Federalists and Whigs - Irony in Politics

The irony in the history of our two major political parties is rich. Both parties actually stated out representing the opposite constituencies which they represent today. The history of this switch is largely blamed on the so called “Dixiecrats”; those Southern Democrats who in 1948; when Truman proposed a Civil Rights platform at the Convention; walked out, dividing the democratic Party forever and giving rise to a Republican faction which would someday become known as “Neo-Conservatism.”  That’s the short, contemporary side of things. But there is an interesting history which goes even further back.

Originally this country had a myriad of political parties; with the two largest being the Federalists and the Democratic-Republican Party. The Federalists believed in a strong Federal government; Washington and Adams were both Federalists. The Democratic-Republicans believed in a Republic guided by the voice of democracy. Remember a “Republic” is the form of democracy which we live under, and not just the name of a political party. Likewise, representative democracy is the manner in which we conduct our affairs within that Republic.

So, there were two main parties back then; divided as to how much power the Federal government should have over the lives of its citizens. In other words; nothing has changed with the system itself; only the players are different and call their parties by different names while still representing the same old interests.

By the 1840’s the Whig Party; formerly known at the time as Democrats, who had been around since the Revolution and were the real Conservatives of the era; got their first President elected. That was William Henry Harrison. He only lasted 32 days, dying of a cold he caught during his inauguration ceremony. However, he was succeeded by John Tyler, a former Democrat. The Whigs held sway through the Presidency of Franklin Pierce, and were largely responsible for some of the worst decisions leading up to the Civil War.

Now here’s where things get really interesting. Lincoln was the first Republican President. His role in the Civil War is widely known; although sometimes misunderstood. His position on slavery changed many times before he became President, and even after his election. He is seen as the “deliverer” to the newly freed slaves and the Republican Party became the party of the African-American until at least the Depression. But Lincoln was also the man who wanted to deport all the slaves to Jamaica and Liberia as a solution to the “negro problem.”

At the same time the Democrats were doing all they could to avoid a war with the South; even advocating the retention of slavery in the Southern states. These were the same men who were opposed to the 13^th Amendment freeing the slaves.

So, what we had; in essence; was a Democratic Party which was not at all in tune with the push for human rights; but rather pro States Rights. And; conversely; a Republican Party which was perceived as being the “Deliverer of Freedom” to the slaves and by extension the “Party of the People.” This has, of course, has been turned on its head by what happened at the Democratic Convention of 1948, but there are interesting things to note between the time of Lincoln and then.

Interestingly Lincoln’s Vice President; Andrew Johnson; was a Democrat who had been elected to the office on the National Union-Republic ticket. At the time we were still not yet confined to only 2 viable parties.

From 1869-1885 we had only Republican Presidents; along the line of Lincoln. These were the years of Reconstruction followed by the Gilded Age. Reconstruction was a repressive occupation of the Southern states; which came to embitter North against South to this present day; while the later Gilded Age represented the advent of the rewards of industrialization and the greed which those rewards brought to the rich and powerful. The Republicans; at this point; became the party of big business. The Democrats came to embrace the working class and the rise of the Unions.

The Republican run ended briefly to accommodate the election of Grover Cleveland in 1885. He was a Democrat. From this time forward there would never be anything but Republicans and Democrats running against one another for the office of President. It would be well to remember that there had been; as noted here earlier; a Democrat-Republican Party. Indeed our 3^rd through 8^th Presidents were from that Party. And there were some pretty great Presidents in that group.

Aside from Cleveland’s return to office in 1893; after having been defeated by William Harrison in 1889, which is the only time a former President has been re-elected to office; the Republicans held sway until President Wilson; a Democrat; came to D.C. in 1913. The first thing he did was to segregate the nation’s Capital. That’s right, D.C. was not segregated until 1913 and then by a Democrat!

After Wilson the mantle of leadership went back to the Republicans for the disastrous social policies of Prohibition, the reckless economic policies of the Roaring Twenties and the resultant Great Depression. In 1933 FDR came to D.C. as the first Democrat since Wilson and began the social programs which so many Americans rely upon today to make ends meet. And this is where the division between the two parties as we know them today begins to take place.

The Democrats had to find a way out of the Depression which had happened during the years of Republican leadership; which let big business run themselves. The New Deal programs; such as the NRA, WPA and all the rest were the country’s first attempts at large scale social programs to alleviate the hunger, homelessness and lack of education and job training which came in the wake of those failed Republican policies. The Republicans now became cast as the enemy of the working man and the party of the rich. Right or wrong, these labels would stick.

The only ones getting short changed by all of this were the nations African-Americans. The Party of Lincoln was the party which most blacks identified with due to Abraham Lincoln. That’s understandable. Regardless of the finer points involved in the validity of the Emancipation Proclamation, he was the man in charge when they received their freedom. And the Democrats had opposed the 13^th Amendment. It seemed like a no-brainer.

But in between the two World Wars, African –Americans expected more and began shifting their allegiance to the Democratic Party, which promised at least the hope of change. They had served honorably in 2 World Wars defending freedoms for others which they themselves did not have here at home. The time to change that had come. So, the nail was set in place; it just needed one more firm whack to drive it home for good.

That final whack came in 1948 at the Democratic National Convention when Harry Truman; who had succeeded President Roosevelt upon his death in 1945; came out with a Civil Rights platform for African-Americans. The Southern Democrats walked out and formed their own party. They even ran their own candidate; and predictably embarrassed themselves. After the election was over the leaders became some of the leading Republican Senators for the remainder of the 20^th century, most notably leading the opposition to the Civil rights legislation of the 1960’s and giving birth to the so-called Conservative movement in 1964 with Barry Goldwater as the first “Conservative” candidate for President.

The Democrats became even more progressive than they had been. This enabled deep divisions to develop within the party. And although they were able to successfully elect the first African-American Pesident; Barak Obama; to office in 2008, the Democrats then lost control of both the Congress and Senate within his first term.

The only point to be made here; if any at all; is that party allegiance; based on history; is suspect at best. It’s also interesting to note how much worse the gridlock in Washington became after the rise of the 2 party system we have today; which consists of Democrats and Republicans. Especially since at one time they were one and the same. That bit of history serves to underscore just how little choice we have today in electing our representatives. They are both different sides of the same coin. This goes a long way in explaining why nothing ever really changes.

NAFTA - Who Started It?

I am so sick of hearing that Bill Clinton started NAFTA. I distinctly remember Ronald Reagan campaigning for what he termed the North American Accord in 1979. Though the details were yet to be hammered out, it was during Reagan’s 2 terms in office that the agreement was first proposed and drafted. The torch was then passed to President Bush, Sr.

The finished product arrived on Clinton’s desk in 1993. He did approve it, sending it on to Congress, where the bill was passed by a Republican dominated chamber in 1994 and then signed by the President, who would have lost a Veto fight even if he were against it; which he was not.

The point here is that the divisive politics of our current era tend to distort and mislead us all. And the real kicker is that neither side will listen to the cold, hard facts of the matter.

NAFTA was a huge benefit to politicians of both parties due to the large amounts of cash funneled to both sides by various lobbyists’ intent on getting the bill passed in order to benefit large corporations with cheap labor. Thus, both sides are filthy with guilt. To not understand this is to be blinded by ignorance.

Election Day - 1960

I was 6 years old and this was the first Presidential election I would recall. I do remember brief bits about Eisenhower, mostly connected with my father being out of work during Ike's second term, during a recession. My father was never out of work, and so I suppose that is why I remember it at all.

The 1960 election was a big deal in our house, my father was Irish-Catholic; as was the Senator from Massachusetts, John Kennedy, who was the Democratic candidate for President. When Kennedy came to New York City, he visited various parts of Brooklyn, including a ride down Ralph Avenue in the Carnasie section, where we lived for a bit less than a year. I still remember seeing him riding past, waving to the crowd.

On Election Night 1960, my parents, along with millions of other Americans, sat glued to their televisions, waiting for the results. It would be a long wait. I remember making it until about 11 PM, or so, and then being carried to my bed. When I woke in the morning it was still not settled as to who had won the election!

While I slept, Richard Nixon had made a speech at about 3 AM, hinting toward a concession. He intimated that Kennedy may have won the election. This was puzzling, as it was not an out and out concession speech. Data from several states, notably Illinois and Ohio, were being examined closely for evidence of Voter fraud.

It was not until the afternoon of Wednesday, November 9th, that Nixon finally conceded the election to Kennedy. This map from Wikipedia illustrates just how close the election was. As a matter of fact, history has proven that Kennedy stole the 1960 election by buying votes in the states questioned. Included in this scenario were the actions of Chicago Mayor Richard Daley in carrying Illinois for the Democrats.

With the United States and the Soviet Union locked in a Cold War, which was about to heat up dramatically, Vice President Nixon made the decision not to concede the election, rather than challenge it, which would have thrown the country into a Constitutional crisis. With the Soviets poised on the border of West Berlin, along with the new Communist regime in Cuba, clearly this was not the time to "rock the boat" here at home. Swallowing what must have been a bitter pill, the Vice President finally conceded the election at about 3 PM on Wednesday, November 9th.

The election of 1960 still stands as a landmark one. It was the first election in the 20th Century in which both candidates had been born in the 20th Century, marking a milestone for younger voters, like my parents. It was the first time in decades that both candidates had children at home, like so many Americans in the electorate. This was also the last time a Presidential candidate would win election without carrying the state of Ohio.

Although he did not win the popular vote, Kennedy beat Nixon by one tenth of one percentage point(0.1%) which is the closest margin of the 20th century.

Nixon's staff wanted him to pursue a recount and challenge Kennedy's victory in several states, especially in Illinois, Missouri and New Jersey. Those 3 states had large majorities in Catholic districts, which just about handed Kennedy the election.

Three days after the election was over, Nixon gave a speech in which he said that he would not contest the results of the election. He is to be credited for this action, as the Russians were watching very closely to see how we handled the affair. Nixon's decision to forgo a challenge sent a clear and united signal to the Soviets that we were a strong, and unified nation, in spite of our many differences.

However, the Republican National Chairman, Senator Morton of Kentucky, did challenge the results in 11 states. Those challenges would not be thrown out of the courts until the following summer of 1961; fully 6 months after Kennedy had taken office, and just 4 months after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. The only loss to Kennedy by recount was the state of Hawaii.

Though this year's elections are largely local affairs, they are the ramp up to next year's National election. So, get out there, vote, and make your voice heard. For what it's worth, the votes you cast today just may influence next year's choices.