Answer:
He proposed to fund the debt through a gradual schedule of dependable tax resources, assume state debts as a measure of good policy, and generate new revenue through western land sales and taxes on luxuries—notably, booze.
One big reason: It gave the North an additional, powerful reason to fight and win the war.
Additional reasons: It gave the Union Army another source of soldiers, and it kept foreign powers from allying with the Confederacy.
<u>Historical context/details</u>:
President Abraham Lincoln issued The Emancipation Proclamation as an executive order on January 1, 1863. The executive order declared freedom for slaves in ten Confederate states in rebellion against the Union. It also allowed that freed slaves could join the Union Army to fight for the cause of reuniting the nation and ending slavery. As summarized by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, "The Proclamation broadened the goals of the Union war effort; it made the eradication of slavery into an explicit Union goal, in addition to the reuniting of the country."
While Lincoln personally was strongly against slavery, he had to tread carefully in his role as president and commander-in-chief. The Emancipation Proclamation was carefully worded in order to retain the support of four border slave states, which remained in the Union though they were states that permitted slavery, were Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky. Lincoln wanted to keep those states loyal to the Union cause.
The Emancipation Proclamation was also a way of blocking foreign support for the Confederate cause. According to the American Battlefield Trust, "Britain and France had considered supporting the Confederacy in order to expand their influence in the Western Hemisphere. However, many Europeans were against slavery." Britain had abolished slavery in its territories in 1833. France had put a final end to slavery in its territories in 1848. So when Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, it also served as a foreign policy action to keep European powers out of the US Civil War, according to Steve Jones, professor of history at Southwestern Adventist University.
A) "Was originally in favor of slavery, but now is that party that is viewed as championing rights of minorities." In fact, they were in favor of slavery, and nowadays they look after minority groups such as immigrants, women, African Americans, etc.
C) "Had the only presidential candidate that was elected for three consecutive terms.". Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected President for three consecutive terms.
D) "Held control of the Senate for over 30 years." The Democratic party has controlled the Congress and the White House for over 30 years in the past 100 years.
The correct answer to this open question is the following.
Although you did not attach any context to the above-mentioned quotation or further references, we are going to assume that you are referring to Solidarity, the social moment in Poland that turned into a worker union that opposed the Communist government.
I have to say that a don't agree with the statement ‘Solidarity died as quickly as it started, having achieved nothing."
I consider that the Solidarity movement in Poland accomplished many things. Indeed, the strike of August 14, 1980, changed the political scenario in Eastern Europe.
The leader of the movement was Lech Walesa. Years later he won the presidential election of Poland. His victory and Vacláv Havel’s victory to become President of Czechoslovakia signified the transformation of Eastern Europe from dominance by the Soviet Union to new democracies.
So what started as a union movement in Communist time in Poland, ended up being a political party that got to power when Lech Walesa became the President of Poland in December 1990.
