Abraham Lincoln and His Presidency

Abraham Lincoln and His Presidency

On 18 May 1860, Lincoln's popularity reached its apex when he was nominated for the presidency by the Republican Party. He was elected 6 November 1860, with only 39 percent of the votes. By the time of his inauguration on 4 March 1861, seven Southern states had already seceded from the Union. Those states formed the Confederate States of America, which subsequently selected Jefferson Davis as their chief executive.

The presidency of Abraham Lincoln is inescapably linked with the crisis and devastation of the American Civil War, but this crisis also helped to shape and define modern America. From his inauguration in March 1861 until his assassination in April 1865, Lincoln presided over an economy and a society that were not only torn apart by unparalleled and appalling hostilities, but that in the long-term influenced national identity and public policies.

Violence and warfare invariably disrupt production and economic exchange and increase the prevalence of poverty. Given that the Civil War was the most disruptive conflict in American history, the Lincoln administration witnessed extraordinary economic distress. This was a widespread economic anguish that was pervasive and disproportionate enough, compared to earlier economic crises, that it necessitated some corresponding response.

During Lincoln's years in office, federal government spending and federal involvement in the national economy noticeably increased. Measured as a ratio of federal government spending to the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the relative size of the federal government rose from around 1.4 percent in 1861 to the then-unprecedented level of 14.2 percent of GDP in 1865. However, the expanded size of the federal government was due to the demands of wartime expenditures and not because of a large commitment of financial resources to social welfare or other relief programs. Within just a few years after the war, this ratio dropped back into the range of two to three percent of GDP, which while somewhat larger than it had historically been in the antebellum period, was more in line with the gradual long-term growth of federal spending over the course of the 19th century.

Traditionally, social and economic issues were often seen as dependent on and responsive to individuals, local conditions, and institutions. Limited provisions were modestly allocated as needed for some disabled and elderly workers under the influence of local poor laws, but not as a coordinated general policy. Consequently the treatment of the poor and remedies to poverty during much of the 19th century were more likely to be considered short-lived issues and local and private charitable activities rather than requiring consistent public policy initiatives. This can be an essential distinction, since adopting a public policy designed to lessen the injurious effects of poverty not only involves a different mindset from a private, charitable response but also requires an alternative commitment of resources.

The magnitude and breadth of economic, social, and human destruction and disruption from the American Civil War forced an alternative response. Even with the enormity of the economic and social crisis associated with the Civil ...