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:

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

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.

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.

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

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 }

There was a certain ethos in the political scene of the Progressive Era that was strongly geared towards reform and a strong sense of right and wrong. This was characteristic of Michigan’s Louis Convers Cramton (1875-1966), who frequently stood for reform in his day, albeit in a Republican framework.

Cramton graduated with a law degree from the law department of the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor in 1899 and was admitted to the bar that year, but moved away from law in 1905 to take up journalism, publishing the Lapeer County Clarion until 1923. He also served as law clerk of the Michigan Senate for three terms as well as Michigan deputy commissioner of railroads in 1907 and secretary of the Michigan Railroad Commission from 1907 to 1909. These roles in state government got him a sufficient resume to run for state office. In 1909, Cramton was elected to the Michigan State House, where he served a term. In 1910, he ran for the Republican nomination for Congress from the 7^th district, but lost. Cramton tried again in 1912 when incumbent Henry McMorran was retiring and prevailed as well as won the election.

Congressman Cramton

As a member of Congress, the newly elected Cramton found himself to sometimes be in support of President Wilson’s New Freedom agenda. For instance, he voted for the Federal Reserve Act, the first version of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act (although he voted against the final version), curbing speculation in cotton futures, and legislation expanding the power of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Cramton was also an early supporter of women’s suffrage. However, to the consternation of organized labor, he supported bonuses in Navy funding bills to encourage efficiency and again crossed them in his opposition to the Howell-Barkley bill in 1924. He was also a loyal Republican on the issues of tariffs and income taxes, and his record did seem to get more conservative after the Wilson Administration. Cramton nonetheless consistently supported veterans’ bonus measures. In 1920, he managed California Senator Hiram Johnson’s unsuccessful bid for the Republican presidential nomination (Port Huron Times Herald). In 1922, he voted for the Dyer Anti-Lynching bill and was known as a strong proponent of funding for the historically black Howard University, which would award him an honorary Doctor of Laws degree in 1945. Cramton’s foremost achievements in Congress were the establishment of several national parks, including Isle Royale National Park in Lake Superior. He also wrote legislation establishing the George Washington Memorial Parkway in Virginia and Maryland and the restoration of historical monuments at Williamsburg, Jamestown, and Yorktown, Virginia. Cramton also lent his strong support to the creation of the National Park Service in 1916, thus becoming known as the “godfather of national parks” (Detroit Free Press).

Cramton and 1920s Law Enforcement

If there was an individual in the House who stood strongest for Prohibition on the Republican side of the aisle, it was Cramton, known as a Congressional spokesman for the Anti-Saloon League. In 1926, he sponsored a bill to establish bureaus of prohibition and customs in the Treasury Department. However, by 1930, support for Prohibition had dried up considerably, and Cramton faced a strong primary challenger in Jesse P. Wolcott, who ran as an opponent of Prohibition. Wolcott narrowly edged out Cramton in an anti-Prohibition wave that swept the state, with a recount occurring in Lansing before the result was finalized. Cramton’s DW-Nominate score stands at a 0.49, which is quite a bit more conservative than you might have thought given my description of his record.

Out of Office

President Hoover found use for Cramton, appointing him to be a special assistant to the Secretary of the Interior, where he conducted studies that resulted in the creation of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area. In 1934, Cramton was elected a state circuit judge, where he served until his loss of reelection in November 1941. Although Cramton was out of the national political picture during the Roosevelt years, he did reminisce in retirement, “As a Republican, I never cared for Franklin D. Roosevelt, but if it wasn’t for his social security program I would be worse off today” (Detroit Free Press). Indeed, in his last years, Cramton was not a wealthy man, his only income being from Social Security and a small pension for his service in Michigan’s state House. Speaking of…

Second Act

In 1948, Cramton made a comeback when at the age of 73 he was again elected to the Michigan State House. In 1951, he succeeded in getting a key anti-crime tool reinstated in Michigan law, the one-man grand jury rather than the three-man jury that got tried and proved ineffective, and he had the support of most Republicans and some Democrats (Kulsea). He was quite the active legislator and strongly pushed for an anti-discrimination law in 1952, but was troubled when many of his fellow Republicans were unwilling to give him the backing that he had received for his anti-crime measure in the previous year, with half of them walking out when he rose up to speak on the matter. Cramton teared up at this, “I am becoming more at home on this side (Democratic) of the House than on the Republican. I have supported the Republican party for half a century. I never thought I would wee the time that Republicans would leave their seats rather than hear a Republican discuss the vital question of human rights” (Kulsea). His great concern for civil rights was interesting given that his district was almost entirely white. In 1955, Cramton succeeded in getting his state’s Fair Employment Practices Act into law, which he authored. Although Cramton had not always agreed with Senator Robert La Follette during his lifetime, he did admire the man and stated to a newsman regarding the senator’s autobiography, “Read it and enjoy it and remember that this country and this government came from the work of men like LaFollette. Everyone should struggle for more representative government, and cheer on those fighting for that cause” (Kulsea). By the time Cramton was 84 in 1960, his health was declining so he finally retired from politics. The following year, Howard University dedicated a school after him for his strong advocacy for the university and black education. Cramton lived just long enough to see passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, dying on June 23, 1966 at the age of 90. Although in some ways, he was distinctly conservative, he had a certain social awareness and moral certitude that was characteristic of the Progressive Era, making him a bit of a mixed figure. His son, Louis K. Cramton, also served in the Michigan House as a Republican, from 1971 to 1981.

References

Cramton, Louis Convers. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/2144/louis-convers-cramton

Ex-Congressman Louis Cramton Is Dead At 90. (1966, June 24). Port Huron Times Herald, 1.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/209694394

Kulsea, W.C. (1966, June 29). Louis C. Cramton: Man Far Ahead Of His Time. The Saginaw News, 18.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1108860225

Louis C. Cramton. (1966, June 29). Detroit Free Press, 6.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/97895591

Louis C. Cramton; Was Called The Godfather of U.S. Parks. (1966, June 25). Detroit Free Press, 2.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/97883361

In 1936, liberal Marion Zioncheck of Seattle, perhaps having cracked under the strain of hard work in Congress, began displaying numerous symptoms of mental illness. However, he knew that the public would not be interested in him having another term, thus he chose not to run and endorsed his friend, Warren Grant Magnuson (1905-1989). Sadly, Zioncheck committed suicide before the end of his term. Magnuson picked up where his friend left off.

Interestingly, although Magnuson’s official birth date is April 12, 1905, he was born to parents that he never knew, and it is possible that this isn’t his real birth date. As an infant he was adopted by William and Emma Magnuson, who named him Warren. He would play football in high school and earned a Bachelor of Laws from the University of Washington School of Law. He was always a Democrat, campaigning for Al Smith in 1928 and backing A. Scott Bullitt’s run for governor, but the time for Democrats had not quite come yet. With the Great Depression, Magnuson and the Democrats soared, with him serving as as special prosecutor of King County, and from 1933 to 1935 he was in the Washington State House, and from 1934 to 1936 was elected prosecutor of King County.

As noted in previous posts, Washington was a state particularly associated with the political left in the 1930s, even radically so. After his election to Congress in 1936, Magnuson was almost entirely faithful to the New Deal and to FDR’s foreign policy with the sole exception of his vote against military conscription in 1940. He also voted against the Reciprocal Trade Act extension that year, and he was not alone among Washington Democrats in regarding trade policy as harming the state’s lumber industry. Magnuson was also quick to have an achievement while in office; in 1937, he was a one of the sponsors of the National Cancer Institute Act. Magnuson briefly served his country in the Navy during World War II, but chose to stay in office after President Roosevelt in 1942 ordered legislators to either choose to serve in Congress or the military. In 1943, Magnuson sponsored the law repealing the Chinese Exclusion Act after Madame Kai Shek delivered a speech before Congress in which she noted the contradiction of having China as an ally while refusing to admit its people. On November 13, 1944, Senator Homer T. Bone resigned as he had been confirmed for a federal judgeship and Magnuson was elected in a special election to finish his term on December 14, 1944. He had faced Tacoma Mayor Harry P. Cain, would join him in the Senate with his victory in the 1946 election. Magnuson proved a strong supporter of President Truman and the Fair Deal and was a firm friend of organized labor and a foe of Republican-backed tax reduction. However, he would differ in his support of a wool tariff in 1947.

In 1955, Magnuson became the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee. In this post he weighed in heavily on regulating the market, pushing for consumer protection laws, auto safety laws, and other measures. He was critical in limiting oil tankers traveling through the Puget Sound. Even though President Eisenhower won Washington in his reelection bid, Magnuson was so popular at the time that he won all counties against former Republican Governor Arthur B. Langlie. He was not only popular with the voters, but also his colleagues given his amiable and agreeable nature. Magnuson also was a bit of a party guy, having being a hard drinker and having numerous girlfriends since his divorce from his first wife in 1935 until settling in 1964. His colleague, Scoop Jackson, would from time to time lecture him, “Maggie, you gotta live a better life!” (Scott) From 1955 to 1959, the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action gave him a 15% for how often he sided with their positions. His strongest area of conservatism was his support for some foreign aid cuts and an occasional anti-communist amendment in foreign policy.

Magnuson was a strong supporter of the New Frontier, and although he was no less or more liberal by 1962, he attracted a strong challenge in Republican Richard G. Christensen, a Lutheran minister, who held him to less than a five point margin. He also proved a strong supporter of the Great Society, and played a significant role in the passage of the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967. Magnuson was, unsurprisingly, a strong supporter of civil rights and helped get the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to passage. In 1968, Magnuson faced Republican State Senator and future Congressman Jack Metcalf for reelection, but he won by nearly 30 points. The following ad certainly helped:

A Power Team: Maggie and Scoop

Magnuson was commonly nicknamed “Maggie”, which dated to his high school football football, but he was not fond of the nickname and friends would not refer to him by that name. He and Henry “Scoop” Jackson represented Washington together for 28 years, and although the two men roughly shared the same ideological space, they could have some differences. For instance, on the Vietnam War, Magnuson differed from Jackson as he was a dove, voting for the Cooper-Church Amendment and the McGovern-Hatfield “End the War” Amendment in 1970. During the Eisenhower Administration, Magnuson had been more likely to favor foreign aid cuts than Jackson, but largely agreed with him on getting tough on crime, voting with him on “no knock” warrants in 1970 as well as reinstatement of the death penalty in 1974. Both of them also strongly aligned on keeping federal funding for the Supersonic Transport, a Boeing project.

The Apex of Power

In 1974, Magnuson won reelection by over 24 points, once again against Jack Metcalf. The following year, he would collaborate with Senator Frank Moss (D-Utah) to pass the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which sets certain standards for products that have warranties to prevent warranties that are misleading to consumers. In the next year, he collaborated with Senator Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) to pass the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Management Act, With the election of President Jimmy Carter, Magnuson would reach the height of his power; after Senator John McClellan (D-Ark.) died in 1977, he moved from Commerce to Appropriations. As chairman of the Appropriations Committee, he steered a lot of federal money to Washington, as senators usually do for their home states. Vice President Walter Mondale joked, “He is scrupulously fair with federal funds; one half for Washington state, one half for the rest of the country” (Scott). He was also President Pro Tem after the retirement of James Eastland (D-Miss.). In 1980, Magnuson opposed the scope of trucking deregulation proposed by the Carter Administration, and wanted to maintain stronger standards for trucking certificates to be given out, but his effort to do so failed.

Although Magnuson had overwhelmingly won in 1974, six years and a Republican officeholder made a difference. By 1980, he was a 75-year-old diabetic and he looked it, but worse was this time it was the Democrats who were saddled with an unpopular president; Carter had not won Washington in 1976. Although he got advice to retire, he did not heed it (Saxon). The result was Republican Slade Gorton, who was quite a contrast to Magnuson, being thin and 23 years younger, defeating him by over seven points. From 1947 to 1980, Magnuson sided with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 78% of the time and the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action 13% of the time from 1955 to 1980. His DW-Nominate score stands at -0.325, thus he overall stands as a little bit more liberal than his colleague, Scoop Jackson. Despite Magnuson’s apparently worse health than Scoop’s with his diabetes causing him increasing health problems in his last years, he’d outlive him by six years, succumbing to advanced diabetes and heart failure on May 20, 1989 at the age of 84. To this day, Magnuson is Washington’s longest serving senator and also the longest serving incumbent to be defeated for reelection.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Magnuson, Warren Grant. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/5913/warren-grant-magnuson

Saxon, W. (1989, May 21). Warren G. Magnuson Dies at 84; Held Powerful Positions in Senate. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Scott, K. (2017, August 9). Opinion: Our Senior-Junior Senator. The Wenatchee World.

Retrieved from

https://www.cantwell.senate.gov/news/news-about-maria/opinion-our-senior-junior-senator

Van Dyk, T. (2005, April 13). Warren Magnuson was one of a kind. Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Retrieved from

https://www.seattlepi.com/local/opinion/article/warren-magnuson-was-one-of-a-kind-1170826.php