Victor Davis Hanson

So that would mean, according to the court interpretation, which stood until 1913, it would say the following. we need $100 million. I'm just taking an arbitrary figure. Okay. The 50 states, each one will contribute to that based on the percentage of the population. So, California, whatever the state was, would be adjudicated, prorated. And then the state then would contribute as a state

So that would mean, according to the court interpretation, which stood until 1913, it would say the following. we need $100 million. I'm just taking an arbitrary figure. Okay. The 50 states, each one will contribute to that based on the percentage of the population. So, California, whatever the state was, would be adjudicated, prorated. And then the state then would contribute as a state

So that would mean, according to the court interpretation, which stood until 1913, it would say the following. we need $100 million. I'm just taking an arbitrary figure. Okay. The 50 states, each one will contribute to that based on the percentage of the population. So, California, whatever the state was, would be adjudicated, prorated. And then the state then would contribute as a state

So say California is one-sixth of the population, they would pay one-sixth of the tax bite. And so that's how it was. And everybody understood that that was a... block. There were people who tried to get an income tax. They really wanted it throughout history.

So say California is one-sixth of the population, they would pay one-sixth of the tax bite. And so that's how it was. And everybody understood that that was a... block. There were people who tried to get an income tax. They really wanted it throughout history.

So say California is one-sixth of the population, they would pay one-sixth of the tax bite. And so that's how it was. And everybody understood that that was a... block. There were people who tried to get an income tax. They really wanted it throughout history.

But because it's in the Constitution that all states have to be apportioned, all income taxes have to be apportioned, that was pretty much the rule. And they didn't know how to get around it. And Supreme Court cases had, by a very close margin, five to four, had upheld that. So the only way you can overrule the Constitution and or a Supreme Court decision is get a constitutional amendment.

But because it's in the Constitution that all states have to be apportioned, all income taxes have to be apportioned, that was pretty much the rule. And they didn't know how to get around it. And Supreme Court cases had, by a very close margin, five to four, had upheld that. So the only way you can overrule the Constitution and or a Supreme Court decision is get a constitutional amendment.

But because it's in the Constitution that all states have to be apportioned, all income taxes have to be apportioned, that was pretty much the rule. And they didn't know how to get around it. And Supreme Court cases had, by a very close margin, five to four, had upheld that. So the only way you can overrule the Constitution and or a Supreme Court decision is get a constitutional amendment.

So to get a constitutional amendment, you need three quarters of all of the states and you need two thirds of the House and the Senate. It's almost impossible to do unless there's something with broad support, 18-year-old vote, women's suffrage. And there was. And why was there? Because... This was the height of the progressive movement under Woodrow Wilson was elected in 2012.

So to get a constitutional amendment, you need three quarters of all of the states and you need two thirds of the House and the Senate. It's almost impossible to do unless there's something with broad support, 18-year-old vote, women's suffrage. And there was. And why was there? Because... This was the height of the progressive movement under Woodrow Wilson was elected in 2012.

So to get a constitutional amendment, you need three quarters of all of the states and you need two thirds of the House and the Senate. It's almost impossible to do unless there's something with broad support, 18-year-old vote, women's suffrage. And there was. And why was there? Because... This was the height of the progressive movement under Woodrow Wilson was elected in 2012.

He always wanted the income tax. And the reason they got it through was, as you pointed out, the chief source of revenue was tariffs. And the tariffs were not like... 3% or 5%. They were sometimes 30% and 40% of goods, and they protected domestic industry. But the left, the progressive, and to the extent that they were populist movement said, these tariffs, and correctly so, are taxes.

He always wanted the income tax. And the reason they got it through was, as you pointed out, the chief source of revenue was tariffs. And the tariffs were not like... 3% or 5%. They were sometimes 30% and 40% of goods, and they protected domestic industry. But the left, the progressive, and to the extent that they were populist movement said, these tariffs, and correctly so, are taxes.

He always wanted the income tax. And the reason they got it through was, as you pointed out, the chief source of revenue was tariffs. And the tariffs were not like... 3% or 5%. They were sometimes 30% and 40% of goods, and they protected domestic industry. But the left, the progressive, and to the extent that they were populist movement said, these tariffs, and correctly so, are taxes.

So, they're increasing the price for goods on American citizens, number one. And number two, to echo an old

So, they're increasing the price for goods on American citizens, number one. And number two, to echo an old

So, they're increasing the price for goods on American citizens, number one. And number two, to echo an old

nullification argument by South Carolina before the Civil War, people said they are protecting the Yankees, where I think there was about four or five states that were responsible for almost all the tariff revenue, New York, Massachusetts, where all of the industry was at that time, and around the Great Lakes area. So the argument was... Wilson, the progressive movement elected Wilson.

nullification argument by South Carolina before the Civil War, people said they are protecting the Yankees, where I think there was about four or five states that were responsible for almost all the tariff revenue, New York, Massachusetts, where all of the industry was at that time, and around the Great Lakes area. So the argument was... Wilson, the progressive movement elected Wilson.