Was the Only Cop Sent to the Electric Chair in U.S. History for Crimes in Office Framed?

There are people out there, who I think are fools and communists, who subscribe to “ACAB” (All Cops Are Bastards) and would trust gangsters over cops. I usually try not to be so biased in writing, but I have a strong contempt for this viewpoint, and it is my impression that it comes from people who are both strongly left and have an overdeveloped antipathy for hypocrisy. No, I don’t like hypocrisy either, but I’d take flawed cops over flawed gangsters any day of the week. Subscribers to the ACAB view may be pleased to hear of the case of Lieutenant Charles Becker of the NYPD, who was executed in 1915 for having allegedly masterminded a murder of his partner in crime. However, there have been questions regarding his guilt. Is it possible that the only officer known to have been executed for crimes as an officer was framed?

NYPD Lieutenant Charles Becker (1870-1915)

Like much of the NYPD of the time, Lt. Becker was no saint. While many NYPD officers looked the other way with illegal establishments, Becker had a partner in illicit business in Herman “Beansie” Rosenthal, who established an illegal casino in 1912. Only a month after Rosenthal’s casino opened, Becker’s men raided the establishment, an effort to please the new reformer police commissioner, Rhinelander Waldo. Rosenthal was furious over this betrayal and thus he went public, giving reporter Herbert Bayard Swope the story that Becker held a mortgage over the property and got 20% of the profits from this establishment, and he was scheduled to testify in court on this matter on July 16^th. However, only hours before, he was gunned down by four gangsters known as Lefty Louie, Whitey Lewis, Dago Frank and Gyp the Blood (Crime Files). Although Becker had a formidable defense counsel, including former Congressman and Winston Churchill mentor W. Bourke Cockran, the timing of the murder as well as Becker having a strong motive and means to pull off this hit plus testimony from three prisoners resulted in Lt. Becker being executed by electric chair on July 30, 1915, after being convicted of masterminding a hit on ol’ Beansie. Although Becker is not a sympathetic figure as a dirty cop, there have been some doubts surrounding his guilt.

The Case For Becker’s Innocence

Although Becker, as noted, was not a saint, a murderer he may not have been. There were some significant issues regarding Becker’s trial. There was, for instance, only one witness to Becker allegedly conspiring, a waiter who claimed to have overheard him with the conspirators. Furthermore, the three prisoners had very strong motive to testify against Becker; they were trying to save themselves from the electric chair. There was also no firm tie ever established between Becker and the four gangsters who were also executed for their role. Also, Becker’s first trial was overturned by the court of appeals for being “shockingly against the weight of evidence” (Snow). The judge in the case was also intensely biased against Becker and it showed in the trial, thus the overturning. However, a second trial resulted in conviction. In 1927, former police reporter Henry H. Klein wrote a book that claimed that Becker was the victim of a conspiracy between politicians and gamblers. He wrote, “It was primarily to save their own lives that Rose, Webber and Vallon, with the aid of Schepps, ‘framed’ Becker, and it was only because of the anxiety of certain politicians to keep their names out of the gambling scandal that the frame-up succeeded. Becker, though an intelligent man was no mental match for either the gamblers or the politicians. No sooner were Rose and Vallon arrested than the job of keeping names out of the scandal and out of the trial was put up to (the late) ‘Big Tom Foley, and though many statements were issued from the District Attorney’s office, none of them, so far as the writer can learn, contained the names of any politicians or any important gamblers” (The New York Times). Other authors later wrote accounts alleging that Becker had been framed, including Andy Logan’s Against the Evidence (1970) and Mike Dash’s Satan’s Circus (2006). Furthermore, Becker was far from the only person who wanted “Beansie” dead for spilling his guts. Indeed, the four gangsters who shot him were normally paid by mobster Jack Zelig (Crime Files). Zelig was going to testify for the prosecution, but he was murdered by another gangster before this could happen, which although the story was that it was a financial beef between them, suspicion fell once again on Becker, but he was not prosecuted. Becker was, per this narrative, a convenient individual to sacrifice in the name of police reform, the careers of certain political actors, and to further the political career of the crusading prosecutor, Charles S. Whitman, who would be elected governor in 1914 and who signed off on Becker’s execution. The best case for Becker frankly is that many people had the motive and means to place a hit on “Beansie”.

The Case for Becker’s Guilt

As an officer, Becker went hard into an “I am the law” sort of policing. Historian Richard Snow (1978) described him as “a ruthless believer in the efficacy of the nightstick”, frequently using brutality in the course of his duties, thus murder may have also been in his repertoire. The narrative of the prosecution against Becker is that through gambler “Bald Jack” Rose he got gangster Jack Zelig to supply four gangsters to take out Rosenthal. However, Zelig denied that he agreed to supply the four gangsters (Levine). Furthermore, there was some damaging testimony against him from Rose, who testified that Becker had said to him, “It was a pleasing sight to me to see that squealing Jew lying there and … I would [like to] have cut out his tongue and hung it on the Times Building as a warning to future squealers” (Snow). Worse yet, a witness presumably for the defense, Jewish gambler Morris Luban, testified that he, Rose, and Becker had been at a Turkish bathhouse the week before the murder. Luban said that he heard Becker say that if Rose and his gang didn’t take out Rosenthal, that he’d have to do so himself (Forward). And, as noted before, Becker had strong motive to want to have Rosenthal killed and quick, as he was due to testify against him when he was murdered. Becker had the means and the motive for the crime.

So…was Lieutenant Becker framed? I can’t say I’m sure, and this is simply because here were many people who had reason to want Rosenthal dead for snitching to the press and who could have hired the four colorfully nicknamed gangsters to take him out. Becker’s widow, for one, believed that he was framed for the murder, and she had inscribed on his headstone:

Charles Becker

Murdered July 30,1915

By Governor Whitman

References

Klein’s Book Calls Becker Innocent. (1927, April 25). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Levine, A. (2023, April 30). The Hectic, Violent, and Relatively Short Life of Big Jack Zelig. Tablet Magazine.

Retrieved from

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/community/articles/death-gangster-big-jack-zelig-lower-east-side

Looking Back. (2012, October 12). Forward.

Retrieved from

https://forward.com/culture/163912/looking-back-october-12-2012

Roberts, S. (2012, July 15). 100 Years After a Murder, Questions About a Police Officer’s Guilt. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

https://archive.nytimes.com/cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/100-years-after-a-murder-questions-about-a-police-officers-guilt

Snow, R.F. (1978, December). Charles Becker. American Heritage, 30(1).

Retrieved from

https://www.americanheritage.com/charles-becker

The Gambler, the Policeman, and a killer named Gyp the Blood. Crime Files.

Retrieved from

The Gambler, the Policeman, and a killer named Gyp the Blood

August 25, 2026 Fascinating Politics

“If-by-Whiskey”: A Classic All-American Fallacy

Noah S. “Soggy” Sweat Jr.

Although Prohibition was nationally repealed in 1933, there were states that held on to it much longer. 1952, Mississippi was one of those states and had been the first to adopt it in 1908 and the first to ratify the national amendment in 1918. The debate in 1952 was on to keep or repeal it, and a 29-year-old state legislator, Noah S. “Soggy” Sweat Jr. (1922-1996), had the idea of how to approach this contentious issue as he was reaching the end of his five-year term in the state House. He delivered the following speech before the Mississippi State Legislature on April 4, 1952:

“My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, this is how I feel about whiskey:

If when you say whiskey you mean the devil’s brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman’s step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life’s great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise” (Marquez).

He managed to simultaneously please and antagonize both sides of the issue. Sweat recounted that it had taken him two months to write the brief speech, and it has since been legendary in Mississippi politics as well as of the United States. This speech gave rise to the logical fallacy, “If-by-Whiskey”, which is defined by Logically Fallacious as:

“A response to a question that is contingent on the questioner’s opinions and makes use of words with strong connotations. This fallacy appears to support both sides of an issue — a tactic common in politics.”

After his stint in the state legislature, Sweat served as district attorney for two terms, and from 1966 to 1974 he was a circuit judge. The position, incidentally, that won in 1952 was continuing Prohibition; Mississippi was the final state to repeal it, doing so in 1966!

References

If-By-Whiskey. Logically Fallacious.

Retrieved from

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/If-By-Whiskey

Marquez, S. (2026, May 7). Noah “Soggy” Sweat’s “The Whiskey Speech” to be presented at Two Mississippi Museums. Magnolia Tribune.

Retrieved from

Noah “Soggy” Sweat’s “The Whiskey Speech” to be presented at Two Mississippi Museums

August 23, 2026 Fascinating Politics

The Rise and Fall of J. Herbert Burke

Earlier this year, I wrote about the rise and fall of Edward Gurney, one of Florida’s early post-World War II Republicans, and there is a similar rise and fall for another one of them, J. Herbert Burke (1911-1993). Many who identified as Republicans in the post-World War II era were Northern transplants; Gurney had been born and raised in Portland, Maine and Burke was born and raised in Chicago and both men moved to Florida after World War II. Having graduated from Kent College of Law in Chicago, he practiced in the city from 1940 to 1949. Burke also served in France in World War II, rising to the rank of captain and being awarded a Purple Heart and Bronze Star as well as having earned the European Theater Medal and the American Theater Ribbon. In 1949, Burke moved to Hollywood, Florida, where he continued to practice law and became politically active, being elected a Republican committeeman in Broward County in 1952.

In 1954, conservative Democrat Dwight L. Rogers was reelected to Congress, but died on December 1^st. A special election was held to succeed him, with his son, Paul Rogers, running as a Democrat and Republican J. Herbert Burke making a go. Florida had had a long history of Democratic dominance, but President Eisenhower winning the state in 1952 as well as Bill Cramer’s election to Congress in 1954, the first Republican to be elected to Congress from Florida since 1882, made Burke’s run plausible. However, the younger Rogers won by about 16.5 points on January 11, 1955. However, President Eisenhower was sufficiently impressed with Burke to give him a job as a member of the Southeastern Advisory Board of Small Business. He would proceed with his career in law as well as in local politics until redistricting opened up an opportunity for him.

Redistricting can easily start, entrench, or wreck careers in Washington, and it was massively helpful in starting Burke’s. In 1966, Florida was forced to redistrict due to the “one man, one vote” rulings of the Supreme Court, and this resulted in the creation of a new Republican district in Florida based in Hollywood. He was only the third Republican to be elected from Florida in the 20^th century, winning by 22 points.

Congressman Burke

For almost all of his Congressional career, Burke was considered a respectable conservative, and in the earliest part of his career he was considered ultra-conservative. In 1967, the New York Times reported that he was among the freshmen considered to be leading the conservative backlash against the Johnson Administration, with the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action (ACA) finding nothing wrong with his 1967 record. The liberal Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) only found him to be correct on one of fifteen votes they considered markers of liberalism, which was a civil rights bill. Burke also had an accomplishment in his first term in his investigation of the Tennessee Valley Authority for using a large increase in funding to expand its functions beyond electricity and flood control (The Chicago Tribune). Burke was also one of the more favorable Florida representatives to civil rights, having been one of five representatives to have voted for the first version of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (the vote ADA counted, but he voted against adding fair housing to the legislation in 1968). He was also one of only two Florida representatives to vote against killing the Philadelphia Plan in 1969. However, Burke far from usually embraced President Nixon when he turned away from the conservative position, and in 1970 he voted against the Administration-backed Family Assistance Plan, which had won support from a number of otherwise conservative Republicans. He argued that this proposal would lead to increased taxation and “socialism” (Langeveld). In 1968, he had spearheaded an investigation into the Tennessee Valley Authority for expanding its business beyond electricity and flood control, He also However, his foremost work was primarily on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

As a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Burke strongly advocated for Ukraine and Byelorussia to be expelled from the UN as they served to give the USSR two more votes and that they “have been transformed into one constituent part of one vast slave state created from the blood of countless millions of murdered people who believe in their independence and who lost their lives because of that basic belief that we take for granted” (Langeveld). His anti-communism also, however, translated into turning a blind eye to human rights violations from nations aligned with the US on at least one occasion. After Australian diplomat James Dunn testified in 1977 to atrocities occurring in East Timor by the Indonesian military, he wrote, “I have my own suspicions regarding what might be behind the testimony, and I agree with you that it is in all our best interests to bury the Timor issue quickly and completely” (Langeveld).

In 1974, the Watergate scandal damaged the GOP’s prospects, and Burke only won reelection by 2 points. He had won reelection by over 25 points in 1972, and his opposition to granting immunity to President Nixon may have saved him from losing. After this election, his conservatism somewhat moderated, and he won reelection by 8 points in 1976. All seemed well in 1978, that is, up until the early morning of May 27^th.

On May 27^th, Burke was arrested for drunk and disorderly conduct as well as non-violently resisting arrest in a Ft. Lauderdale bar with nude go-go dancers, where per the police report he was “belligerent and verbally abusive” and “yelling, shouting, disrupting business” (Langeveld). He claimed that he was unjustly arrested and that he had overheard two men talking about engaging in a drug deal and followed them to the club to investigate. Contrary to this narrative and in keeping with him being drunk, he had written on the wall of his cell, “My name is J.H. Burke. The time is 12:20 a.m. I have not been charged. I want to make a charge against the (illegible) by the Dania police. I was molested by the Dania police without right of counsel with charges being made against me. I was abused, molested, abused and prevented from calling a lawyer, a friend or making a complaint. J. Herbert Burke” (Langeveld). He subsequently tried to persuade the bar’s manager, Joseph Dangles, to provide false testimony to exculpate him. This resulted in a charge of witness tampering being added to the case, and he ultimately pled guilty to the original charges and “no contest” to witness tampering, which landed him a $177.50 fine and three months’ probation (Langeveld).

This incident severely compromised support for Burke’s reelection, and Democratic sheriff Edward Stack ran against him. Although Stack was far from a perfect candidate himself, he prevailed by 23 points. Burke’s political career was over, never running again for public office. His agreement rate with ACA and ADA are almost the inverse: 88% and 11% respectively. Burke’s DW-Nominate score places him as more of a moderate conservative at 0.241. The usually Republican district would return to form in 1980 with the election of E. Clay Shaw by 10 points. Burke died of a heart attack on June 16, 1993, at the age of 82. Burke’s story was an inspiration for Floridian Carl Hiaasen to write the Florida-based crime thriller Strip Tease in 1993, which was adapted into a critically panned 1996 film with Burt Reynolds and Demi Moore.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Burke, J. Herbert. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/11007/j-herbert-burke

Hunter, M. (1967, September 6). Shift to the Right in Congress Seen. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

J. Herbert Burke, former congressman. (1993, June 23). The Chicago Tribune, 131.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/article/chicago-tribune-obituary-for-j-herbert/37315588

Langeveld, D. (2009, October 8). J. Herbert Burke: only there for the articles. The Downfall Dictionary.

Retrieved from

https://downfalldictionary.blogspot.com/2009/10/j-herbert-burke-only-there-for-articles.html

August 19, 2026August 25, 2026 Fascinating Politics

1968: The North Carolina Faithless Elector Case

Dr. Lloyd W. Bailey (1928-2020), the Nixon elector who prompted the first Congressional vote to disapprove of an electoral vote cast.

Ever since the Electoral College was created, there have been numerous criticisms and real or possible pitfalls pointed out. Indeed, in my area, there are quite a few critics. One of the potential pitfalls are the electors themselves, and whether their votes will be in comport with the will of the people. I say for this one that it is a “potential” pitfall as no elector’s independent decision has changed the outcome of a presidential election. There have been a few famous instances of faithless electors as well as efforts to curb the phenomenon.

The 1968 election was a three-way race between Republican Richard Nixon, Democrat Hubert Humphrey, and American Independent George Wallace. Wallace had no realistic chance of winning the election, but he did have a chance of serving as kingmaker, and that is what his campaign was shooting for. Had Wallace been able to serve as a kingmaker, he could have extracted a pledge from the winning candidate that would have hindered the progression of civil rights in the South. The Wallace campaign got just a little closer to this potential outcome when Dr. Lloyd W. Bailey, an elector pledged to Nixon, cast his vote for Wallace. This had no chance of changing the election, and Bailey said that if his vote would have changed the election, he would have stuck with Nixon. This was a big news story at the time, and created the best political environment in history for the repeal of the Electoral College. At the start of 1969, Rep. James G. O’Hara (D-Mich.) filed the first ever objection to an electoral vote in history. Sen. Edmund Muskie (D-Me.) did likewise for the Senate. Their hope in this matter was to discourage future faithless electors by invalidating this vote and to uphold “the integrity of this election under the present system and to effectively dramatize the dangers of continuing to operate under this outmoded, haphazard and undemocratic method of electing a President” ( They had the backing of the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Emanuel Celler (D-N.Y.). He spoke in favor of the objection, stating, “Whether or not electors are pledged, whether or not they are named, whether or not their names appear on the ballot, whether or not the law provides sanctions if they should fail to vote in accordance with the electorate’s wishes, the universal – and I say “universal” – understanding in the United States today and in the 20^th century particularly is that the electoral college exercises a ministerial, an agency function and effectuates the expressed wishes of the people. Indeed most electors consider themselves irrevocably committed to support the presidential candidate on whose ticket they were elected or on which they were elected” and concluded, “…I intend to support the proposed challenge to the vote cast by the elector from North Carolina. I do so recognizing that the disposition of this challenged vote will not affect the result of the presidential election. However, I believe it most appropriate and essential that the Congress give effect to the view now held by the overwhelming majority of our people that when the vote of an electorate is cast for President, it shall not be nullified or abrogated by any elector” (Congressional Record, 149). However, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, William McCulloch of Ohio, was in opposition. He argued, “Today, the objectors ask us to circumvent the [constitutional] amending process. They ask us to do what we have criticized so often before—to read into the Constitution what we wish the law to be. . . . They ask us to adopt a view which not only differs from but which is diametrically opposed to the way the Constitution was written” and held that Congress should only engage in objections in instances in which two returns were received, such as in the 1876 election (U.S. House).

Congress voted on both the O’Hara and Muskie resolutions, but both failed, the O’Hara objection 169-229 and the Muskie objection 33-58. Interestingly, House Minority Leader Gerald Ford (R-Mich.) supported O’Hara’s objection, as did many Michiganders. Maine’s delegation joined Muskie in support as well.

The Ideology of the Vote

Nearly all of the most conservative members of Congress agreed with McCulloch’s objection and voted against. There were also, even more interestingly, some very liberal legislators who voted against the objection, such as California’s Philip Burton. However, the liberal Americans for Democratic Action considered voting for the objections to be the liberal position. All black politicians save for Senator Edward Brooke (R-Mass.), who happened to be the only black Republican legislator at the time, voted for the objection.

The vote is detailed here, with lifetime ACA agreement rates for legislators:

Muskie Elector Objection, 1969 Download

O’Hara Elector Objection, 1969 Download

8/21/26 Correction: There were a few errors on the ACA scores in the O’Hara Elector Objection, which I have fixed.

References

Congress and the Case of the Faithless Elector. (2020, November 17). U.S. House of Representatives.

Retrieved from

https://history.house.gov/Blog/2020/November/11-17-Faithless-Electors

Counting Electoral Votes – Joint Session of the House and Senate Held Pursuant to the Provisions of Senate Concurrent Resolution 1. (1969, January 6). Congressional Record, 145-172.

Retrieved from

https://www.congress.gov/bound-congressional-record/1969/01/06/house-section

Counting of the Electoral Vote. (1969, January 6). Congressional Record, 197-246.

Retrieved from

https://www.congress.gov/bound-congressional-record/1969/01/06/senate-section

August 16, 2026 Fascinating Politics

Edith Green: The Beaver State’s Education Champion

That Oregon today votes Democratic seems to go without saying, but it didn’t used to be this way. Indeed, the state had a considerable history of Republican voting, and for most of FDR’s presidency, both of its senators were Republicans. From 1943 to 1953, the entire delegation to Congress from Oregon was Republican. However, just because one was a Republican, it far from automatically meant that a conservative line was followed, and this proved quite true with Senator Wayne Morse, who broke the Republican unity when he switched to Independent in 1953. Morse was a liberal, and he was popular. Liberalism was starting to gain traction in the state, and the liberal position was popular on some issues in the state, such as public ownership of power. The Republicans and President Eisenhower had moved hard in the direction of private ownership of power, and that rubbed many Oregonians the wrong way. Enter Edith Starrett Green (1910-1987).

In the 1950s, Green was an outsider in multiple ways. First, she was a Democrat, and second, there had only been one woman previously elected to represent the state in Congress in Portland’s Nan Honeyman, and she had lost reelection after one term. Green had been a teacher by profession in her younger years, teaching public school in Salem from 1930 to 1941 and afterwards was a lobbyist for the Oregon Education Association and director of the Oregon Congress of Parents and Teachers. It probably goes without saying that in her career her big emphasis would be on education. In 1952, Green made her first run for public office by running for Secretary of State. Although she lost, she had lost narrowly in a good Republican year. In 1954, Green set her eyes on the Portland-based 3rd district. Its representative during that time was Homer D. Angell, who had defeated Honeyman back in 1938 and was moderate and pro-organized labor, having voted against the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947. However, by 1954, he was 79 years old and got defeated for renomination by 41-year-old Tom McCall, who would later be elected governor. Despite a fresh face, voter support for the GOP was declining and it was a midterm, which tends to work against the president’s party. Green defeated McCall with 52% of the vote, and had little trouble winning her district afterwards, even though Portland voted for Nixon in 1960.

Congresswoman Green

As a member of Congress, she started out as a New Deal liberal, much as Nan Honeyman had been, and called for an equal pay law (which would be enacted in 1963). From 1955 to 1964, she only dissented with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) twice (she opposed flood control funding and a foreign aid increase in 1957). She strongly supported the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s, but was the only woman to oppose an effort to tack on sex as a protected class to the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Green believed that this could kill the bill and that separate legislation should address sex discrimination, stating, “For every discrimination that I have suffered, the Negro woman has suffered ten times that amount of discrimination” (O’Dea, 288-289). She strongly supported New Frontier and Great Society programs but she notably dissented on the bill repealing the “right to work” section of the Taft-Hartley Act in 1965, a bit of a sign of things to come. That year, as chairwoman of the subcommittee on higher education, Green introduced the Higher Education Act of 1965, which was easily adopted during the Great Society Congress and was part of President Johnson’s efforts to use the federal government to the betterment of education. Green had also played major roles in drafting the National Defense Education Act in 1958 and the Higher Education Facilities Act in 1963. However, Green’s politics would increasingly diverge from the national Democratic line.

The Nixon Years: A Turn to the Right

Beginning in the latter part of the Johnson Administration, Green started dissenting with the liberal line a bit more and even moved a bit to the right on her signature issue of education. She started supporting measures giving states more authority and in 1969 she proposed a substitute to extending the Elementary and Secondary Education Act backed by the Nixon Administration which reduced the length of its extension from five to two years, thus funding for the law would come for review by Congress sooner. Green became increasingly skeptical of the efficacy of numerous federal social programs, and in 1969 was one of the sponsors of a proposal, opposed by the Nixon Administration, to transfer functions of numerous anti-poverty programs to the states. Indeed, her increasing skepticism of the federal role in education led her to coin the term “educational-industrial complex” to critique extensive federal involvement in education (Hunter). One issue Green continued to remain liberal on among others was in her opposition to the Vietnam War. In 1967, she had been one of only 18 representatives to support an amendment giving the sense of Congress that bombing of North Vietnam should come to an end. In 1972, she sponsored with Sen. Birch Bayh (D-Ind.) and Rep. Patsy Mink (D-Haw.) a lasting achievement in Title IX, banning sex discrimination in educational institutions receiving federal funding.

In 1974, Green opted to retire from Congress. Evaluations on her stand as rather similar; she sided with ADA 71% of the time, the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action 25% of the time, and her DW-Nominate score is -0.243, all indicating moderate liberalism for her overall career. Her activities after her career focused primarily on education, serving as a member of the State Board of Higher Education and taught at Warner Pacific College. Demonstrating further how much had politically changed in twenty years, Green endorsed President Ford in 1976 and served as co-chairwoman for “National Democrats for Gerald Ford”. In 1981, President Reagan tapped Green to serve on the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships. She died of cancer on April 21, 1987, at the age of 77. To this day, Edith Green is the most impactful female federal legislator that Oregon has elected.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Cogswell, P. (2022, December 12). Edith Starrett Green. Oregon Encyclopedia.

Retrieved from

https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/green_edith_starrett_1910_1987_

Green, Edith Starrett. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/3775/edith-starrett-green

Hunter, M. (1981, April 3). Cuts in U.S. Aid to Education to Have Wide Impact. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

O’Dea, S. (2006). From suffrage to the Senate: America’s political women: an encyclopedia of leaders, causes & issues (2nd ed.), Vol 1. Millerton, NY: Gray House Publishing.

August 12, 2026 Fascinating Politics

The 1912 Congressional Election: The Winds of Change

The 1912 election was highly impactful on the Congressional level, with a number of prominent incumbents being turned out and the entrance of the Progressive Party in Congress. The majorities the Democrats got in the House and Senate ensured that much of President Wilson’s progressive agenda would be passed in his first two years. I will write a separate post about the 1912 presidential election, as that deserves one.

The House

Champ Clark (D-Mo.), Speaker of the House

This election was a boon for the Democrats, as Republicans lost 28 seats while Democrats gained 62. The Democrats won a lot of the new seats added from the 1910 census, while the newly formed Progressive Party won 10 seats. Part of the reason Republicans took significant losses was because of the third-party Progressive candidates.

In California, Republican William Kent in the 1^st district opted to run for reelection as an Independent and won, while Republican James Needham lost reelection to Democrat Denver Church in the 7^th district. Republican William Stephens, now in the 10^th district, ran for reelection as a Progressive and won. In the 11^th district, Republican Sylvester Smith’s retirement resulted in the election of Democrat William Kettner.

In Connecticut, Democrats had a clean sweep of the delegation, although the wins all around were close. In the 1^st district, future Democratic Senator Augustine Lonergan succeeded retiring Republican E. Stevens Henry, Republican John Q. Tilson lost reelection to Democrat Thomas L. Reilly in the 3^rd district, and Republican Ebenezer J. Hill lost to Democrat Jeremiah Donovan. Tilson and Hill would win back their seats in 1914, with Tilson later serving as majority leader.

Democrats won Delaware’s sole district with Franklin Brockson, succeeding retiring Republican William Heald.

In Illinois, ten Republicans lost reelection; William Wilson of the 3^rd district to Democrat George Gorman, George Foss of the 10^th district to Progressive Charles Thomson, Charles Fuller of the 12^th district to Progressive William Hinebaugh, James McKinney of the 14^th district to Democrat Clyde Tavenner, George W. Prince of the 15^th district to Democrat Stephen Hoxworth, John Sterling of the 17^th district to Democrat Louis FitzHenry, Joe Cannon of the 18^th district to Democrat Frank O’Hair, William B. McKinley of the 19^th district to Democrat Charles Borchers, William Rodenberg of the 22^nd district to Democrat William Baltz, and Napoleon Thistlewood tof the 25^th district to Democrat Robert Hill. Republicans did, however, unseat Democrat Lynden Evans in the Chicago-based 9^th district with Fred Britten. The most notable loss was of course Joe Cannon, who had been House Speaker from 1903 to 1911. Wilson, Foss, Fuller, Sterling, Cannon, McKinley, and Rodenberg would be returned to office in the 1914 election.

In Indiana, the state’s sole Republican representative, Edgar Crumpacker of the 10^th district, lost reelection to Democrat John B. Peterson. However, the district would return to form with the election of William Wood in 1914.

In Iowa, two seats flipped to the Democrats with Republican Charles E. Pickett losing reelection to Democrat Maurice Connolly in the 3^rd district. In the 6^th district, Republican Nathan Kendall withdrew from reelection, with Democrat Sanford Kirkpatrick succeeding him. However, Republicans still had 8 of 11 districts; Iowa was still a strong Republican state despite Woodrow Wilson’s win.

In Kansas, Republicans Fred Jackson, Rollin Rees, and Isaac Young lost reelection in the 4^th, 5^th, and 6^th districts to Democrats Dudley Doolittle, Guy Helvering, and John Connelly respectively. Democrats would interestingly hold a majority of the Kansas delegation until the 1918 election, making the Wilson presidency the height of power for Democrats in Kansas. .

In Kentucky, although no changes occurred in the state’s partisan composition, future Senate Majority Leader and Vice President Alben W. Barkley won in the at-the-time strongly Democratic 1^st district.

In Maine, Republicans actually regained some ground; Democrat Samuel Gould lost reelection to Republican Forrest Goodwin in the 3^rd district, leaving Republicans with a 3-1 edge in the state delegation.

In Maryland, Republicans lost their sole representative in Thomas Parran of the 5^th district, with Democrat Frank O. Smith winning.

In Massachusetts, Republican Samuel W. McCall of the 8^th district was succeeded by Democrat Frederick Deitrick while Republican Robert O. Harris in the 14^th district lost reelection to Democrat Edward Gilmore. However, Republican Samuel Winslow defeated Democratic incumbent John Thayer in the 4^th district.

In Michigan, Republicans William Wedemeyer, George A. Loud, and H. Olin Young of the 2^nd, 10^th, and 12^th districts lost reelection to Democrat Samuel Beakes, Progressive Roy Woodruff, and Progressive William J. MacDonald respectively. Although Loud would regain his seat in 1914, Woodruff would later be elected as a Republican in 1920 and serve until 1953, with him becoming extremely conservative by FDR’s second term. In Michigan’s 5^th district, however, Democrat Edwin Sweet lost reelection to Republican Carl Mapes.

In Missouri, Republican Leonidas C. Dyer of the 12^th district appeared to have won reelection, but in 1914 the result was overturned and his opponent, Democrat Michael Gill, was seated for the rest of the session. Dyer would win his seat back in 1914.

In Montana, Republican Charles Pray lost reelection, and since Montana added a district, Democrats Tom Stout and John M. Evans were elected at-Large.

In New Hampshire, both of the state’s Republican representatives, Cyrus Sulloway and Frank Currier, went down to defeat by Democrats Eugene Reed and Raymond Stevens. Republicans would regain both seats in 1914, with Sulloway returning.

In New Jersey, Democrats nearly swept the board, with the only Republican remaining to represent the state was William Browning of the 1^st district. In the 2^nd district, Republican John Gardner lost reelection to Democrat J. Thompson Baker and in the 4^th Republican Ira Wood retired and was succeeded by Democrat Allan B. Walsh, He would, however, be joined by two Republicans during the 63^rd Congress: Republican Dow Drukker would win a special election in the 7^th district following the death of Democrat Robert G. Bremner and Republican R. Wayne Parker would be seated for the lame-duck session of Congress after Democratic incumbent Walter I. McCoy opted to resign to accept an appointment as a justice of the Washington D.C. Supreme Court.

In New York, Progressive Walter Chandler succeeded retiring Republican John Andrus in the 19^th district, while Democrats Henry Bruckner and Joseph Goulden succeeded departing Republicans in the 22^nd and 23^rd districts. In the 25^th district, Republican Theron Akin, who came to identify himself as a “Progressive Republican”, lost the Progressive nomination to John C. Bucher, who lost to Democrat Benjamin Taylor. In the 35^th and 40^th districts, Republicans Michael Driscoll and James Simmons lost reelection to Democrats John Clancy and Robert H. Gittins respectively.

In Ohio, the House Republican delegation was already in bad shape at only five representatives and it was shrunk to three. Future Speaker of the House Nicholas Longworth lost reelection to Democrat Stanley Bowdle in the 1^st district as did Republicans Edward L. Taylor and L.Paul Howland in the 12^th and 22^nd districts to Democrats Clement Brumbaugh and William Gordon respectively. However, Republican Simeon Fess gained an open Democratic seat in the 6^th district.

In Pennsylvania, although Roosevelt won the state, Democrats made gains down-ticket given the Republican-Progressive split, including Democrat J. Washington Logue winning an open Republican seat in the 6^th district, which was part of the at-the-time Republican stronghold of Philadelphia. Seven Republicans outside of Philadelphia lost reelection: Charles Bowman of the 11^th district to Democrat John J. Casey, Benjamin K. Focht of the 17^th district to Democrat Franklin Dershem, Jesse Hartman of the 19^th district to Democrat Warren Bailey, Daniel Lafean in the 20^th district to Democrat Andrew Brodbeck, Charles Matthews in the 24^th district to Progressive Henry Temple, and Peter Speer in the 28^th district to Progressive Willis Hulings. Another notable defeat was progressive-leaning Republican Melville Kelly’s primary defeat of John Dalzell in the 30^th district; Dalzell had been one of Speaker Joe Cannon’s (R-Ill.) top conservative lieutenants on the Rules Committee. Democrats also lost two seats; William B. Wilson in the 15^th district to Republican Edgar Kiess, and Curtis H. Gregg in the 22^nd district to Republican Abraham Keister. Wilson would serve as Woodrow Wilson’s Secretary of Labor for the entirety of his presidency.

In Rhode Island, Democrats came out with a 2-1 delegation; Rhode Island was given an additional Congressional district from the 1910 census, with future Senator Peter Gerry succeeding the late Republican George Utter in the 2^nd district.

Although no partisan changes occurred in the at-the-time solidly Democratic Texas, Sam Rayburn was elected to his first term this year. He was the longest serving House Speaker in American history and one of its most consequential, serving from 1940 to 1947, 1949 to 1953, and from 1955 until his death in 1961.

In Washington, two more seats were added, and these at-Large districts were won by Progressives James Bryan and Jacob Falconer, following the vote of the state for Roosevelt. However, Republican Stanton Warburton in the 2^nd district, who had chosen to run for reelection as a Progressive, lost to Republican Albert Johnson.

In West Virginia, although Wilson won the state, the down-ticket results did not work out so well for Democrats, as Adam Littlepage of the 3^rd district and John M. Hamilton of the 4^th district lost reelection to Republicans Samuel Avis and Hunter Moss Jr. However, Littlepage would regain his seat in the 1914 election.

In Wisconsin, the elections were a bit quirky.

In the 4^th district, Republican William Cary ran for reelection on a “non-partisan” line and won the Democratic nomination and won.

In the 5^th district, Republican William Stafford won back his seat from Socialist Victor Berger. Stafford and Berger would duke it out for this district, with Berger being defeated for the last time by Stafford in 1928.

Republican James Davidson of the 6^th district lost reelection to Democrat Michael Reilly, but he would win his seat back in 1916.

Republican Elmer Morse was placed in the same district as Democrat Thomas Konop in the 9^th and lost the election.

The Senate

The Democrats would gain four seats in the Senate while Republicans lost seven. There were notably a few elections in which there were public referendums that although were not legally binding, the state legislatures chose to honor the results.

Majority Leader John W. Kern (D-Ind.), who was William Jennings Bryan’s running mate in 1908.

In Colorado, retiring Republican Simon Guggenheim was succeeded by Democrat John F. Shafroth.

In Delaware, Republican Harry A. Richardson lost reelection to Democrat Willard Saulsbury Jr.

In Illinois, the Senate election was a bit of a mess; the aging Republican Shelby Cullom, who had first been elected to Congress in 1864, lost renomination and Republican William Lorimer had been been voided in 1912 due to corruption. An agreement was reached in the Illinois legislature to elect Democrat J. Hamilton Lewis and Republican Lawrence Y. Sherman.

In Kansas, Democrat William Howard Thompson won the Senate election after Republican Charles Curtis was defeated for renomination by Walter R. Stubbs. Thompson would be the second-to-last Democrat to represent the state in the Senate.

In Maine, Republicans would have one of their few victories, as Democrat Obadiah Gardner, specially appointed to the Senate in 1911, lost the election to Republican Edwin Burleigh.

In Montana, Republican Joseph Dixon opted to run for reelection as a Progressive, but lost to Democrat Thomas J. Walsh, who would serve in the Senate for twenty years as a progressive crusader and would die just before he could become FDR’s attorney general.

In New Hampshire, a vacant Republican seat was won by Democrat Henry Hollis.

In New Jersey, Republican Frank Briggs lost reelection to Democrat William Hughes.

In Oregon, Republican Jonathan Bourne opted to run for reelection as a member of the “Popular Government Party”, but lost to Democrat Harry Lane.

In Tennessee, Democrats regained a seat that was only held by Republican Newell Sanders as he was an interim appointment. The victor, John K. Shields, would later prove a royal pain in the neck for President Wilson.

In West Virginia, in keeping with that state’s down-ticket trend, Democratic appointee Clarence Watson lost the election to Republican Nathan Goff Jr., who had been Secretary of the Navy during the Hayes Administration.

August 8, 2026August 11, 2026 Fascinating Politics

Great Conservatives from American History #33: Charles Wiggins – The Great Nixon Defender

The year 1966 constituted a backlash against the policies of the Johnson Administration, and some incumbents went down who were thought to be in good shape in their districts. Republican attorney and mayor of El Monte Charles Edward Wiggins (1927-2000) challenged incumbent Democrat Ronald B. Cameron in the 25^th district in Orange County. Cameron had previously defeated Republican John Rousselot in 1962, as he had attracted great controversy for being a prominent member of the John Birch Society. However, Wiggins could not be painted in the same light, and on Election Day 1966 he ousted Cameron by 5 points. This would be Wiggins’ toughest election as he would prove popular in his district.

Wiggins on Policy

At first, it may have seemed like Wiggins was going to be an extreme conservative; in 1967 the liberal Americans for Democratic Action found him in agreement on none of the 15 votes they had tallied as most important, and this included a civil rights bill that had the support of all but 25 Republicans. However, he would prove that he had more layers than just ultra-conservative; as a member of the House Judiciary Committee he was involved in the consideration of Constitutional amendments, and he was regularly against further amendments; in 1971, he was one of 19 representatives to vote against the 18-year-old vote and one of 24 to vote against the Equal Rights Amendment, but in the same year he also voted against the School Prayer Amendment. In 1978, Wiggins voted against an amendment letting Washington D.C. elect representatives. However, this didn’t mean he was against autonomy for D.C., as in 1973 he voted for the law permitting D.C. to elect its own mayor and city council. He also wasn’t opposed to all efforts to amend the Constitution; in 1969 he voted in favor of an amendment scrapping the Electoral College. His political stances had some variance; although in 1969 he supported killing the Philadelphia Plan (affirmative action precursor) he also supported expanding the government’s ability to enforce anti-discrimination laws in 1971. Wiggins was a staunch supporter of President Nixon’s policy on Vietnam and although he was in opposition to most anti-poverty programs, he did support the creation of the Legal Services Corporation to help provide legal assistance to the poor. In 1974, he was one of 48 representatives to vote against the Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments in 1974, which provided for federal funding of presidential campaigns, limitations on campaign contributions, and the establishment of the Federal Election Commission. On economics, Wiggins supported free market approaches to policy and was in opposition to price control on gas. He was also fiscally conservative, voting to sustain the vetoes of Presidents Nixon and Ford on spending. However, Wiggins backed a few hot-button positions unpopular with rank and file conservatives, such as voting for the New York City bailout in 1975, against the Hyde Amendment in 1976, and his support for the Panama Canal Treaties. He also went against President Ford on voting to override his veto of the bill providing for national standards for strip mining in 1975. Wiggins opposed the 1975 Voting Rights Act extension and led the push for an alternative formula for coverage under the act, one more lenient than what existed, namely he called for a standard of coverage based on minority turnout rates.

Wiggins and Watergate

Wiggins was one of the three leaders of the defense of the Nixon Administration during the Watergate hearings. Their strategy, per The New York Times (2000) was “…to construe the evidence as narrowly as possible, require ironclad proof and propose benign explanations of information damaging to the president” (Pace). However, upon the release of the Watergate tapes, he changed his mind and supported impeachment, but wanted the president to resign to avoid dragging things out. Wiggins lamented where he had to stand, stating, “Such a conclusion was a sad and personally wrenching one for me to reach, because I regarded–and still do regard–myself as a friend of the president and his family and one still willing, proudly, to claim his achievements” (Nelson & Weinstein). Although Wiggins’ defense of Nixon certainly harmed his political prospects, he nonetheless prevailed in reelection in 1974, winning by 15 points. In 1978, Wiggins opted to retire to private legal practice, and he was succeeded by the much more conservative William Dannemeyer. His DW-Nominate score is a 0.359, he was in agreement with the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action 79% of the time, and in agreement with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 15% of the time. However, he was not out of government for good.

Judge Wiggins

In 1984, President Reagan tapped Wiggins to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, and he issued some substantive rulings. In 1994, he upheld the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in Holmes v. California National Guard, finding that it was not in violation of the 1^st and 5^th Amendments (Nelson & Weinstein) In 1996, Wiggins assumed senior status (semi-retirement for judges). In 1998, he testified before Congress during the Clinton impeachment hearings and urged a “nay” vote as he found the charges too vague (Pace). He was in poor health in his last years, suffering from diabetes and heart disease, dying on March 2, 2000 at the age of 72.

Conclusion

The inclusion of Wiggins may seem odd, but in truth on most matters he was conservative and was a man who thought for himself, unafraid to take unpopular positions, whether in opposition to consensus or his party’s preferences. I tremendously value the latter, which is why the current era of politics is disturbing to me. Pardon the late aside, but I see two political cults present in American politics: the Cult of Trump and the Cult of Social Justice, the latter which seems to be increasingly going mask off in its favorability to communism, and the former which tries very very hard to form a greater ideological philosophy from whatever President Trump wishes. The truth about President Trump is that although yes he is a man of the right, he is also temperamental and often acts based on his whims, whether for good or ill. Seeing people twist like pretzels in justification for some of the things he does (such as imposing tariffs so broad and slipshod that they included islands with penguins rather than humans as residents) is simultaneously amusing and disheartening. Choose systems and philosophies, not men, and don’t insist on 100% agreement with you as it is not realistic, and there is also a non-zero chance that you are wrong (GASP!). President Reagan was right when he said that someone who is 80% your friend and ally in politics is not 20% your enemy. Use your own brains, people! Don’t merely be a mouthpiece for others.

Bonus:

Wiggins’ press conference explaining his position on Watergate after the release of the Watergate tapes:

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Nelson, S.S. & Weinstein,H. (2000, March 4). U.S. Judge Charles E. Wiggins; Backed Nixon During Watergate. The Los Angeles Times.

Retrieved from

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-mar-04-mn-5189-story.html

Pace, E. (2000, March 8). Charles Wiggins, 72, Dies; Led Nixon’s Defense in Hearings. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Wiggins, Charles Edward. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/11055/charles-edward-wiggins

August 4, 2026 Fascinating Politics

Great Conservatives from American History #32: John Taber – The Empire State’s “Meat Ax” of Spending

New York is not a place particularly known for its conservatism, but in the time of the election of attorney and local Republican leader John Taber (1880-1965) to Congress in 1922 representing Auburn in the Finger Lakes region, there were many conservatives representing the state, notably Senator James W. Wadsworth Jr. Although the power of conservatism in New York would decline over time, especially with the rise of FDR, Taber’s old-school Republicanism would go mostly unchanged.

The 1920s were a time in which he was truly in his element and he stuck staunchly to the cost-conscious vetoes of President Calvin Coolidge. His orientation was strongly pro-business and lassiez-faire. However, Taber did interestingly vote for the Child Labor Amendment in 1924, which if enacted would have given Congress the power to regulate and abolish child labor. The upholding of the Fair Labor Standards Act (which Taber twice voted against) by the Supreme Court took the wind out of the sails of this amendment. Indeed, this amendment had quite a regional focus and the legislation that supporters of child labor legislation pushed was unlikely to change New York labor laws. After all, the Keating-Owen Act of 1916 for child labor, which was struck down by the Supreme Court, had no impact on New York’s labor laws.

Responding to Liberal Governance

Taber’s opposition to the New Deal was practically absolute, opposing all First 100 Days laws except the Economy Act, but his commitment to reduced spending on a couple occasions placed him on the same page as the Roosevelt Administration, such as him being one of eight Republicans to oppose the Steiwer-Cutting Amendment in 1933 for reviewing veterans benefit cuts. Republicans in general were in support of Steiwer-Cutting as they prioritized veterans benefits over New Deal spending. He also twice voted to sustain President Roosevelt’s vetoes of veterans’ bonus bills. In 1938, Taber stood out for his motion to to recommit that defeated FDR’s reorganization plan, an indicator that FDR couldn’t simply do whatever he wanted, even with the most strongly Democratic Congress. He also was one of 33 representatives to vote against Social Security. Taber warned, “Never in the history of the world has any measure been brought in here so insidiously designed so as to prevent business recovery, to enslave workers, and to prevent any possibility of the employers providing work for the people” (CBS) Although this was hyperbolic rhetoric, the Social Security tax that was imposed was one of the factors behind the Roosevelt Recession of 1937-1938 as the tax began in 1937 and benefits were not paid out on Social Security until 1940. Taber was also known as the “Watchdog of the Treasury” for his efforts to hold down expenditures and got the nickname “Meat Ax” for once declaring on the federal budget, “I’m going to cut it with a meat ax” (Cooke). His efforts got him criticism from the Truman Administration, but he also attracted admiration, even from opponents. One opponent stated, “No man has served Congress with greater distinction…Without his watchful eye the public debt would be $10 billion higher” (Cooke). His attitude towards spending was take-no-prisoners, “We’re not going to use a knife to cut down Federal appropriations, we’re going to use a sledgehammer” (The New York Times). Taber often worked to this end together with Appropriations Chairman Clarence Cannon (D-Mo.), who was often highly committed to budget cutting regardless of the wishes of president or party. This didn’t mean things were always peachy between them; in 1945 he and Cannon had an argument that escalated to Cannon punching Taber in the face (Henry).

Shouting to Cure Deafness

Among other things, Taber was known for his brassy, booming voice, and with this voice as well as a new amplification system in the House, resulted in a rather incredible event. On May 9, 1940, Taber, holding the microphone close to his mouth, was denouncing efforts to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act when Rep. Leonard Schuetz (D-Ill.) felt rather dizzy and had to leave the chamber to sit on a bench, and for the first time in his entire life was able to hear out of his left ear, and even better than in his right ear (The New York Times, 1940).

Taber and Schuetz “recreating” the incident for the press.

Foreign Policy

Although on domestic policy he was strongly to the right, he was open to foreign aid and could not be counted as among the die-hard non-interventionists before World War II. Indeed, in the postwar era, he supported aid to Greece and Turkey and the Marshall Plan. This support, however, was not without careful eye to spending, and he was well-positioned to keep a careful eye on spending given that for many years he was the leading Republican on the House Appropriations Committee. During the Republican 80^th and 83^rd Congresses, Taber was the chairman, and used his post to push forward strong domestic budget cuts and was considered among the top figures in the House GOP. During his time to cut budgets in a significant way was known as “Taberizing” (The New York Times).. However, even he could on occasion be persuaded that there was such a thing as too much “Taberizing”, which is what President Eisenhower accomplished in getting Taber to call for reversing foreign aid cuts in 1956. Indeed, during the Eisenhower Administration, he was backing Administration-sponsored increases in foreign aid. However, this enthusiasm didn’t carry over to President Kennedy’s foreign aid packages and he proved as much of a foe of the Kennedy Administration as he had the Truman Administration.

Civil Rights

Although John Taber supported anti-lynching legislation twice, he repeatedly voted against legislation to ban poll taxes. He also voted against the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960. However, Taber did vote for the 24^th amendment in 1962, barring the poll tax in federal elections and primaries. He also multiple times voted for anti-segregation amendments.

The End

Although it was thought that Taber might retire in 1958 as he didn’t want to stick around too long, many legislators lean to staying in the game. However, by 1962, he was 82 years old, and he was redistricted into the same district as Democrat Sam Stratton. Given the redistricting and his age, Taber opted not to go for another term. His DW-Nominate score stands at 0.558, he agreed with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 13% of the time from 1947 to 1962, and agreed 93% of the time with the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action from 1957 to 1962. He passed away in a nursing home on November 22, 1965 at the age of 85.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Cooke, J. (1965, November 22). John Taber Dead at 85. The Geneva Times, 1.

Retrieved from

www.newspapers.com/image/1187305413/

Ex. Rep. John Taber Dies at 85. (1965, November 23). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Henry, C. (2018, July 12). The Man Who Brought Two Presidents to Town. Elsberry Historical.

Retrieved from

http://elsberryhistorical.org/items/show/163

Loud House Debate Restores Hearing of Congressman. U.S. House.

Retrieved from

https://history.house.gov/Collection/Detail/25769818336?current_search_qs=%3Fret%3DTrue%26PreviousSearch%3DSearch%252cMostRecommended%26CurrentPage%3D134%26SortOrder%3DMostRecommended%26ResultType%3DList%26Command%3DNext

Miracle in Congress. (1940, May 10). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

‘Pork’ Foe John Taber Succumbs. (1965, November 23). The Arizona Daily Star, 21.

Retrieved from

www.newspapers.com/image/162711177/

Taber, John. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/9144/john-taber

August 2, 2026 Fascinating Politics

The 1974 Midterms: Watergate Fallout

On August 9, 1974, President Richard Nixon became the first and so far only president to resign office after the Watergate tapes proved that he initiated a cover-up of the Watergate burglary, thus he was guilty of obstruction of justice. Republicans suffered the electoral consequences in the 1974 midterms, with Democrats winning 48 seats. The result was a strongly liberal Congress with the freshmen being known as “Watergate Babies”. Although the new Congress blocked further military assistance to South Vietnam, they were limited in their ability to act as President Ford vetoed 66 bills, of which 12 were overridden. However, the 1974 midterms produced fundamental changes in the Democratic Party and constituted the beginning of the end of the influence of conservative Democrats, as the Democratic Party made it clear through their ousters of several committee chairmen that seniority alone no longer determined whether one would get a chairmanship. This either motivated retirements or legislators significantly changing their voting behavior to get on the good side of liberal Democrats.

Patrick Leahy’s (D-Vt.), the longest serving of the Democrats among the 1974 freshmen.

The significant results were as follows…

House

Although Arkansas had no change, future President Bill Clinton came within 4 points of defeating Republican John Paul Hammerschmidt, who represented Bentonville, Fayetteville, and Rogers, for reelection.

In California, Republican incumbents Bob Mathias and Victor Veysey lost to Democrats John Hans Krebs and James F. Lloyd respectively. The 13^th district saw Republican Charles Gubser retire and be succeeded by Democrat Norman Y. Mineta, while in the 34^th district Republican Craig Hosmer retired and Democrat Mark W. Hannaford succeeded him.

In Colorado’s 2^nd district, which included the city of Boulder, was increasingly waving its liberal flag with future Senator Tim Wirth defeating five-term Republican incumbent Donald G. Brotzman for reelection. The 2nd hasn’t been represented by a Republican since.

In Connecticut’s 2^nd district, Democrat Chris Dodd, son of the late Senator Thomas Dodd, succeeded retiring Republican Robert Steele.

In Florida’s 5^th district, one of the few Republican gains occurred, with Republican Richard Kelly succeeding retiring Democrat Bill Gunter. Kelly would later be one of the members of Congress implicated in the Abscam Scandal.

In Georgia’s 4^th district, Democrat Elliott Levitas defeated four-term incumbent Republican Benjamin Blackburn for reelection. This brought Georgia back to its traditional all-Democratic delegation.

In Illinois’ 3^rd district, Democrat Marty Russo defeated Republican Robert Hanrahan for reelection and Democrat Abner J. Mikva defeated Republican Samuel H. Young for reelection in the 10^th district. In the 15^th, 40-year incumbent and Republican whip Leslie Arends retired, his successor being Democrat Tim Lee Hall. Hall would only hold the seat for one term before the district reverted to its traditional Republicanism.

In Indiana, Republicans were left with only two seats after election night. Losing were Republican Earl Landgrebe of the 2^nd district who had famously refused to support impeachment of President Nixon after the release of the Watergate tapes, Democrat Floyd Fithian defeating him by 22 points. By contrast, he had won reelection by over 9 points. In the 6^th district, 12-term incumbent William G. Bray lost reelection to Democrat David W. Evans by almost 5 points. Republicans Roger Zion, David Dennis, and William Hudnut were defeated by Philip Hayes, Philip Sharp, and Andrew Jacobs Jr. in the 8^th, 10^th, and 11^th districts.

In Iowa, the results went south for Republicans, but the election did see the election of Chuck Grassley, currently the longest serving federal politician, for his first term in the House, succeeding the legendary skinflint H.R. Gross, but Republicans William J. Scherle and Wiley Mayne lost reelection to Democrats Tom Harkin (who would be elected to the Senate in 1984) and Berkley Bedell in the 5^th and 6^th districts respectively.

In Louisiana, only one change occurred, and that was due to Democrat John Rarick losing renomination to radio host Jeff LaCaze. Rarick was extremely conservative, never supported a civil rights measure, and had had ties with the KKK. LaCaze was much more liberal, but the 6^th district was conservative, thus Republican W. Henson Moore won the open seat.

In Maine, the 1^st district was a bit of a surprise as Republican David F. Emery defeated Democrat Peter Kyros, who had been first elected in 1966, for reelection by under half a point.

In Maryland, Republican Lawrence Hogan of the 5^th district (father of former Governor Larry Hogan) sought to run for governor and retired, with Democrat Gladys Spellman winning the district.

In Massachusetts’ 5^th district, future Senator Paul Tsongas defeated Republican Paul W. Cronin by 21 points. Cronin was the last Republican to represent the district.

In Michigan’s 6^th district, Republican Charles Chamberlain opted not to run again, with Democrat Milton Carr succeeding him. In the 18^th district, Republican Robert J. Huber, an ultra-conservative, lost reelection to Democrat James Blanchard by nearly 19 points.

In Minnesota’s 6^th district, Democrat Richard Nolan won the election succeeding retiring Republican John M. Zwach.

In Montana’s 1^st district, future Democratic Senator Max Baucus defeated Republican Richard Shoup for reelection.

In Nevada’s at-Large district, Democrat James Santini defeated Republican David Towell for reelection.

In New Hampshire, Democrat Norman D’Amours succeeded Republican Louis Wyman, who had retired to run for the Senate.

In New Jersey, Republicans John Hunt, Charles Sandman, William B. Widnall, and Joseph J. Maraziti lost reelection to Democrats James J. Florio, William J. Hughes, Andrew Maguire, and Helen S. Meyner in the 1^st, 2^nd, 7^th, and 13^th districts respectively.

In New York, Republicans James Grover, Angelo Roncallo, and Carleton J. King lost reelection to Democrats Thomas Downey, Jerome Ambro, and Edward W. Pattison of the 2^nd, 3^rd, and 29^th districts respectively. Retiring Republicans Howard Robison and Henry P. Smith of the 27^th and 36^th districts respectively were succeeded by Democrats Matthew McHugh and John J. LaFalce.

In North Carolina, Republicans Wilmer Mizell and Earl Ruth of he 5^th and 8^th districts went down to defeat against Democrats Stephen Neal and Bill Hefner. Hefner would serve in Congress until 1999.

In Ohio’s 1^st district, Democrat Tom Luken lost reelection by 2 points to Republican Bill Gradison. However, Luken would run in the 2^nd district in 1976 and win, and represented the district until 1991. Democrat Ronald Mottl succeeded Republican William Minshall in the 23^rd district.

In Oklahoma’s 6^th district, Republican John Newbold “Happy” Camp lost reelection to Democrat Glenn English by 9 points. Did he live up to his nickname on election day?

In Oregon, Democrats won all House seats, with incumbent Republican Wendell Wyatt of the 1^st district retiring and being succeeded by Les AuCoin and Democrat Jim Weaver defeating Republican John Dellenback for reelection in the 4^th district.

In Pennsylvania, in the 7^th district Republican Lawrence G. Williams lost renomination and was succeeded by Democrat Robert W. Edgar while Democrat Frank Clark of the 25^th district lost reelection to Republican Gary Myers.

In South Carolina, Republican Edward Young of the 6^th district lost reelection to Democrat John Jenrette. Jenrette would later be implicated in the Abscam Scandal.

In South Dakota, Republicans scored a victory with Larry Pressler’s defeat of incumbent Democrat Frank Denholm in the 1^st district.

In Tennessee, Republicans LaMar Baker and Dan Kuykendall lost reelection in the 3^rd and 8^th districts to Marilyn Lloyd and Harold Ford respectively. Ford was the first ever black representative from Tennessee and served until 1997.

In Texas’s 13^th district, Republican Bob Price lost reelection to Democrat Jack Hightower.

In Virginia, Republicans Stan Parris and Joel Broyhill of the 8^th and 10^th districts respectively lost reelection to Democrats Herb Harris and Joe Fisher, a distinct shift from conservative to liberal representation as Harris and Fisher were of the national rather than Southern Democrat variety.

In Wisconsin, Republicans Vern Thomson and Harold Froehlich of the 3^rd and 8^th districts lost reelection to Democrats Alvin Baldus and Robert John Cornell respectively. Thomson had once been Wisconsin’s governor and been in Congress since 1961.

In the Senate, Republicans lost a net of four seats, not as terrible as it might have been given the national atmosphere, and three Republican incumbents won narrow reelections in Kansas’s Bob Dole (who won by two points), North Dakota’s Milton Young (who won by only 186 votes), and Oklahoma’s Henry Bellmon (who won by half a point), Also of note is that 30-year incumbent J. William Fulbright of Arkansas lost renomination to Governor Dale Bumpers by a 30 point margin. Bumpers was 20 years younger and popular while Fulbright, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, to many represented the Washington establishment and was out of touch.

In Colorado, Republican Peter Dominick, whose physical and psychological health was deteriorating due to an at-the-time un-diagnosed multiple sclerosis, lost reelection to future Democratic presidential contender Gary Hart by 18 points.

In Florida, Democrat Richard Stone succeeded the retiring Republican Edward Gurney.

In Kentucky, Republican Marlow Cook lost reelection to Democrat Wendell Ford. Cook was not unpopular and would have likely won reelection had the Democrats not nominated Ford, a highly popular governor.

In Nevada, Republicans scored a victory when Republican Paul Laxalt succeeded retiring Democrat Alan Bible. He defeated future Senator Harry Reid by less than half a point.

In New Hampshire, Democrat John A. Durkin narrowly defeated Republican Louis C. Wyman to succeed Republican Norris Cotton. It was one of the closest races in Senate history, with Cotton temporarily holding his seat once more until the outcome was determined.

In Vermont, Democrat Patrick Leahy defeated Republican Congressman Richard Mallary to succeed retiring Republican Senator George Aiken. Leahy was the first ever Democrat elected to the Senate from Vermont since the establishment of the Republican Party, and would remain in office until 2023.

July 29, 2026August 13, 2026 Fascinating Politics

Harry Lane: Oregon’s Independent Progressive

In the early 20^th century, a progressive wave swept the nation, a belief that government could, in some way or another, be used to improve society and reform politics. This wave far from missed Oregon and one of the most significant reformers in the state was Harry Lane (1855-1917). Lane was well-positioned to push reform, being a member of one of the state’s foremost political families: his grandfather, Joseph Lane, was a Confederate sympathizer who was briefly senator and candidate for vice president on the Southern Democratic ticket in 1860, and Lane County, Oregon, is named after him. His uncle, Lafayette Lane, was a Democratic member of the House from 1875 to 1877.

Attending Willamette University in Salem, he graduated in 1876 and two years later earned a medical degree from Williamette University College of Medicine. His postgrad work was with the College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York City. After Lane’s time there, he returned to Portland and opened up a prestigious medical practice, becoming the president of several medical societies.

In 1887, Governor Sylvester Pennoyer appointed Lane to head up the Oregon State Insane Asylum, and there he soon made waves as he was horrified by the deplorable conditions there and the abuse inmates suffered. His efforts to ferret out corruption in the system did not win him friends in the political realm and Pennoyer eventually forced him to step down in 1891. He became an advocate for public health, seeking to reduce the spread of contagious diseases, especially tuberculosis and would provide medical care free of charge for indigent patients, which won him a good deal of support for a political career. In 1902, Lane ran for the Oregon State Senate as an independent who supported direct democracy measures including initiative, referendum, and recall. Although unsuccessful, in 1904, Lane ran for mayor of Portland and won, serving two terms. During this time, he frequently battled with the Portland City Council, often at best serving as a veto pen. Lane notably proposed the creation of the annual Portland Rose Festival in 1907, which happens to this day, and was an advocate for the advancement of women. In 1905, Lane hosted a national convention for women’s suffrage and in 1908, he appointed Lola Baldwin as the first female police officer in American history. In 1912, Lane ran for the Senate, and a non-binding popular referendum between six candidates placed him in first at 30% of the vote, defeating conservative Republican Ben Selling by a little over a point.

Although the Oregon State Legislature in 1913 was solidly Republican, they saw fit to honor the result of the referendum. This was praised in the Cincinnati Post (1913), “Again take off your hat to Oregon!Again that State stands forth as a splendid example of government by the people. Again she puts her heel on the snake vile partizanism [the author’s word for what we call “partisanship”]. Again she demonstrates that there is honor in politics and thereby refutes the declaration that aims cannot be attained save through violence and anarchy.

In a popular primary the people of Oregon declared for a Democrat for U.S. Senator, Harry Lane. Oregon’s Legislature is strongly Republican, but that body almost unanimously voted the Democrat, Lane, into the Senate.

Whether Lane proves good, bad, or indifferent, the people of Oregon have got what they want, which is self-government” (4).

Senator Lane

As a senator, Lane was a supporter of numerous progressive causes. He was an early supporter of women’s suffrage as were many politicians of the West, and supported Prohibition. Lane staunchly supported breaking up monopolies, government ownership of utilities, and opposed imperialism. He also sought to reform relations between Americans and American Indians, him regarding trying to make them farmers a fundamentally flawed plan and deploring past and present ill-treatment, in this case much in contrast to his grandfather. A lot of President Wilson’s agenda got his approval in the first two years, although the same could be said for most of his Democratic colleagues. However, Lane had a conservative side to him and this was in his opposition to high taxes and high spending, and he detested waste. The Edgerton Earth (1916) described his opposition, “Senator Harry Lane of Oregon has an abhorrence of waste that amounts to almost an obsession. A needless expenditure of money gets under his cuticle like a woodtick and makes his life a burden. It isn’t that he is a tightwad either. In his personal affairs he spends with as little heed as anybody; but when it comes to wasting government funds – the very funds that a great many great legislators love to spend with much reckless abandon – Lane is a miser, watching every penny like a terrier dog watching a rat hole” (4). An example of this was on February 24, 1917, he was one of three Democrats to vote against a measure increasing the pay of government employees. In 1914, he was one of only two Senate Democrats to join a unified GOP in opposition to the Emergency Internal Revenue Tax Act, which raised numerous domestic taxes in response to declining tariff revenues from the outbreak of World War I. Lane expressed his opposition, “I think that more than $100,000,000 could easily be chopped off and the affairs of the Government conducted just as well as they are now. I do not feel we have the right to levy additional taxes as though we were in the midst of unexampled prosperity. I believe it is unbusinesslike and unpatriotic. I think it is gross carelessness” (The Cincinnati Enquirer, 5). There were also numerous other occasions in which he voted with the Republicans on tax issues, such as when he was the only Democrat to vote for Senator Lodge’s (R-Mass.) unsuccessful amendment on February 28, 1917, assessing the highest tariffs on nations in which their goods were produced with child labor not in comport with the Keating-Owen Act of 1916. Indeed, Lane’s independence was admired by many but by the end of his life he became reviled for it.

Lane and World War I

Another way in which Lane was independent was him being one of six senators to vote against declaring war on Germany for their resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare. Only two of the six senators would be reelected. Lane had cast his vote on April 4, 1917, against doctor’s orders as by this time he had for years been suffering from chronic kidney disease and by this time had advanced arteriosclerosis (Johnston, 42). An editorial in The Oregonian blasted him, “Next to being ashamed of Harry Lane for what he has done … the people of Oregon are ashamed of themselves for having sent Harry Lane to the United States Senate” (MacColl, 137-138). There were loud calls for his recall, but his foes would not get to have the pleasure of voting against him, as he died only seven weeks after his vote, on May 23^rd while recuperating in San Francisco at the age of 61 from a stroke. His vote against declaring war was the last he cast and the last vote that Lane made his position known on was in support of Senator Hiram Johnson’s (R-Calif.) amendment to the Espionage Act to strike a section prescribing rules for publicizing information regarding U.S. military operations in wartime on May 12th. His DW-Nominate score is a -0.154, which is quite a bit less liberal than you might have thought. Lane would be succeeded by Republican Charles McNary, who would become one of the most prominent national politicians from Oregon as Senate Republican leader and nominee for vice president in 1940.

References

Jensen, K. (2022, June 29). Oregon Encyclopedia.

Retrieved from

https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/lane_harry_1855_1917_

Johnston, R.D. (2003). The radical middle class: populist democracy and the question of capitalism in progressive era Portland, Oregon. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Kennedy, T.G. (2021, October 18). Portland Mayor Harry Lane. Medium.

Retrieved from

View at Medium.com

Lane Abhors Waste. (1916, March 24). The Edgerton Earth, 4.

Retrieved from

www.newspapers.com/image/1095809210/

Lane, Harry. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/5441/harry-lane

MacColl, E.K. (1979). “7: Patriotism and fear, 1917-1923”. The growth of a city. Portland, Oregon: The Georgian Press Company.

One More For Oregon. (1913, January 31). The Cincinnati Post, 4.

Retrieved from

www.newspapers.com/image761244334/

Volley Is Fired By Lane. (1914, October 14). The Cincinnati Enquirer, 5.

Retrieved from

www.newspapers.com/image/33466459/

p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 115%; background: transparent }em { font-style: italic }a:link { color: #000080; text-decoration: underline }

	hsp62uk6@outlook.com on A Deeper Dive into the Bricker…
	The Equal Time Rule… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…
	The equal time rule… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…
	De gelijke-tijdregel… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…
	De gelijke-tijdregel… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…

	hsp62uk6@outlook.com on A Deeper Dive into the Bricker…
	The Equal Time Rule… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…
	The equal time rule… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…
	De gelijke-tijdregel… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…
	De gelijke-tijdregel… on Lar “America First” Daly: The…

Mad Politics: The Bizarre, Fascinating, and Unknown of American Political History

What your history class missed!

Was the Only Cop Sent to the Electric Chair in U.S. History for Crimes in Office Framed?

“If-by-Whiskey”: A Classic All-American Fallacy

The Rise and Fall of J. Herbert Burke

1968: The North Carolina Faithless Elector Case

Edith Green: The Beaver State’s Education Champion

The 1912 Congressional Election: The Winds of Change

Great Conservatives from American History #33: Charles Wiggins – The Great Nixon Defender

Great Conservatives from American History #32: John Taber – The Empire State’s “Meat Ax” of Spending

The 1974 Midterms: Watergate Fallout

Harry Lane: Oregon’s Independent Progressive