturers intended a high and permanent system of tariffs, which had not been obvious before, when tariffs had been thought of as revenue measures with perhaps "incidental" protection. The term "lobbyists" was first used in America in the 1820s for the agents of the New England/Pennsylvania manufacturers who began to haunt the legislative halls and hold out inducements to congressmen. The acts of 1828 and 1832 were blatant examples of log-rolling rather than policy decisions. The latter was also deceptively presented by the Jackson/Van Buren forces as a remedy to tariff opponents.
It was not only the South that vigorously opposed the tariffs of 1828 and 1832.
More @ LRC
No comments:
Post a Comment