Fascinating Politics

Ralph Yarborough: The Last Liberal Senator From Texas (As of Writing)

In 2026, a truly rare and unique event may happen; a Democrat may win a Senate seat in Texas. In the past, I have been dismissive about such a possibility, and so far it has proven right. However, Republican voters in Texas made in what my opinion was a spectacularly bad decision in nominating Ken Paxton, a man with a metric butt ton of baggage. There is a very real possibility that Paxton is the first Republican to lose a Senate election to a Democrat since 1988, and from what I’ve seen of James Talarico, he seems like quite a liberal. 2026 would also be momentous because it would be the first time in over sixty years that Texans elected a liberal to the Senate. The last liberal to be elected to the Senate from Texas was Ralph Webster Yarborough (1903-1996).

Early Career

Yarborough had started his political career as an acolyte of James Allred, a supporter of the New Deal, and as an assistant to Allred as attorney general filed suit against big oil companies. The election of Allred as governor resulted in the appointment of Yarborough as a judge of Travis County. Although the state increasingly moved to the right with Allred’s successors being Pappy O’Daniel and Coke Stevenson, Yarborough did not, and became the leader of the liberal faction of the party.

In 1952, Yarborough was planning to run for Attorney General but Governor Allan Shivers, leader of the conservative wing of the party, outright told him he wouldn’t be running (Hill). So instead he challenged Shivers for renomination, but lost. He tried again against Shivers in 1954 but lost in a bitter campaign, and a third time running was his narrow loss to Senator Price Daniel. However, this loss to Senator Daniel opened up another opportunity for him.

Senator Yarborough

In 1957, Senator Daniel resigned to serve as Governor of Texas, and in a hotly contested election, Yarborough won a plurality against conservative Democratic Congressman Martin Dies Jr. and Republican Thad Hutcheson; the conservative vote had been split. He won the primary for a full term against conservative and former interim Senator William Blakley by 17 points and then the general election in 1958 for a full term by 51 points, with his populist slogan being, “Let’s put the jam on the lower shelf so the little people can reach it”.

Yarborough was a strong supporter of both the New Frontier and the Great Society. Many Texas politicians at best only supported some of these, and some, such as his Republican colleague John Tower and Congressmen John Dowdy, O. Clark Fisher, Omar Burleson, and Joe Pool, were strongly opposed.

Yarborough and Civil Rights

Ralph Yarborough was the only senator from a former Confederate state to vote for all of the major civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s. He even went against President Johnson’s preference by voting for Senator Kennedy’s (D-Mass.) unsuccessful anti-poll tax amendment to the Voting Rights Act. Yarborough did, however, vote for Senator Gore’s (D-Tenn.) motion to recommit the Civil Rights Act to ease up on the school segregation funding ban and in 1957 he had, as had all other Southern senators, backed two key limiting amendments to the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

Struggle with Strom

Shortly after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, President Johnson nominated former Florida Governor LeRoy Collins to administer the Community Relations Service under the law. Commerce Committee Chairman Warren Magnuson (D-Wash.) had had trouble getting enough senators in the chamber to have a quorum to proceed. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, who opposed the nomination, stood at the door to the Senate to block any senators arriving late. Yarborough appeared and laughingly said, “Come on in, Strom, and help us get a quorum” and Thurmond lightheartedly responded, “If I can keep you out, you won’t go in, and if you can drag me in, I’ll stay there” (U.S. Senate). The two proceeded to wrestle, with Thurmond, who was 30 pounds lighter and in better physical shape, wrestled Yarborough to the ground. “Tell me to release you, Ralph, and I will,” said Thurmond (U.S. Senate). However, Yarborough was defiant and wouldn’t say so. Chairman Warren Magnuson finally said, “Come on, you fellows, let’s break this up”, and Yarborough made a clean exit by grunting, “I have to yield to the order of my chairman” (U.S. Senate). Collins was approved by the committee 16 to 1 and would be approved by the full Senate 53-8.

Second Term

In 1964, Yarborough faced a 40-year-old Republican named George H.W. Bush. Although liberalism was not necessarily popular in Texas, Republican John Tower’s election to the Senate in 1961 was considered a fluke at the time (yet he would serve until 1985) and Republican nominee Barry Goldwater was deeply unpopular at the time. Yarborough defeated Bush by over 12 points.

During the Great Society Congress, Yarborough staunchly supported Lyndon Johnson on Great Society programs, but was less enthused about foreign aid spending and at times joined Wayne Morse (D-Ore.) and Ernest Gruening (D-Alaska), who had become liberal skeptics of foreign aid, in opposition to foreign aid increases. Yarborough also supported repealing the “right to work” section of the Taft-Hartley Act and opposed Minority Leader Everett Dirksen’s (R-Ill.) proposed Constitutional amendments for legislative apportionment and school prayer. In 1967, he pushed unsuccessfully for an amendment impounding 10% of railroad profits during the time in which a railroad strike settlement was in effect, but it failed 23-59 on June 7th.

By 1970, Texans were tiring of the liberalism of Ralph Yarborough; he had a dovish voting record on Vietnam, supported busing, and voted against the nominations of both Clement Haynsworth of South Carolina and G. Harrold Carswell of Florida to the Supreme Court. On the latter, Senator Walter Mondale (D-Minn.) said to him, “You did right but your vote could beat you”, to which Yarborough responded, “I know” (Abilene Reporter-News). Republican Bush, now with time in the House under his belt, was ready to challenge him again. However, the Democrats beat him to it…former Congressman Lloyd Bentsen, known as a moderate, defeated Yarborough for renomination. Yarborough was moderately liberal by the standards of ADA but strongly liberal by ACA standards, siding with the former organization 75% of the time and the latter only 8% of the time. His DW-Nominate score is a -0.416, making him only less liberal than Congressmen Henry Gonzalez of San Antonio and Bob Eckhardt of Houston. Bentsen would hold the seat for the Democrats and would later be the Democratic nominee for vice president in 1988 as well as President Clinton’s first Secretary of the Treasury.

In 1972, Yarborough at 69 tried to return to the Senate, but his loss in the Democratic primary to Harold “Barefoot” Sanders, who lost to John Tower, marked the end of his political career. He died on January 27, 1996, at the age of 92.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Hill, R. (2018, March 11). Texas Liberal: Ralph Yarborough. The Knoxville Focus.

Retrieved from

https://www.knoxfocus.com/archives/this-weeks-focus/texas-liberal-senator-ralph-yarborough/

Odintz, M. Ralph Yarborough: A Legacy of Progressive Politics in the Senate. Texas Historical Association.

Retrieved from

https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/yarborough-ralph-webster

Senators Eulogize Ralph Yarborough. (1970, December 22). Abilene Reporter-News, 4.

Senators Wrestle to Settle Nomination. U.S. Senate.

Retrieved from

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/pinned.htm

Yarborough, Ralph Webster. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/10414/ralph-webster-yarborough

Fascinating Politics

Liberty Lobby Judges the 87th Congress, House

Willis Carto, the radical right founder, treasurer, and de facto head of Liberty Lobby.

Last week, an article from conservative columnist Erick Erickson covered a troubling phenomenon brewing among the right that has taken a stand against liberty, most notably in the figure of Charles Haywood in the article, “The Midwestern Fuehrerbunker Driving the Right Off the Cliff”. Indeed, the trending towards authoritarianism in the name of traditionalism places excessive emphasis on order. The efforts of Haywood and others in infiltrating the conservative movement and its organizations remind me of a figure who like Haywood was from Indiana that the conservative movement figuratively expelled from its ranks: Willis Carto, who would eventually be the subject of multiple exposes as pro-Nazi and peddled antisemitism and racism through means covert and overt in his long life. This organization he formed to get on the map and to serve as a springboard for a right-wing dictatorship when the time was right. Liberty Lobby attracted some conservatives but also some radical right cranks and bigots on to its Board of Policy. I had known that this organization issued ratings but I was and still am far more interested in Americans for Constitutional Action (ACA) as a good way to judge right and left from a conservative perspective in the past, and examining these ratings has certainly not changed my mind. However, this alternative take is of interest too, especially since I found the criterion by which the first two years of the Kennedy Administration was judged. I am going to interchangeably refer to the makers of the criterion as Liberty Lobby and Carto as they were by and large one and the same.

Liberty Lobby’s ratings of Congress are rather limited and simplistic; only 10 votes are counted for the entirety of the Congress in both legislative bodies; by contrast the liberal Americans for Democratic Action counted 10 votes for 1961 and 8 votes for 1962 in the House while ACA counted 12 votes in 1961 and 11 votes in 1962 for the House. Carto was strict in grading but also simultaneously leaves out numerous issues that were considered both by ADA and ACA as salient for determining ideology:

. The Ayres-Kitchin conservative substitute for minimum wage legislation in 1961.

. The 1961 Area Redevelopment Act.

. Rep. Cannon’s (D-Mo.) 1961 effort to restore funding for power generation at the Hanford plutonium reactor.

. The failed effort in 1961 to get President Kennedy’s federal aid to education bill considered in the House.

. The Housing Act of 1961.

Rather than these measures, Carto sees fit to include the vote for a Constitutional amendment banning the poll tax and the bill establishing the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency. Liberty Lobby’s analysis is quite limited given the exclusion of numerous issues that I would consider highly ideologically salient and his emphasis seems strong on the nationalistic; 4 of 10 issues connect in some way to nationalism. Also, instead of counting the Mason (R-Ill.) substitute in the House like ADA and ACA do, Liberty Lobby counts the final vote on the Trade Expansion Act, which dings a lot of rural representatives.

The following votes in the House were considered to be of greatest importance by Carto:

1. Expand the Rules Committee

Speaker Sam Rayburn’s (D-Tex.) resolution to expand the House Rules Committee from 12 to 15 members for the 87th Congress, adding two Democrats and one Republican. This was intended to counter its chairman, Howard W. Smith (D-Va.), a staunch opponent of liberal legislation.

Adopted 217-212: D 195-64; R 22-148, 1/31/61.

Yea = +, Nay = –

2. Establish Arms Control and Disarmament Agency

Passage of the bill establishing the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in the State Department to implement arms control and to manage international negotiations for arms limitations.

Passed 290-54: D 194-16; R 96-38, 9/19/61.

Yea = -, Nay = +

3. Disapprove Creation of Department of Urban Affairs

Resolution disapproving of President Kennedy’s executive order creating the Department of Urban Affairs. Conservatives in the Republican Party objected to the growth of government but there was an additional incentive for Southern Democrats to vote against as the proposed cabinet head would be Robert Weaver, who was black.

Disapproved 264-150: D 111-137; R 153-13, 2/21/62.

Yea = +, Nay = –

4. Raise National Debt to $308 Billion.

Passed 211-192: D 202-39; R 9-153, 6/14/62.

Yea = -, Nay = +

5. Defeat Food and Agriculture Bill

Rep. Paul Findley (R-Ill.) motion to recommit and thus kill the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962, which provided for supply management controls for wheat, corn, and other feed grains.

Passed 215-205: D 48-204; R 167-1, 6/21/62.

6. Trade Expansion Act

Passage of the bill granting the president expanded authority to negotiate trade agreements and provides for adjustment assistance to employers and workers harmed by trade agreements.

Passed 298-125: D 218-35; R 80-90, 6/28/62.

Yea = -, Nay = +

7. Foreign Aid Authorization

Passage of the bill basically granting President Kennedy’s request for foreign aid funds for fiscal year 1963.

Passed 250-164, 7/12/62.

Yea = -, Nay = +

8. Poll Tax Ban Amendment

Adoption of the resolution proposing a Constitutional amendment banning poll taxes in federal elections and primaries.

Adopted 295-86: D 163-71; R 132-15, 8/27/62.

Yea = -, Nay = +

9. Kill Public Works Program

Rep. William Cramer (R-Fla.) motion to recommit, and thus kill, the bill establishing an accelerated public works program.

Defeated 192-221: D 44-202; R 148-19, 8/29/62.

Yea = +, Nay = –

10. United Nations Bond Bill

Passage of the bill providing for up to $100 million in loans to the United Nations.

Passed 257-134: D 191-46; R 66-88, 9/14/62.

Yea = -, Nay = +

I have not found out what issues Liberty Lobby graded for the Senate yet, but I have learned that only Senators Strom Thurmond (D-S.C.) and John Tower (R-Tex.) got 100%. The representatives that got 100% by Liberty Lobby were:

Republicans

Edgar Hiestand, Calif.

John Rousselot, Calif.

James B. Utt, Calif.

Noah Mason, Ill.

Earl Wilson, Ind.

August Johansen, Mich.

Clare Hoffman, Mich.

James Battin, Mont.

Ralph Beermann, Neb.

John H. Ray, N.Y.

Gordon Scherer, Ohio

Samuel Devine, Ohio

Ellis Y. Berry, S.D.

Bruce Alger, Tex.

William K. Van Pelt, Wis.

Democrats

Joe Waggonner, La.

Otto Passman, La.

Jamie Whitten, Miss.

John Bell Williams, Miss.

W. Arthur Winstead, Miss.

William Colmer, Miss.

John Dowdy, Tex.

Omar Burleson, Tex.

I should note that scoring a 100% on this does not necessarily mean alignment with Carto’s noxious views on race and religion. For instance, Samuel Devine of Ohio would later vote for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and some others, such as Gordon Scherer of Ohio and William K. Van Pelt of Wisconsin, had voted for previous civil rights measures. As for the scorecard, it is below:

87th Congress Liberty LobbyDownload
Fascinating Politics

Conservatives and Liberals on the South During the Civil Rights Era

Part of my research involves an interest in how legislators are perceived, and a significant perception difference between liberals and conservatives exists with those who represented the states of the former Confederacy. An interesting article from 1943 from a Southern perspective argued that the liberal Americans for Democratic Action’s (ADA) predecessor organization, Union for Democratic Action, was anti-Southern in its tabulation of key votes. This would prove increasingly true after 1964 with ADA taking on a bit more of a new left perspective, in which certain lopsided votes were counted against legislators, most notably a 1967 proposal to withdraw troops from Vietnam, which only got 18 votes from representatives.

Robert W. Hemphill (D-S.C.), one of the legislators most disagreed on by conservatives and liberals.

Conservatives were significantly less impressed with the conservatism of Southern Democrats that liberals saw. Indeed, some differences in evaluation are of magnitudes in difference. Take Thomas S. Gettys of South Carolina for instance; he served entirely within in a period that both the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action (ACA) and ADA were grading, and Gettys only sides with ACA 63% of the time and ADA 7% of the time. This is an astounding 30 point difference: by ACA standards he fits within what I consider the moderate range of 35-65%, while by ADA he’s an ultra-conservative. DW-Nominate places him at -0.122 by contrast, closer to the conservative assessment. Same goes for Robert Hemphill of South Carolina, who was the most favorable of South Carolina’s Democrats in the early 1960s to national Democratic programs and represented a district in the poorer northern portion of the state that was more favorable towards New Deal liberalism than the ; ADA only finds him 34% liberal while ACA finds him only 33% conservative, this is a 33 point differential in how these organizations seem him. Hemphill’s DW-Nominate score is -0.129, which fits closer with the conservative conception of Hemphill. Americans for Democratic Action regarded Southern Democrats as 17 points more conservative than Americans for Constitutional Action, with the discrepancy with Southern Republicans being considerably less at 6.6 points. Interestingly, among politicians who fall completely within the range ACA was scoring, the discrepancy is even higher, with Southern Democrats being 20.6 points more conservative by ADA than ACA with Republicans only at 7.4 points discrepancy. There are a few outside cases in which legislators from the South who are considered ultra-conservative by ACA are considered just slightly less so by ADA, such as Texas’s Bruce Alger and Virginia’s William Scott, but the differential is a mere two points. ACA and ADA being far more in agreement on where Southern Republicans stand vs. where Southern Democrats stand indicates that ACA places stronger emphasis on certain old New Deal issues; they count more agricultural votes and in particular their 1959 scoring stands out for counting votes in the House that hardly any Democrats voted their position on; these include a motion to delete a direct housing loan program for veterans, overriding President Eisenhower’s veto of a public works bill, and an increased permissible interest rate for government bonds. ADA counted more positions that strengthen the Southern Democratic claim to conservatism, such as a 1959 vote on Hawaii statehood and a 1960 vote on the strengthening McCulloch-Celler Amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1960. Indeed, civil rights votes being counted more by ADA than ACA further emphasizes Southern conservatism, while ACA’s greater focus on spending and programs that brought more unity between Northern and Southern Democrats. Also, Southern Democrats really suffer under liberal scoring because of ADA’s much stronger emphasis on defense and Vietnam votes than ACA’s. The details of legislator scores of agreement with ADA and ACA are below…legislators in BOLD served entirely within the period that ACA was assessing politicians.`

ACA v ADADownload

References

Gettys, Thomas Smithwick. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/10728/thomas-smithwick-gettys

Hemphill, Robert Witherspoon. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/4299/robert-witherspoon-hemphill

The South Isn’t Anti-New Deal — The New Deal Is Anti-Southern. (1943, August 21). The Southern Watchman, p. 2.

Retrieved from

https://fascinatingpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/southern_watchman_1943_08_21_2.pdf

Fascinating Politics

Charles E. Bennett: “In God We Trust”

Today Florida seems like blood red Republican territory. However, it used to be even more solidly Democratic, and this was how it was when the state’s longest serving representative in history was elected to Congress. This man, who served 44 years in the House, was Charles Edward Bennett (1910-2003).

A lawyer by profession, Bennett gained prominence in his home of Jacksonville and was elected to the Florida House in 1941. However, the following year he resigned to serve in World War II, and in the process contracted polio, which paralyzed his legs for the rest of his life. He managed to walk with the assistance of canes, crutches, or leg braces. In 1948, Bennett challenged incumbent Emory Price of the 2nd Congressional district, based in Jacksonville, for renomination and won. This was tantamount to election in Florida at the time. Bennett was a moderate during the Truman Administration, sometimes going with and sometimes going against it. His record varied over his long time in Congress, at times being quite conservative and at other times being accommodating to the national Democrats.

In 1955, Bennett sponsored the legislation that impacts what we see every day: adding “In God We Trust” on all currency, which was passed unanimously. He said of the legislation, ”In these days when imperialistic and materialistic communism seeks to attack and destroy freedom, we should continuously look for ways to strengthen the foundations of our freedom. At the base of our freedom is our faith in God and the desire of Americans to live by his will and his guidance. As long as this country trusts in God, it will prevail” (The New York Times).

Bennett’s record on civil rights was, save for his vote for the 24th Amendment in 1962 (banning poll taxes in federal elections), entirely one of opposition until his vote for the Voting Rights Act of 1965. His vote against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution he would later say were the two votes he regretted (Cirincione). For the duration of the Johnson presidency, Bennett was with the conservative wing of his party; he voted against key Great Society programs including the Economic Opportunity Act, Medicare, a permanent food stamp program, and federal aid to education.

In 1967, Bennett sponsored legislation creating the House Ethics Committee. However, he would be denied its chairmanship multiple times, and would only serve a term as its chair in the 96th (1979-1981) Congress. He was known as “Mr. Clean”, and his reputation for ethics went untarnished in his long career. Bennett would not take contributions or private gifts from defense contractors. Although certainly his clean reputation was appreciated by many, some fellow legislators thought he was a bit uptight. As the 1980 edition of The Almanac of American Politics described him, “He opposes unofficial office accounts, outside income for members and congressional pay raises, which led one colleague to call him ‘a bit too pious.'” (The Jacksonville Times-Union) Indeed, his reputation for ethics also came with a reputation for diligence and hard work. Late in his career, he described himself thus, ”I’m not a brilliant person. I do produce some good legislation. But I’ve never been accused of being a genius. But I feel that being there and making the vote is my duty and responsibility” (The New York Times). And indeed, Bennett was sure to be there…for his entire career, he never missed a roll call vote.

Although Bennett’s district overtime started voting for Republican candidates for president, he was sufficiently popular to continue to handily win reelection, and often did support the positions of President Richard Nixon. However, Bennett did dissent from Nixon on some issues; in 1971 he began differing with the Nixon Administration on Vietnam, supporting proposals for a timetable for withdrawal. Bennett also could vote the liberal position on environmental issues, siding with environmentalists against the construction of the Alaska pipeline in 1973. Indeed, Bennett prized conservation and his efforts resulted in the creation of several environmental reserves. On social issues, he was broadly conservative, opposing busing to achieve desegregation, supporting the death penalty, and a school prayer amendment. In 1977, Bennett suffered a tragedy when one of his sons, Charles Jr., died of a drug overdose, which got his focus on combating illegal drugs. However, he softened up a bit on his opposition to some social programs; in 1971 he supported the creation of a national childcare system, but this was ultimately vetoed by President Nixon. Bennett also supported the creation of the Legal Services Corporation in 1974. On foreign policy, Bennett was often skeptical of foreign aid and in 1979 opposed implementing the Panama Canal Treaties.

During the 1980s, he was a prominent skeptic of President Reagan’s military buildup, and opposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, the B-2 Bomber, and the MX Missile. Bennett had previously supported certain military expenditures, such as the B-1 Bomber and the Neutron Bomb. Despite this, Bennett was passed up for chairmanship of the House Armed Services Committee in 1985, the post going to Les Aspin (D-Wis.),who had a strong record as a skeptic of high defense spending. Defense policy was not his only difference with Reagan; he also voted against his tax reduction proposal in 1981. However, Bennett could justify this on his personal sense of fiscal conservatism, and in 1982 he sided with the Administration in support of a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. His record, particularly in the second half of the Reagan presidency got more liberal, more in accord with national Democrats but on social issues he largely remained conservative. In 1990, Bennett was one of the champions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. In 1992, although he initially sought to run for another term, he opted to retire after his wife suffered a stroke. Bennett’s lifetime scores by the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action and the liberal Americans for Democratic Action are almost the inverse of each other; 62% and 39% respectively. His DW-Nominate score is a -0.088, which is high for a Democrat.In 2002, his health deteriorated due to a heart attack and stroke and he died on September 6, 2003 at the age of 92. Bennett is without doubt among the most honorable of the politicians that the public has sent to Washington.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Charles E. Bennett: A noble life. (2003, September 9). The Jacksonville Times-Union.

Retrieved from

https://web.archive.org/web/20160303173743/http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/090903/opi_13479868.shtml#.Vth2Z4XP32c

Bennett, Charles Edward. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/633/charles-edward-bennett

Cirincione, J. (2003, November 6). An American Patriot. Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center.

Retrieved from

https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/research/2003/11/an-american-patriot

Files, J. (2003, September 10). Charles E. Bennett Dies at 92; Put ‘In God We Trust’ on Bills. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Fascinating Politics

Hoke Smith: Georgia’s Progressive Reformer

There was a sort of progressivism that in many ways would be alien to modern people who identify themselves as “progressive”, and this was the early 20th century progressivism, especially that of the South. Despite the South’s current reputation for conservatism, progressive politics far from skipped the region, and one of the region’s foremost advocates was Georgia’s Michael (Hoke) Smith (1855-1931).

An attorney by profession, Hoke Smith’s lucrative injury law practice in which he represented clients against railroad companies got him money and influence, and in 1887, he purchased The Atlanta Journal, and grew the paper into an influential publication. His successful running of the paper as well as the paper’s advocacy for Grover Cleveland and his tariff reform proposals in 1888 elevated his national profile. Smith also played a major role in lining up the Georgia delegation to the Democratic National Convention behind Cleveland in 1892, and after his victory he awarded Smith with the post of Secretary of the Interior in 1893. In this role, he was placed in charge of reforming the pension system for Union veterans, which had grown bloated. In 1896, Smith, who was supportive of gold like Cleveland, opposed William Jennings Bryan’s candidacy for the Democratic nomination, but after his win he supported his candidacy out of a sense of duty to support the Democratic candidate.

Smith continued to use The Atlanta Journal to advance his beliefs, and among other causes he pushed for railroad regulation, countering trusts, ending the convict leasing system, and white supremacy. In 1904, he condemned the Roosevelt Administration and the GOP on race, stating,

“The attitude of the Republican Party and its candidate for President threatens the peace and tranquility of a great section of the United States known as the South. This section was already confronted with a serious problem, the presence of 8,000,000 negroes, the large majority of whom need direction in their daily walks of life from their white neighbors. This daily aid is required on account of the superior qualities of the white race. Any effort to force equality will necessarily injure the negroes as well as disorganize the relations under which the agricultural and commercial growth of the South must take place.

Under the wise Administrations of Cleveland, Harrison, and McKinley each day brought new evidence that the problem of two different races living side by side was being handled wisely and justly by the stronger race freed from outside interference. As one of the proofs of this fact it may be mentioned that the white people of the South have paid by voluntary taxes on their property over $100,000,000 for the education of negro children. The harm already accomplished by Roosevelt and the Republicans is serious. The South is contributing a full part of the commercial growth of the country. A blow against our section injures all sections. We should especially ask those interested in Southern investments to reflect upon this situation before they give approval to the present course of the Republican Party and its candidate for President” (The New York Times).

In 1906, Smith ran for governor of Georgia, and secured the support of the Populist leader Tom Watson by running a white supremacy campaign and promising to disenfranchise blacks, although it is true that Clark Howell, his main opponent in the Democratic primary, was also running a white supremacy campaign. His rhetoric as well as that of others, numerous publicized allegations of black men sexually assaulting white women, and the generally heated racial atmosphere set the stage for the 1906 Atlanta Race Massacre, in which thousands of whites attacked black residents, homes, and businesses for three days, resulting in the killings of dozens of blacks and injuries of scores more. The entrance of state troops to counter the massacre as well as heavy rainfall resulted in its end.

As governor, Smith abolished the convict leasing system and took the lead in trust-busting, becoming known as the “trust-busting Georgian” (The New York Times, 1931). Although the end of the convict leasing system was a good development for blacks, it was replaced with the state-run chain-gang system of forced prison labor which also was ripe for abuse and brutality. He also formally instituted the disenfranchisement of blacks and instituted the “grandfather clause” exemption to literacy tests. However, the latter would be struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. The Southern form of progressivism practiced by Smith and others at the time was put best by historian C. Vann Woodward, “progressivism for whites only” (Lerda, 72). In 1908, Smith had a setback when Watson switched his political support to Joseph M. Brown, who had been removed from the State Railroad Commission by Smith after he voted against his passenger railroad rate cut, over Smith’s refusal to commute a death sentence of one of his supporters. Brown won the primary but in 1910, Smith defeated Brown and once again was governor. However, Senator Alexander Clay’s death in 1910 resulted in the elevation of former Governor Joseph M. Terrell, however, Terrell was badly compromised in his effort to serve out the remainder of Clay’s term after having suffered a paralyzing stroke, and the state legislature chose Smith to serve. Smith decided not to immediately take the office of senator, choosing to finish his agenda before doing so, which included creating the Department of Commerce and Labor and the state Board of Education, a lobbying curb, and placing a maximum work week of 60 hours for textile workers (Maysilles).

As senator, Smith had several accomplishments, including the Smith-Lever Act in 1914 and the Smith-Hughes Act in 1917 and backed much of Wilson’s New Freedom agenda. He was also one of the most racist senators; he, Mississippi’s James K. Vardaman, and South Carolina’s Ben Tillman refused to support nominations of any blacks except for Ambassador to Liberia, which helped sink the nomination of Adam Patterson for the Register of the Treasury, a position that was reserved for blacks under previous post-War of the Rebellion administrations. However, he had an independent streak and proved a bit more conservative than you might expect given his time as governor. For instance, Smith supported Senator Lodge’s (R-Mass.) reservations to the Versailles Treaty and defended civil liberties during World War I, most notably with his vote for the France Amendment in 1918 to protect telling the truth with good motives from government censorship. In 1920, Smith faced a strong challenge in the primary from Tom Watson, who interestingly was running on a platform critical of the Wilson Administration and in opposition to the League of Nations. He also pushed anti-Catholicism, and won the primary, tantamount to election in the uniformly Democratic Georgia. Although Tom Watson was not a preferable replacement for Smith on racial issues for blacks, they nonetheless were pleased to see Smith defeated. Smith’s DW-Nominate score stands at -0.234.

Smith died on November 27, 1931 at 76, being the last survivor of President Cleveland’s cabinet. Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt of New York, closely connected to Georgia by his Warm Springs residence, later known during his presidency as the “Little White House”, stated on his death, “I am deeply distressed to hear of the passing of my old and close friend, Hoke Smith. I first knew him when I was a very small boy, when he was in President Cleveland’s Cabinet. His was a distinguished career and Georgia loses a great citizen” (The New York Times, 1931). Indeed assessments of him were good on the time of his death, but his leading role in the disenfranchisement of black voters and his capitalizing on racism to win public office mar his legacy and have only aged worse over time.

References

Hoke Smith is Dead. (1931, November 28). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Hoke Smith on Race Issue. (1904, October 4). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Lerda, V.G. (2000). Southern Progressivism in Historical Perspective: the 1890s and the 1990s. RSA Journal, 11.

Retrieved from

https://ojs.unito.it/index.php/rsajournal/article/download/9046/7567/29123

Maysilles, D. Hoke Smith. New Georgia Encyclopedia.

Retrieved from

https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/government-politics/hoke-smith-1855-1931

Smith, Hoke. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/8633/hoke-smith
Fascinating Politics

RINOs from American History #28: Connie Morella – The Last of the Liberal Maryland Republicans

In 1986, Congressman Michael Barnes of the 8th district, based in Bethesda, opted not to run for another term to run for the Democratic nomination for the Senate. The 8th has never in its history elected a conservative, but it has elected Republicans, and this time around, even though 1986 was not a good year for the GOP, Republican Constance “Connie” Morella (1931- ) won the seat by six points by winning numerous crossover Democratic votes in an upset. Voters were charmed by her outgoing and gregarious personality and furthermore she was sufficiently liberal for the district.

Morella had grown up in a Democratic working-class family and became Republican after marrying her husband, Anthony, who worked for numerous liberal Republicans, including Maryland’s Mac Mathias and New York City mayor John Lindsay. Her political career had begun when she was among the founding members of the Montgomery County Commission for Women, where she advocated for women’s rights and supported the Equal Rights Amendment. On social issues, Morella was pro-choice, anti-death penalty, pro-gun control, and pro-gay rights. She also has the distinction of being the only Republican to have voted against both the Gulf War and the Iraq War. Morella was very much a Republican in the mold of former Maryland Senator Mac Mathias, who had been a frequent Republican dissenter of both the Nixon and Reagan Administrations on both domestic and foreign policy. Speaking of, she was one of the few Republicans to vote against naming D.C.’s airport after Reagan in 1998. When asked after her career how she reconciled being a Republican in a Democratic district, she responded, “I practiced the three Cs: Country, constituency, conscience” (Fischer). She also sided with President Clinton frequently, including her support of the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Motor Voter Law, and the Brady Act as well as being one of four House Republicans to vote against all articles of impeachment of President Clinton. She was also a key figure in getting the Violence Against Women Act passed in 1994 (Fischer). However, she was not a 100% liberal; she differed with liberals in her support of NAFTA, supported a Balanced Budget Amendment, voted against the Clinton budget package in 1993 that included tax increases, and supported the Bush tax cuts. Despite her overall liberal stances, Morella had friendly relations with fellow Republicans. She recounted, “I think I had the respect of my colleagues, which is why I got away with so much (laughs), if I can put it that way! I was never nasty to them. I was always very civil. They always knew how I was going to vote” (Maddux).

Despite her district being Democratic, Morella continued to win reelection by double-digits, that is, until 2000, when she won by six points. This narrow showing encouraged the state’s Democratic leadership to target Morella’s seat for redistricting by adding territory from the Baltimore-based 4th district. Although she ran a strong campaign, she was defeated by Democrat Chris Van Hollen (who is now one of Maryland’s senators) by 4 points in 2002. Had she run in her old district, she would have narrowly won reelection. She sided with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 68% of the time and her DW-Nominate score is -0.018. In 2003, President Bush tapped her to serve as US Permanent Representative to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, a post she served in until 2007. Morella joked on the job change, “I went from Parris Glendening [the Governor of Maryland who had helped engineer her defeat] to Paris, France” (Fischer). In 2020, Morella was among a group of former Republican representatives to endorse Democrat Joe Biden. She cited several factors in her decision: withdrawing from the Iran deal, the World Health Organization, and the Paris Climate Accord, and Trump’s personality flaws, adding, “I just think we need a change. I just don’t hold him in the highest regard with regard to integrity” (Depuyt).

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Depuyt, B. (2020, August 24). Morella, Gilchrest Join With Ex-Congressional Republicans Backing Biden for President. Maryland Matters.

Retrieved from

https://marylandmatters.org/2020/08/24/morella-gilchrest-join-with-ex-congressional-republicans-backing-biden-for-president

Fischer, A. (2009). Morella Let Her Conscience Be Her Guide. Library of Congress.

Retrieved from

https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/0904/morella.html

Maddux, B. (2013, October 17). A ‘Somerville gal’s’ remarkable life. The Somerville Times.

A ‘Somerville gal’s’ remarkable life

Morella, Constance A. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/15434/constance-a-morella

Fascinating Politics

James B. Pearson: A Kansas Independent

Since 1939, Kansas has consistently had two Republican senators. However, this hasn’t always necessarily meant that Kansas has had two conservative senators…the Kansas Republican Party has in the past had significant divides between the conservative and moderate wings, and had moderate governors as well as moderates on the national stage. One of these was Governor Alf Landon, the 1936 Republican nominee for president, and another was James Blackwood Pearson (1920-2009). On January 21, 1962, Senator Andrew Schoeppel, a conservative stalwart, died of abdominal cancer. Governor John Anderson tapped attorney Pearson, who had worked on his campaign, as his replacement. Although Pearson got a significant challenge in 1962 from former Governor Edward F. Arn, a letter to the editor to The Atchison Daily Globe (1962) noted, “Actually, so far as issues are concerned, there was little or nothing to choose from. Both Arn and Pearson followed a conservative line, opposing increased federal spending and taxation. Both wanted to curb the growing bureaucracy in Washington” (4). And indeed, for a time, Pearson was the more conservative of Kansas’s two senators. He often opposed key Great Society legislation including the War on Poverty and voted against Medicare, having done so without regret (Seaton, 300). However, Pearson also supported key civil rights measures. He wrote to his constituents on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “I believe the principles embodied in this bill are morally right. We are confronted with a national problem and Federal action is justified because we are dealing with rights guaranteed under the Federal Constitution” (Seaton, 302).

In 1966, Pearson was challenged for renomination by Congressman Robert Ellsworth, who really wasn’t ideologically different from him at this time. Ellsworth ran a campaign based on Pearson’s significant absences in the 89th Congress in put out a radio ad for a search by a “Missing Pearson Bureau”, but the charge was rather unfair and out of context as Pearson had taken significant time off due to his son suffering from a serious emotional issue that required medical treatment, and Ellsworth knew that this was the reason (303-304). He defeated Ellsworth 54-45, and faced an even tougher contest against former Democratic Congressman J. Floyd Breeding, who he bested 52-45.

The governor who had appointed Pearson, John Anderson, was known as part of the Rockefeller wing of the Republican Party, and had backed Nelson Rockefeller at the Republican National Convention in 1964. Anderson was a moderate, and Pearson would move increasingly to the center. During the Nixon Administration, Pearson supported a number of socially liberal positions, such as opposing efforts to curb busing as a means of desegregation and the contrast between him and Bob Dole became quite apparent; Dole was willing to be the Nixon Administration’s man in the Senate while Pearson opted for independence.

By the 1970s, he received great praise for this increasing political independence. In 1970, he voted for the Cooper-Church Amendment to halt bombing in Cambodia although did he did not support the McGovern-Hatfield “End the War” Amendment. Senator Jacob Javits of New York, one of the foremost liberal Republicans, praised him as an “enlightened conservative”.

The voters strongly approved of Pearson come 1972, and he was a shoo-in for reelection and netted 71.42% of the vote and won all countries. After his reelection, Pearson increasingly let his liberal flag fly. He supported public financing of presidential campaigns, supported a strong minimum wage increase, voted to ban importation of Rhodesian chrome, opposed restoration of the federal death penalty, and backed unsuccessful legislation to create the Consumer Protection Agency and successful legislation to create the Legal Services Corporation. Some matters in which he continued to be conservative were on defense spending, curbing OSHA enforcement on small businesses, and opposed the common site picketing bill.

In 1975, Pearson, along with Senator Walter Mondale (D-Minn.) sponsored the successful Senate resolution to reduce the threshold needed to end debate from 67 to 60 senators. Liberals had been fighting for this measure for years. However, Pearson also still from time to time led the charge on a conservative cause; he sponsored with Senator Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex.) a measure to end price controls on oil. In 1976, Pearson voted against the Hyde Amendment. Pearson was also known as one of the friendlier Republicans to the agenda of President Carter, and he backed him on foreign policy, including voting to confirm Paul Warnke to head up SALT II talks with the USSR, voting for the Panama Canal Treaties, and voting for the sale of jet fighters to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Israel.

On October 14, 1977, Pearson stunned his voters by his announcement that he would not run for reelection, as he wanted to return to the private sector. He was praised in The Iola Register (1977), “Pearson’s brand of moderate, humane, thoughtful, and non-belligerent Republicanism let him be effective in Washington regardless of what party was in the White House. Because he accepted or rejected ideas on their merit rather than joining or opposing men according to the party label they wore he was welcome in both camps” (4). Pearson agreed with the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action 49% of the time and the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 34% of the time, while his DW-Nominate score is a 0.134, indicating his moderate Republicanism. Pearson got a successor who was also a moderate Republican in Nancy Landon Kassebaum, daughter of 1936 Republican presidential contender Alf Landon. Pearson died on January 13, 2009, at the age of 88.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

Voting Records

Jim Pearson’s bombshell. (1977, October 17). The Iola Register, 4.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/636191813

Pearson, James Blackwood. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://www.voteview.com/person/10817/james-blackwood-pearson

Seaton, F.D. (Winter 2011-2012). Man in the Middle: The Career of Senator James B. Pearson. Kansas History: A Journal of the Central Plains, 34: 296-315.

https://www.kansashistory.gov/publicat/history/2011winter_seaton.pdf

Time to Close Ranks [Letter to the Editor]. (1962, August 19). The Atchison Daily Globe, 4.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/33917811

Fascinating Politics

Emmet O’Neal: Louisville’s Fiscal Hawk

Since 2006, Kentucky’s 3rd district, centered in Louisville, has stood as an exception to the conservative trend of the state. From 2019 to 2023, the district’s Congressman, John Yarmuth, was chairman of the Budget Committee and came out as a friend of Modern Monetary Theory in his strong support for deficit spending and introduced the Inflation Reduction Act in 2021. However, Louisville was not always the liberal center of Kentucky; from 1903 to 1959, the district had as its representatives either Republicans or fiscally conservative Democrats and was the most likely place outside of the Appalachian region of the state to vote for a Republican representative. Its representative during the Roosevelt Administration was Democrat Emmet O’Neal (1887-1967).

An attorney by profession who also engaged in banking, O’Neal hailed from a political family; indeed, his older brother, Joseph, had briefly been mayor of Louisville in 1927. In 1934, he won election to Congress by over 13 points. In his first year in Congress, although O’Neal publicly called Roosevelt the “Savior of America” his record in Congress showed that he often differed with him, especially on government spending. In his first year, he also opposed the Public Utilities Holding Company Act and the Bituminous Coal Act. That year, O’Neal, himself a veteran of World War I, also delivered a speech in opposition to the Patman Bonus Bill, as he thought the money would be better spent on widows and orphans as well as the disabled among soldiers rather than able-bodied men and that soldiers already had preference on the work relief rolls (The Advocate-Messenger). In 1937, O’Neal expressed his limited spending beliefs, “I am a democrat but I do not believe that lavish spending will bring back prosperity. I don’t think one can save by spending a great deal more than one has. I know I can’t do it in my personal affairs, and I don’t think the government can do it” (The Oregonian).

In 1939, O’Neal gave critical support to a cut in the Works Progress Administration and an effort by Clarence Cannon (D-Mo.) to restore it failed on a voice vote. He did support work relief funding later that year. Columnist Joe Hart (1940) identified O’Neal as “an anti-New Dealer by record and the target of organized labor and the American Legion…”. He consistently voted for legislation curbing the power of organized labor until 1943, and as mentioned previously opposed bonus legislation for veterans. His record resulted in a 1940 challenge for his renomination by Leo F. Whalen, who identified himself as a “100 percent New Dealer” (The Louisville Courier-Journal). Unfortunately for supporters of the New Deal, O’Neal survived the challenge. People from the Republican side also appreciated O’Neal’s independence; a letter to the editor from a man who identified himself as a “Dyed-in-the-Wool Republican” from Louisville responded to Hart’s article with, “The electorate no longer votes as this political boss or that pressure group directs; but it choose to think for itself and elects and re-elects men of honor, men of integrity, and patriotism, and men who will not become a “rubber stamp” for the politician, for the pressure group or even for the New Deal. Such qualities of statesmanship the electorate has found in this man, Hon. Emmet O’Neal, and has wisely chosen to re-elect him and send him back to the Congress as the representative of all the people, and not the representative of a few pressure groups” (The Courier Journal, 34). On foreign policy, he was mostly loyal to the Roosevelt Administration. In 1942, UDA-New Republic released their first set of ratings, which found him to be on their side on 10 of 19 issues from 1939 to 1942. He was found favorable on 9 of 10 foreign policy issues but only favorable on 1 of the 9 domestic issues on which he voted.

In 1945, O’Neal was praised in The Cynthiana Democrat for his role on the Appropriations Committee for budget cuts, “The Appropriations Committee of the House has submitted a bill which seeks to cut the appropriations of money to be expended by some fifty-two billion dollars. Emmet O’Neal, the Louisville Congressman, is a member of this committee and is largely responsible for the cuts in these appropriations” (2).

O’Neal on Civil Rights

On the matter of civil rights, Emmet O’Neal twice opposed anti-lynching legislation, but despite this, the head of the United Government Employees, Edgar G. Brown, praised him as a friend of black people for securing them a raise for custodial work in 1938 and playing a key role in prohibiting racial discrimination in hiring in the Civil Aeronautics Authority Pilot Training Law (Atlanta Daily World). He was also far from an exception in this stance in his state, as only two Kentucky representatives supported anti-lynching legislation in his time. O’Neal also thrice supported anti-poll tax legislation as well as Rep. Adam Clayton Powell’s (D-N.Y.) amendment to cut off school lunch funds to segregated schools in 1946.

World War II

During World War II, his conservatism on domestic issues appeared to decline and in 1943 he voted to sustain President Roosevelt’s veto of the Smith-Connally Wartime Disputes Act. However, O’Neal still resisted appropriations increases in certain New Deal programs, such as several agricultural programs and opposed retaining the National Youth Administration. In 1943, Union for Democratic Action found him on their side on 11 out of 16 issues and in their follow-up issue in 1945, 2 of 4 issues. O’Neal’s support for national Democratic initiatives also increased in his opposition to most efforts to weaken price control and he would also vote against overriding President Truman’s veto of the Case labor bill in 1946. That year, however, was a bad one for Democrats, and future Senator Thruston B. Morton defeated O’Neal on Election Day by 16 points, the strong margin surprising all around, with Republicans surprised and O’Neal stating, “I didn’t know there were so many Republicans” (The Louisville Times). By contrast, in 1944, O’Neal had won reelection by almost 15 points. His DW-Nominate score stands at -0.134.

It didn’t take long for President Truman to find a new role for O’Neal, tapping him to be ambassador to the Philippines, serving from seven months. He subsequently retired from elective politics and continued to practice law. He died of a heart attack in Washington D.C. on July 18, 1967, at the age of 80. The days of O’Neal’s sort of Democrat seem long gone, and that is, in this author’s opinion, a pity.

References

A “Chip” On His Shoulder [Letter to the Editor]. (1940, April 21). The Louisville Courier-Journal, 34.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/107353757

A Congress to Win The War. (1942, May 18). The New Republic.

Retrieved from

https://archive.org/details/cainmnh_000157/mode/2up

A Congress to Win the War and the Peace. (1944, May 5). The New Republic, 110 (19), 643-58.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1143419115

Congressmen See Oregon, Big Dam. (1937, September 7). The Oregonian, 19.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1083476879

Coy, P. (2021, September 1). Modern Monetary Theory Has a New Friend in Congress. The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Emmet O’Neal on the Bonus. (1935, March 22). The Danville Daily Messenger (Danville, Ky.), 2.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1043373571

Emmet O’Neal Renders Great Service. (1945, November 1). The Cynthiana Democrat, 2.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1141741813

G.O.P. Sweep Wins Congress. (1946, November 6). The Louisville Times, 1.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1345031836

Hart, J. (1940, April 19). Emmet O’Neal Survives as a Political Paradox. The Louisville Courier-Journal, 7.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/107353642

Leo F. Whalen Will Oppose Emmet O’Neal for Congress. (1940, May 11). The Louisville Courier-Journal, 13.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/108003801

O’Neal, Emmet. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://www.voteview.com/person/7073/emmet-o-neal

Patton, J.G. & Loeb, J. (1945, February 5). Challenge to Progressives. The New Republic, 112 (6), 21-42.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/1143339882

Fascinating Politics

The Election About Nothing: 1990

Tom Foley (D-Wash.), House Speaker.

It is two months until the midterm elections, and Democrats are hoping for a wave this year, while Republicans best hope that individual candidates count more than a general feeling against them, which is what happened in the 1990 midterms. There were some issues that were in the backdrop but none constituted an overall theme, such as a general anti-incumbent theme, voter dissatisfaction with the Savings and Loan bailout, and the 1989 Supreme Court decision Webster v. Reproductive Health Services, which upheld a Missouri law prohibiting public funding of abortions except to save the mother’s life on a 5-4 vote. Despite there being an anti-incumbent feeling, 96% of incumbents were returned to office this year, and those who lost did so for varying reasons. Thus, given that this election had no over-arching theme, commentators at the time dubbed it the “Seinfeld election” as the show Seinfeld, a new show at the time, was commonly known as a “show about nothing”. Although the overall bend was against the Republicans, it was only to a minor extent as far as midterms go. Republicans lost eight seats in the House, with Democrats taking seven and an Independent winning one. Can you guess who this Independent was? I’ll give you a hint: you know his name. If you can guess before I reveal it, kudos to you. An interesting detail is that the contrast in some cases between what the losing incumbents had won in 1988 and 1990 could be stark, and this speaks to a less partisan time.

The House Races That Flipped:

In Arkansas’ 2nd district, based in Little Rock, Republican Tommy Robinson retired to run for governor, and he was succeeded by Democrat Ray Thornton, who had previously served in Congress from the 4th district from 1973 to 1979.

In California’s 1st district, Democrat Douglas Bosco lost reelection to Republican Frank Riggs. Bosco suffered from his involvement with a failed Savings and Loan institution and Riggs was able to capitalize on this and the anti-incumbent mood. Riggs would be one of the “Gang of Seven” Republican freshmen who pushed for reforms and publicized mishandling of House institutions, such as the House Bank and the Congressional Post Office.

In California’s 17th district, Republican Chip Pashayan lost reelection to Democrat Cal Dooley. Pashayan became politically vulnerable after it was revealed that he received $26,000 in campaign funds from Lincoln Savings and Loan chairman Charles Keating, which he later returned (Barrett). By contrast, he had won reelection with 71.5% of the vote in 1988.

In California’s 44th district, Democrat Jim Bates lost reelection to Republican Duke Cunningham. In 1989, Bates had the dishonorable distinction of having been the first member of Congress to be reprimanded by the House Ethics Committee for sexually harassing female staffers (Orlando Sentinel). By contrast, Bates had won reelection with 59.7% of the vote in 1988.

In Florida’s 2nd district, the voters didn’t seem to take too kindly to incumbent Bill Grant changing his affiliation from Democratic to Republican. In 1988, he had won reelection uncontested, but this year, he lost reelection by 14 points to Democrat Pete Peterson.

Although no change happened in Georgia, this was Newt Gingrich’s closest call, coming within less than a point to defeat. By contrast, he had won reelection by almost 17 points in 1988.

In Hawaii’s 1st district, Republican Pat Saiki retired to run for the Senate, and she was succeeded by Democrat Neil Abercrombie. Abercrombie had previously briefly served in Congress.

In Idaho’s 1st district, Republican Larry Craig retired to run for the Senate, and he was succeeded by moderate Democrat Larry LaRocco, who interestingly had made his pro-choice stance a centerpiece of his campaign (CQ Press). This election produced for the first (and only time) since the 88th Congress that both of Idaho’s representatives were Democrats.

In Illinois’ 16th district based in Rockford, Republican Lynn Martin retired to run for the Senate, and he was succeeded by Democrat John W. Cox Jr. However, this one was a fluke in the normally Republican district as he was defeated for reelection in 1992.

In Indiana’s 3rd district, Republican John Hiler lost reelection to Democrat Tim Roemer. Roemer was able to capitalize on him sitting on the House Banking Committee and connected him to the savings and loan crisis.

In Maryland’s 1st district, Democrat Roy Dyson fell to scandal, as stories came about about his chief of staff, Tom Pappas, engaging in strange and abusive management practices towards male staffers came out in 1988. In addition, there were rumors that the unmarried Dyson was in a relationship with Pappas, and the latter subsequently committed suicide. He had survived reelection in 1988 against Republican Wayne Gilchrest by less than a point, and this time around Gilchrest won by 14 points. Dyson never ran for Congress again, but he had a political comeback, serving in the Maryland State Senate from 1995 until his reelection defeat in 2014.

In Minnesota’s 7th district, Republican Arlan Stangeland was caught up in personal scandal; the married Stangeland had used his Congressional credit card to make hundreds of calls to a female lobbyist. He lost reelection to Democrat Collin Peterson, who would hold the seat until 2021 in this normally Republican district given his stance as a moderate. Stangeland had won reelection in 1988 by around 9 points.

In Missouri’s 2nd district, based in the St. Louis suburbs, Republican Jack Buechner lost reelection to Democrat Joan Horn by only 54 votes. By contrast, Buechner had won reelection with over 66% of the vote in 1988. His stridency in the advocacy of his positions as well as a strong campaign against him on his anti-abortion stance helped put Horn over the top (CQ Press). This election proved a fluke, as Horn would lose reelection to Republican Jim Talent in 1992, and indeed this seat has been held by Republicans since.

In New Hampshire’s 2nd district, staunchly conservative Republican Chuck Douglas lost reelection to Democrat Richard Swett by over 5 points. His public feuding with fellow Granite Stater and Bush chief of staff John Sununu had harmed his image in the district. Douglas had won his first election in 1988 comfortably with 56.8% of the vote. The last time the district had elected a Democrat was the same year of the sinking of the Titanic.

In North Carolina’s 11th district, Democrat James M. Clarke lost reelection about 1.5% to Republican Charles Taylor. Taylor would be one of the “Gang of Seven” Republican freshmen, but by 2006 he would face allegations of impropriety surrounding his business interests, and lost reelection to Democrat Health Shuler.

Although no party change occurred in Ohio, a notable result was the loss of renomination for Republican Buz Lukens of the 8th district, who had a sex scandal involving a 16-year-old. The winner of the nomination was none other than future Speaker of the House and “Gang of Seven” member John Boehner.

In Oregon’s 5th district, Republican Denny Smith lost reelection to Democrat Michael J. Kopetski by 10 points. Smith had been a director at a failed Savings and Loan institution and was accused of having attempted to influence federal regulators (Time Magazine). The warning signs were there for Smith, as in the last election Kopetski had held him to 50.2% of the vote.

In Pennsylvania’s 18th district, Democrat Doug Walgren lost reelection to future senator and presidential contender Republican Rick Santorum by almost three points on the anti-incumbent theme and that he had lost touch with the voters (CQ Press). Santorum would also be one of the “Gang of Seven”. Walgren had first been elected in 1976 and won reelection with 62.7% of the vote in 1988; he had gotten too confident.

In Rhode Island’s 2nd district, Republican Claudine Schneider retired to run for the Senate, and she was succeeded by Democrat Jack Reed, who is currently one of the state’s senators.

In Utah’s 3rd district, retiring Republican Howard C. Nielson was succeeded by conservative Democrat Bill Orton, who won the seat by 20 points and managed to hold on to it until the 1996 election.

In Vermont, Peter Smith lost reelection to Independent Bernie Sanders by 16.5%. Smith was never in a particularly commanding position, as in his first election in 1988, he had benefited from a three-way race, as the Democrats ran a candidate who got almost 19% of the vote and he had won against Sanders by under 4 points. He had also distanced himself from the tax policies of the Bush Administration by publicly disagreeing with him at a campaign event, but this didn’t help. By contrast, this time Democratic voters rallied behind Sanders, as the Democratic nominee only netted 3% of the vote. The press of the time noted that Sanders was the first Socialist to be in Congress since Victor Berger’s 1928 defeat. Laurence Barrett of Time Magazine (1990) wrote on the new representative, “A former Socialist mayor of Burlington, Sanders has railed for years against establishments of all kinds. This fall, his populist appeal seems in sync with the times.”

In Virginia, incumbent Stan Parris of the Alexandria-based 8th district, had been known for his sharp criticisms of the Democrats and the D.C. government. As Congressional Quarterly (1990) noted, “Parris, long known for conservative bombast, wearied many with his diatribes against liberals and the District of Columbia’s government” although it also noted that “The Democrat who ousted him though, James P. Moran Jr., matched him blow for rhetorical blow”. From his 1988 election, you would think that this one would go well for him too, as he won by almost 25 points. However, Moran, who was the mayor of Alexandria, defeated him by 7 points. Another factor helping Moran was his pro-choice stance. The Democrats have not had trouble holding the district since.

In Wisconsin, Robert Kastenmeier, who had represented the Madison-based 2nd district since 1959, got overconfident in his safety and had suffered an upset by moderate Republican Scott Klug, a TV journalist who won with 53% of the vote, who convincingly made the case that Kastenmeier had lost touch with the voters (CQ Press). By contrast, he had won reelection by 17 points in 1988. Democrats have not had trouble holding this district since Klug honored his term-limits pledge and retired from office in 1999.

Gubernatorial Races

Anti-incumbent sentiment had a bit more power in gubernatorial races, in which several governors lost reelection and 15 in total changed parties. Nancy Gibbs (1990) of Time Magazine noted the increased focus on state government as product of federal policy, “Throughout the 1980s, Reaganomics shifted much of the burden of government to the states — whether for providing services or finding ways to pay for them. Incumbent members of Congress can hide from their responsibility for such steps, but sitting Governors cannot. As chief executives, they directly bear the blame for policies that affect the voters. That wrath accounts for the decisions by Connecticut’s William O’Neill and Massachusetts’ Michael Dukakis not to seek another term after imposing tax increases. Special-interest money also plays a smaller role in state races — which means that voters can more easily make themselves heard”. For conservatives, this is how federalism ought to work.

In Alaska, Alaskan Independence Party candidate Wally Hickel succeeded Democrat Steve Cowper.

In Arizona, retiring Democrat Rose Mofford was succeeded by Republican Fife Symington.

In Connecticut, retiring Democrat William O’Neill was succeeded by former Senator Lowell Weicker, who ran on the A Connecticut Party ticket.

In Florida, Republican Bob Martinez lost reelection to Democrat Lawton Chiles after breaking a promise not to raise taxes.

In Kansas, Republican Mike Hayden lost reelection to Democrat Joan Finney after breaking a promise not to raise taxes.

In Massachusetts, retiring Democrat Michael Dukakis was succeeded by Republican Bill Weld.

In Michigan, Democrat James Blanchard lost reelection to Republican John Engler.

In Minnesota, Democrat Rudy Perpich lost reelection to Republican Arne Carlson.

In Nebraska, Republican Kay Orr lost reelection to Democrat Ben Nelson.

In New Mexico, retiring Republican Garrey Carruthers was succeeded by Democrat Bruce King.

In Ohio, retiring Democrat Dick Celeste was succeeded by Republican George Voinovich, who had served as mayor of Cleveland.

In Oklahoma, retiring Republican Henry Bellmon was succeeded by Democrat David Walters.

In Rhode Island, Republican Ed DiPrete lost reelection to Democrat Bruce Sundlun due to a corruption scandal.

In Texas, retiring Republican Bill Clements was succeeded by Democrat Ann Richards. This is the last time that a Democrat has been elected governor of Texas.

In Vermont, retiring Democrat Madeleine Kunin was succeeded by Republican Richard Snelling.

Other Notes:

In Connecticut’s 5th district, Gary Franks was the first black Republican to be elected to the House since Illinois’ Oscar De Priest of Illinois had left office in 1935.

Time Magazine’s article regarding the election notes that “Most lawmakers who feel remotely threatened – as well as every House member attempting to graduate to the Senate – came out against it [the Bush Administration’s deficit-reduction package]. Braver souls who supported the unpopular combination of tax hikes and service cuts are now being savaged for their stand” (Barrett). If we want to understand why we have a debt problem in the United States, this is a part of it.

References

96 Percent of House Incumbents Re-Elected. (1990). CQ Press.

Retrieved from

https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal90-1112110#_

Barrett, L.I. (1990, October 21). Housecleaning Time? Time Magazine.

Retrieved from

https://time.com/archive/6716187/housecleaning-time

Boys-Will-Be-Boys Syndrome. (1989, October 31). Orlando Sentinel.

Retrieved from

BOYS-WILL-BE-BOYS SYNDROME

Demos Pick Up 10 More Seats in House. (1990, November 7). Deseret News.

Retrieved from

https://www.deseret.com/1990/11/7/18889955/demos-pick-up-10-more-seats-in-house-br

Gibbs, N. (1990, November 18). “You Can’t Beat Somebody with Nobody”. Time Magazine.

Retrieved from

https://time.com/archive/6716475/you-cant-beat-somebody-with-nobody

Fascinating Politics

Equal Rights Amendment and Abortion – Side by Side

Peter Rodino (D-N.J.), who reintroduced ERA.

I have previously written about the close tie between the issue of abortion and the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) and how the failure to attach an abortion neutral provision to the ERA resulted in its defeat. I will examine here the 1983 vote in which the ERA, being reintroduced by Rep. Peter Rodino (D-N.J.) after failing to be ratified in 1982, failed to pass on November 15th and how legislators measured up on a vote barring federal funds for abortion. The closest vote on abortion to compare with the ERA vote of 1983 is the September 22nd vote on Rep. Silvio Conte’s (R-Mass.) amendment. I have charted the vote here, with lifetime Americans for Constitutional Action scores for these individuals. Because 1984 was the last year ACA did their scoring, this is how they would have been seen in that session. There are a few legislators who are still in office now.

Abortion Restriction and ERA Vote:

Abortion and ERA Vote, 1983Download

Silvio Conte (R-Mass.), who sponsored a 1983 amendment deleting funds for abortions.

A few observations regarding these votes…

A legislator who supported ERA had a 66% chance of opposing the abortion restriction and a 40% chance of supporting.

A legislator who opposed ERA had a 93% chance of supporting the abortion restriction, and a legislator who opposed the abortion restriction had a 95% chance of supporting ERA.

Only ten representatives were opposed to both Conte’s amendment and the ERA. These were Al McCandless (R-Calif.), Richard Thomas (D-Ga.), J. Roy Rowland (D-Ga.), Robert Whittaker (R-Kan.), Earl Coleman (R-Mo.), Edwin Forsythe (R-N.J.), Tim Valentine (D-N.C.), James Martin (R-N.C.), James Broyhill (R-N.C.), and Tommy Vandergriff (D-Tex.).

Al Gore supports both ERA and abortion restriction.

Former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) supports abortion restriction and opposes ERA!

John McCain supports abortion restriction and opposes the ERA.

Ed Markey, today known as one of the most liberal members of the Senate, votes for restricting abortion funding as do a majority of Massachusetts representatives! All voted for the ERA, and all but amendment sponsor Silvio Conte were Democrats, and Conte was also a liberal.

Richard Durbin of Illinois, currently Senate Minority Whip, votes for both abortion restriction and the ERA.

Chuck Schumer of New York, currently Senate Minority Leader, votes against abortion restriction and for the ERA.

2016 Republican contender John Kasich of Ohio votes for abortion restriction and against the ERA, as does current Ohio Governor Mike DeWine.

Ron Wyden of Oregon, who is a senator now, votes against abortion restriction and for the ERA.

Jamie Whitten of Mississippi is the only legislator to switch from opposing the ERA in 1971 to support in 1983. Whitten’s conservatism began waning in the mid-1970s and really started going downhill after he became chairman of the Appropriations Committee in 1979. He changed significantly to accommodate the Democratic leadership; since 1975 seniority was no longer a guarantee for a chairmanship.

Also, a word on abortion. This is one issue in which the parties truly have polarized and polarized hard over time. It is downright unimaginable today that most of North Carolina’s representatives vote against abortion restriction while 70% of Massachusetts’ representatives vote for. There is also a far greater Catholic Democrat factor here than now in support for abortion restrictions. There are some legislators here who support abortion restrictions but later oppose them. One such figure who I’ve noted before is Florida’s Bill Nelson, who performed an almost entire 180 flip as senator. With this vote you not only see the diversity of opinion within the parties on this issue but also the level of ideological diversity that existed in 1983…far less than now.

References

To amend H.R. 3913, a bill appropriating $96.16 billion in funds for the Departments of Labor, Health, and Human Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 1984. The Conte Amendment prohibits use of funds to perform abortions. (motion passed). Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/rollcall/RH0980334

To suspend the rules and pass H.J. Res. 1, a bill proposing a amendment to the Constitution of the United states relative to equal rights for men and women (motion failed; 2/3 required). Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/rollcall/RH0980469