Month: February 2025

Fascinating Politics

“Smiling Bill” Miller: He Had No Legs But Ran Six Times

Like many men of his generation, William Jennings Miller (1899-1950) was a veteran of the first World War. Unlike many men of his generation, his injuries occurred shortly after the war’s conclusion. Miller was test-flying a plane and it crashed. He suffered a broken back as well as the loss of both of his legs, and spent four years in the hospital. Despite this crushing loss, Miller proceeded with life after being released. He got married and launched a successful insurance career in Hartford, Connecticut. Miller also was active in the American Legion, becoming Connecticut’s commander in the 1930s. In this position, he simultaneously fought for generous benefits for disabled veterans while taking a fiscally conservative stance in opposing adjusted compensation certificates, and during his tenure membership reached record levels (Congressional Record, 16000). Miller’s success in insurance as well as in the American Legion put him in a good position to run for public office, and in 1938 he challenged Democrat Herman P. Kopplemann for reelection. This was a good time to run as it was the first election since 1928 that went in a Republican direction, and he was among the winners. This election started a ten-year cycle of boom and bust for the parties in Connecticut.

Congressman Miller

Miller was a happy warrior while in Congress, persistently cheerful despite his disability and known as “Smiling Bill”. His attendance record was solid and as an active member of the American Legion he specialized in veterans’ affairs. Miller encouraged veterans, injured and not injured alike, to not rely on the government whilst advocating for them. He proved fiscally conservative, voting against work relief appropriations in 1939. However, on social issues he proved liberal. Miller was one of less than ten Republicans to oppose the Hobbs bill in 1939 that would have provided for detention facilities for illegal immigrants. Miller also supported anti-lynching legislation, which while you might think this would be a given in Connecticut, his Republican colleague, Thomas Ball of the 2nd district, voted against. He was also opposed to the US getting involved in World War II, voting against the Neutrality Act Amendments in 1939 and against the peacetime draft in 1940. 1940 was a good year for the Democrats in Connecticut, and all House Republican incumbents lost reelection, with Kopplemann returning to office. However, in 1942, Miller ran again and defeated Kopplemann a second time.

During the 78th Congress, Miller was staunchly independent in his voting. He voted against appropriations for the Dies Committee, for income tax relief, against further funds for the National Youth Administration, and against the Smith-Connally Act. The latter provided a mechanism for stopping wartime strikes and it was enacted in 1943 over President Roosevelt’s veto. Miller further voted against multiple efforts to weaken wartime price control, voted against soldier voting bills that placed the criterion of who would get mailed a ballot with the States as opposed to the Federal government, voted to ban the poll tax in Federal elections, supported generous benefits for defense workers, supported legislation curbing subsidies, and supported freezing the Social Security tax at 1%. 1944 was, although not the blowout year for Connecticut Democrats that 1940 was, still a good year as four of six of the Republican representatives were not returned to office, with Miller again losing to Kopplemann. In 1946, however, Republicans again had a clean sweep of the Connecticut delegation, with Kopplemann losing reelection for the last time to Miller. During the Republican 80th Congress, he supported income tax reduction over President Truman’s veto, the Taft-Hartley Act over President Truman’s veto, banning the poll tax for Federal elections, the Reed-Bulwinkle bill easing anti-trust laws on railroads, budget cuts to multiple departments, and the Marshall Plan. However, he demonstrated his independence and his general aversion to anti-subversion measures in being one of only eight House Republicans to vote against the Mundt-Nixon bill for the registration of Communists with the Attorney General. Although Miller opposed cuts to aid to Europe, he nonetheless voted against aid to Greece and Turkey in 1947. I have not been able to find out the why but his voting on other foreign aid measures suggests that his rationale may have been similar to that of a small group of Democratic liberals who opposed such aid as the two nations fell short of being democracies.

Miller’s independence did not save him from another defeat in 1948, this time by future Connecticut Governor, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and Senator Abe Ribicoff. Despite his record of being in and out of Congress, Miller ran ahead of most Republicans (Congressional Record, 16000). This highlighted both how difficult his district had become for Republicans but also to Miller’s appeal. Ideologically, his DW-Nominate score was a 0.062, highlighting his strong independence from party line and his score from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action, which accounted for his last term, was a 32%.

Perhaps had his health allowed it, he would have made another go for Congress. However, Miller developed a kidney ailment in March 1949 that resulted in him being bedridden for a year (The Hartford Courant). Although it looked like earlier in the year he might have been on the mend, he died only weeks after the 1950 election on November 22nd. The Hartford Courant memorialized him thusly, “Former Congressman William J. Miller attained a remarkable degree of success despite a physical handicap that would have discouraged a less courageous man…Bill Miller wore nobody’s collar when he was in Congress. When he thought his party’s leadership was wrong, he voted as his conscience dictated” (Congressional Record, 16000). Despite living a physically difficult and short life, Miller made the best of it that he could and did so with a smile on his face. Republicans didn’t fare well in the Hartford-based district after Miller’s exit, with the Republicans only winning back the district one more time; in 1956, when President Eisenhower was overwhelmingly reelected and the seat was open. It also happened to be the last time Connecticut elected an entirely Republican delegation to Congress. The 1958 midterms resulted in a full switch of the House delegation from Republican to Democrat and saw Republican Senator William Purtell’s reelection loss to Thomas J. Dodd. Could a Republican like Miller be elected in any district in Connecticut today? Perhaps in the 4th or 5th districts, but Connecticut hasn’t sent a Republican to Congress since 2006, and that was Chris Shays, considered one of the most liberal Republicans in his day who fell in 2008 to the district’s current representative, Jim Himes.

References

ADA Voting Records. Americans for Democratic Action.

Retrieved from

ADA Voting Records

Congressional Record. (1950, November 30). U.S. Government Publishing Office.

Retrieved from

Click to access GPO-CRECB-1950-pt12-4-2.pdf

Miller, Recovering From Illness, Is Allowed Outdoors. (1950, March 14). The Hartford Courant.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/369901384/

Miller, William Jennings. Voteview.

Retrieved fromhttps://voteview.com/person/6518/william-jennings-miller

Fascinating Politics

Ronald Reagan the Liberal

Let me get this out of the way…no this is not a post alleging that Ronald Reagan was a liberal or a RINO as president or any other such half-baked revisionism. This is about the early phase of Ronald Reagan’s public life, when Reagan was in fact a liberal.

Reagan’s Early Life

Ronald Reagan’s early upbringing was influenced by the politics and religion of his parents. His mother was a devoutly religious woman and his father, Jack, a traveling salesman, was a staunchly populistic Democrat who supported the progressive causes of his day, strongly opposed the KKK and racial and religious bigotry, and would support the New Deal. As a young man, Ronald Reagan would let black college football players stay at his folks’ place when no establishment in his town would let them stay the night. Reagan’s experiences in young adulthood motivated him to stick with a liberal Democratic philosophy; after all, President Roosevelt’s work relief programs had provided his father and older brother with jobs (Cannon). In 1934, Reagan started his work as a sports radio announcer for WHO in Iowa. Interestingly, heading up the news section at WHO was H.R. Gross, would later become a notorious skinflint in Congress and support Reagan’s rise in politics. When asked in 1984 at a visit from President Reagan if he thought that Reagan had the chops to be president at the time, he responded, “No. He was a Democrat. He belonged to the wrong party” (UPI). After his time in radio, Reagan would move to Los Angeles and got a contract with Warner Brothers after a successful screen test. His enthusiasm for liberal causes was strong but it was based in a strong idealism and the personal magnetism of FDR appealed to him greatly. Writer Howard Fast even claimed that Reagan attempted to join the Communist Party in 1938, but was turned down as he was thought to be a lightweight and unreliable (Geller). This story is, however, disputed.

Reagan remained committed to FDR during his presidency and voted for him every time. By 1946, he concluded that the communists were a force of evil to be reckoned with much like the Nazis had been, but this approach was not well-received by many of the actors who had previously been in full support of his positions. He worked with actress Olivia de Havilland to counter communists in the Independent Citizens’ Committee of the Arts, Sciences, and Professions, which was ostensibly a pro-FDR group, but was headed by secret communist Hannah Dorner who with the communist leadership made the organization always side with the USSR despite a primarily non-communist membership (Fund). Ultimately, Reagan, de Havilland, Roosevelt, and other prominent figures who lent credibility through their membership to the communist leaders left the organization, rendering the committee influentially inert.

The following year, he became president of the Screen Actors’ Guild and to this day he is the only president to have ever led a union. Reagan became a member of the newly established liberal Americans for Democratic Action (which would staunchly oppose his presidency) as well as United World Federalists. As president of the Screen Actor’s Guild he clashed with communists and pro-Communists in Hollywood, who were using underhanded methods to gain control of unions and had been trying to destroy the Stagehand’s Union (which was an anti-communist bulwark). He would testify before the House Committee on Un-American Activities as a friendly witness in 1949. In 1948, Reagan campaigned for the election of Harry S. Truman for a full term and Hubert Humphrey for the Senate. In a 1948 speech for the pair, he criticized the Republican 80th Congress’s performance, condemning the Taft-Hartley Labor Bill and citing the Congress’s blocking an expansion of Social Security and failure to enact civil rights legislation as among their shortcomings (YouTube).

Although Ronald Reagan was initially supportive of liberal Rep. Helen Gahagan Dougals’s bid for the Senate in California in 1950 and contributed $50, his attitude shifted during the election. Towards the end of the election, he switched his support to Rep. Richard Nixon (Nixon Foundation). By this point, Reagan was although not a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, not the strong liberal he had once been. In 1952, he again broke from his party in his decision to support Dwight Eisenhower in 1952. Reagan’s increasing conservatism would develop throughout his time hosting the General Electric Theater anthology series from 1954 to 1962, as he would often talk politics with conservative GE executives, who would persuade him to take up the conservative mantle. In 1962, Reagan officially switched his party registration to Republican. Reagan’s biographer Lou Cannon summed up Reagan’s transformation from liberal to conservative as being due to “ increased wealth, and the higher taxes that accompanied it; conflicts with leftist union leaders as an official of the Screen Actros Guild, and exposure in his General Electric days to a growing view that the federal government, epitomized by the New Deal, was stifling economic growth and individual freedom”.

References

Cannon, L. Ronald Reagan: Life in Brief. UVA Miller Center.

Retrieved from

https://millercenter.org/president/reagan/life-in-brief

Fund. J. (2020, August 2). How Olivia de Havilland and Ronald Reagan Beat the Hollywood Communists. National Review.

Retrieved from

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/how-olivia-de-havilland-and-ronald-reagan-beat-the-hollywood-communists/

Geller, A. (1999, September 26). Commies Rated Ron Too Dim to be a Red Star: Buddy Says Reagan Was Rejected By the Party. The New York Post.

Retrieved from

https://nypost.com/1999/09/26/commies-rated-ron-too-dim-to-be-a-red-star-buddy-says-reagan-was-rejected-by-the-party/

Meroney, J. (2010, December 12). Was Ronald Reagan a secret snitch? The Los Angeles Times.

Retrieved from

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-dec-12-la-oe-meroney-reagan-20101212-story.html

Reagan Campaigns for Truman in 1948. YouTube.

Retrieved from

Reagan reminisces of days at WHO. (1984, February 21). UPI.

Retrieved from

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1984/02/21/Reagan-reminisces-of-days-at-WHO/6619446187600/

RN Helped Switch RR. (2011, February 8). Nixon Foundation.

Retrieved fromhttps://www.nixonfoundation.org/2011/02/rn-helped-switch-rr/

Fascinating Politics

The Mallory Decision: The Limits of Obtaining Statements from Criminal Defendants

Felix Frankfurter, the author of the Mallory decision.

In 1954, a D.C. home was broken into, and a housewife was choked and raped. This terrible crime became the basis of a major case before the Supreme Court that would cause a political firestorm. The perpetrator was 19-year-old Andrew Mallory, who was convicted of the rape and sentenced to death, and after his arrest he had been interrogated for seven hours before confessing to rape (Time Magazine). There was no evidence of torture or coercion in this confession, but it was also shown that there was a judge available during this time. Mallory appealed his sentence up to the Supreme Court based on the length of his pre-hearing detention. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Mallory v. U.S. in 1957 that any confession obtained after an unreasonable delay was inadmissible in federal court. This meant that arrested persons had to promptly be presented to judges and that testimony produced during an “unnecessary” delay could not be considered by judges, and Mallory was freed.

This decision was met with popular disapproval, especially from conservatives. Senator Strom Thurmond (D-S.C.) issued a statement condemning the ruling, holding that “Any police abuse this decision prevents will be replaced many times over by criminals abusing the laws of the States and Nation under the umbrella of the Supreme Court decision” (Clemson University). Thurmond, a frequent critic of the Warren Court, would also make the Mallory decision an issue during the consideration of Justice Abe Fortas to be elevated to chief justice. However, it wasn’t just strong conservatives who condemned the Mallory decision; Kenneth Keating (R-N.Y.), who was frequently associated with the GOP’s Rockefeller wing, stated, “I cannot believe that the universal rejection of the Mallory (rule) approach in all other jurisdictions (except Federal) is based on a callous unconcern for the rights of the accused. The Mallory decision simply went too far in coddling criminals and gave too little thought to the interests of the public…Brutal or other unlawful police actions should of course be exposed and condemned” (CQ Press). Congress opted for action.

On July 2, 1958, the House passed 294-79 a bill that would make statements obtained from a defendant admissible in court during a period of unreasonable delay, directly overturning the Mallory decision. The votes against mostly came from liberals. Senator Jacob Javits (R-N.Y.), for instance, opposed the bill as he regarded it as “unnecessary” and expressed concern that Congress was making the first move in a “raid” on the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (CQ Press). However, the bill died in the Senate due to the efforts of liberal Senators John Carroll (D-Colo.) and Wayne Morse (D-Ore.). In 1959, the House again passed an anti-Mallory bill on July 7th, and again the Senate prevented its enactment. The House would undertake periodic efforts to undo the decision and thus make it easier to prosecute criminal defendants. With crime rising substantially in the 1960s, the omnibus crime bill in 1968 was passed that included several provisions that strengthened the criminal code. The act notably altered the Mallory Rule so that a confession could be admitted into evidence if a judge found it was voluntary, and that delay was not unreasonably longer than six hours (Time Magazine). In between Mallory and the 1968 omnibus crime bill, a more famous decision would catch the public eye in Miranda v. Arizona (1967), which instituted the requirement of police reading of a defendant’s rights to them before interrogation.

And what happened to Andrew Mallory? Mallory, it turns out, was a repeat offender. He had numerous jobs he was in and out of and after a babysitting job went sour, he broke into the family home and beat the wife, and in 1960, he broke into another home and beat and raped a mother of four children (Time Magazine). He was convicted of the latter crime and served 11 years in prison. Mallory was shot and killed a year later by a police officer while on the run after attacking and robbing a couple after pointing a gun at another pursuing officer (Time Magazine).

References

Figure in Key Case Before High Court Is Killed by Police. (1972, July 12). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Mallory Rule. CQ Press.

Retrieved from

https://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal58-1341657#_=_

Statement By Senator Strom Thurmond in the Senate with Reference to the Supreme Court Decision in the Mallory Case. (1957, June 27). Clemson University.

Retrieved from

https://open.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2465&context=strom

The Law: Andrew Mallory, R.I.P. (1972, July 24). Time Magazine.

Retrieved from

https://time.com/archive/6840001/the-law-andrew-mallory-r-i-p/

Fascinating Politics

Herman Welker: “Little Joe from Idaho”

The 1950 election was without question an ideological election…the nation shifted right. This was reflected in both general and primary elections. For the latter, Congressman George Smathers’ defeat of the staunchly liberal Senator Claude Pepper was of particular note. Also of note was Senator Glen Taylor of Idaho’s defeat by former Senator D. Worth Clark in a rematch. Republican Herman Welker, who had focused his fire on Taylor as had all other candidates as well as the Idaho Statesman, probably was disappointed that it was not him to defeat Taylor. After all, Taylor had been such a massive mismatch for the state of Idaho ideologically as he was extremely liberal and had run for vice president on the Progressive Party ticket, the party organization which was dominated by actual communists and speeches written for Henry Wallace had communist authorship and they basically spouted Moscow’s position. However, the mood in Idaho was quite Republican and the GOP had a clean sweep of the state, including winning Idaho’s 1st district, which contained the state’s panhandle and at the time was a bastion of organized labor in the state. Welker defeated Clark’s attempted comeback by a whopping 23 points. His campaign planks included anti-communism, his opposition to the proposed Columbia Valley Authority (TVA for the west), reducing income taxes, a balanced budget, and opposition to deficit spending (The Burley Herald). Welker also had some star power behind him. When he worked as an attorney in Los Angeles as a young man, he befriended Bing Crosby, and for 15 years Crosby would go on vacations to Idaho and hunt pheasant with Welker (Hill). Crosby hosted a fundraiser for him, and with considerable momentum in his and Republicans’ direction, Welker won with 61% of the vote, with D. Worth Clark only taking 38%.

Senator Welker


Welker’s tenure in the Senate was highly controversial, with him pulling no punches in his approach. Indeed, this is what he promised when he announced his bid for the Senate, with him stating, “I will not engage in velvet glove technique. I will call a spade a spade and will never be vague or uncertain by giving nervous endorsement or pussyfooting, just to get votes” (The Burley Hearld). However, although certainly among some Idaho voters his approach was refreshing, he wore out his welcome during his term. Welker was so attached to Senator Joseph McCarthy as part of his inner circle that he was known as “Little Joe from Idaho”. As McCarthy’s reputation worsened nationwide, so did his in Idaho. Columnist Holmes Alexander, a conservative, listed some major issues with Welker that were impacting his prospects for reelection, “the senator’s absenteeism was high, prestige low among colleagues and the press corps, his office a haven for political hacks from back home, his payroll loaded with ‘do-nothing relatives’ and had ‘made a sorry spectacle of himself as a ranter … and a bully of witnesses in committee” (Hill). However, this assessment of his faults does not include the most shameful episode in his tenure. He spearheaded the effort, with Senator Styles Bridges (R-N.H.), in attempting to blackmail Senator Lester Hunt (D-Wyo.) into resigning over his son’s arrest in Washington D.C. for propositioning an undercover officer. The margin of the Republican majority in the Senate was tight, and the GOP figured that a Republican could win Hunt’s Senate seat, but not if Hunt was the incumbent. A cleaner effort to get Hunt out of the way was pursued by the Eisenhower Administration, which offered Hunt a financially lucrative post on the US Tariff Commission if he resigned his seat and agreed not to run for the Senate again (Storrow). Hunt would subsequently shoot himself in his office. As Ray Hill (2024) notes, “There is good reason to believe Styles Bridges was at least human enough to have suffered both shame and guilt for what was a vile episode. Bridges, once one of the most prominent GOP senators, retained his influence, but largely confined himself to the shadows on Capitol Hill. Unfortunately, Herman Welker did not seem as affected by the incident as his colleague, although those close to the Idaho senator noted his paranoia seemed to be increasing”. In 1954, Welker led the defense for McCarthy on the question of censure, but because Senator McCarthy would not apologize for his conduct before the Watkins Committee, he was censured 67-22 on December 2nd. Reportedly Welker was among the senators who encouraged McCarthy not to apologize (Johnson).

1956: Frank Church Steps Up

In 1956, Democrat Frank Church narrowly won the Democratic primary to challenge Welker over former Senator Glen Taylor, managing to convince Democratic voters that they shouldn’t lose again by picking Taylor. Church’s campaign was one of positivity and he favorably contrasted with Welker on the right and Taylor on the left. He also refused to use the blackmail story against Welker, having all pamphlets surrounding the matter burned in a bonfire (Hill). Church wanted to defeat Welker on the issues, and he pointed out contrasts between his stances and Welker’s positions. Church declared in the weeks before the election that “in recent years Idaho has gone from one extreme to the other in its senators. I have spoken of the extremist views and deplorable voting record of my opponent, Herman Welker, during this campaign, and I will undertake to describe it for what it is – a record so bad that now even leading Republicans are disclaiming it” (The Idaho Statesman). Indeed, from a liberal perspective no senator had a worse record than Welker. He was the only senator for the duration of a full Senate term in the 1950s who managed to side with Americans for Democratic Action on zero votes. He sided with Americans for Constitutional Action 83% of the time, with them marking him down for his votes for mineral subsidies in 1955, the agriculture bill in 1956 (although he voted in a free market direction on amendments), and against a reduction in an increase in air force funding in 1956. Welker’s DW-Nominate score was a 0.493, being one of the most conservative senators in his day. He also notably opposed the Eisenhower Administration on some key issues, including foreign aid and on a few important judicial nominations. This included being one of four Republicans to vote against the confirmation of Simon Sobeloff, a moderate who the Eisenhower Administration knew would rule against segregation and had opposed the use of paid informants in national security cases, as well as being one of two to vote against the confirmation of John Marshall Harlan II to the Supreme Court. The only other opponents were notorious maverick Republican William Langer of North Dakota and a group of Southern Democrats. After the Committee for an Effective Congress announced their endorsement of Church, Welker denounced them as a “radical bunch of pinks and punks” (Hill). Welker was also a critic of Brown v. Board of Education (1954). He went as far as to claim that communists literally wrote the court’s decision (Johnson). Although President Eisenhower won Idaho resoundingly in the 1956 election, Welker did as well this time as Clark had done in 1950. This was despite the fact that there was a third candidate in the race to potentially drain from Church’s vote in Taylor, who would recall that he was paid to run as an Independent in the race by Welker supporters to the tune of $35,000 (Johnson). Welker’s health deteriorated after the end of his term, with him having increasingly poor balance. In one incident, he twice fell off a ladder while trying to paint the roof of his house before giving up (Hill). It was discovered in October that he had a malignant brain tumor, and although two operations were performed, he died on October 31st. Although we cannot be sure how far the brain tumor impacted Welker’s mind, it is hard to imagine that it didn’t play at least a major role in his erratic behavior in his last years in office that contributed to his loss.


References

Frank Church Raps Record of Opponent. (1956, October 16). The Idaho Statesman.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/723828900/

Herman Welker States Candidacy For U.S. Senator. (1950, May 4). The Burley Herald.

Retrieved from

https://www.newspapers.com/image/567484623/

Hill, R. (2024). Idaho’s Conservative: Herman Welker. The Knoxville Focus.

Retrieved from

https://www.knoxfocus.com/archives/this-weeks-focus/idahos-conservative-herman-welker/


Johnson, M.C. (2016, June 17). The McCarthy Era in Idaho. Boise State University.


Retrieved from


https://www.boisestate.edu/bluereview/mccarthy-era-idaho/


Storrow, B. (2013, April 14). A Death Untold: The Suicide of Wyoming Sen. Lester Hunt. Casper Star-Tribune.


Retrieved from


https://trib.com/lifestyles/home-and-garden/a-death-untold-the-suicide-of-wyoming-sen-lester-hunt/article_68e7c2e9-cec0-557b-bf53-1b5db00ea88e.html


Welker, Herman. Voteview.


Retrieved from


https://www.voteview.com/person/9930/herman-welker

Fascinating Politics

The Storied Career of the Principled, Unpredictable, and Individualistic Harry P. Cain

The state of Washington is not known as a Republican much a less conservative place, but 1946 was an exception. That year was the first time the GOP won control of both the House and the Senate since 1928, and numerous people were elected who in other circumstances would not have likely won. This could be said for Harry Pulliam Cain (1906-1979).

A banker by profession, Cain did not start his life in politics on the Republican side, rather he was a New Deal Democrat, fervently backing FDR in 1932 and becoming the chairman of the Pierce County Young Democrats. However, he became disillusioned with Roosevelt’s second-term policies and his “court-packing plan” and would recall, “I had respect for Roosevelt at first. His program was bold and imaginative – just what we needed when the country was sick. But he continued to treat us sick even when we had become well again. I thought the third term was a terrible thing” (Smith, 2023). From 1935 to 1936, Cain and his wife took a long trip to Europe, and he was in the audience of several Nazi mass rallies. The speeches he heard from Hitler and other leading Nazis convinced him that the Nazis were a danger to the world, and made over 150 speeches on the subject back in the US (Smith, 2011, 28-37). In 1940, Cain was elected Tacoma’s mayor and although the mayoral position in Tacoma was not a strong one, he increased his power by making direct appeals to the people, hosting a weekly radio program, and engaging in a few publicity stunts, such as walking across the newly rebuilt Tacoma Narrows Bridge. Cain also stood out as one of only two elected officials on the West coast to oppose Japanese internment, consistent with his core belief in individual freedom. This translated to him protecting Tacoma’s Japanese business district (Smith, 2023). He was also a reformer as he wanted to crack down on vice and pushed for long-term city planning. Reelected in 1942, Cain would take a leave of absence in 1943 to serve in the military, where he would serve with heroism and distinction, rising to the rank of colonel. In 1945, he delivered a tremendously impactful speech to 5,000 Germans at a former concentration camp on the massive extent of the crimes of Nazi Germany, which brought the crowd to tears (Smith, 2023).

Eyes on the Senate

In 1944, Cain announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination for the Senate. However, his principled nature by insisting on not answering political questions and not personally campaigning while serving in the army contributed to his loss to Congressman Warren G. Magnuson. 1944 was also not the best year for the GOP, but the next election…that would be a different story.

In 1946, Cain ran for the Senate as a Republican, and the Democrats were in a uniquely poor position in Washington for multiple reasons. First, the unpopularity of Truman in 1946 given meat shortages, and incumbent Hugh Mitchell, who was not charismatic, was in a weak position as he had not been elected to his position, rather appointed after the resignation of Senator Mon C. Wallgren as he had been elected governor. This combination of factors resulted in the election of Cain.

Senator Cain

As a senator, Cain stood as more conservative than the standard Republican from Washington. He was the only Washington politician, for instance, who voted against funding a new Tennessee Valley Authority steam plant in 1948. Many voters in the state of Washington were supportive of public ownership and generation of power rather than private, and Cain was firmly on the side of private development. Indeed, he was a strong supporter of the free market as opposed to government regulation and control. Cain also gained a reputation as the staunchest supporter of the real estate industry in the Senate, and this translated into him being prominent in opposition to rent control and public housing. In 1948, he unsuccessfully attempted to kill the Taft-Ellender-Wagner Housing bill. This would instead be done in the House, but the bill would become law in the next Congress. Cain also voted for the Taft-Hartley Act, which was not a popular statewide position in given that Washington was the second-highest unionized state in the nation. However, he saw himself as a Burkean legislator who does not surrender his judgment to the voters, and stated in 1949, “I had decided to listen only to my conscience and my instinct and do what seemed right at the time. Why not? A man in public office might as well play it the way he thinks he should. There is no sure way to stay in public office” (Derieux, 65).

On foreign policy, Cain did back aid to Greece and Turkey and supported the Marshall Plan while opposing efforts to cut the program. However, he would not be in favor of Point IV aid to poor nations and would support foreign aid cuts. Cain stood opposed to the US taking in generous numbers of displaced persons from Europe, and in 1950 he voted against a bill taking in an increased number of such people. Yet, he also supported civil rights at home, voting to end a Southern filibuster against a Fair Employment Practices bill and opposing a Southern effort to undermine army desegregation.

Cain also notably held two solo filibusters: a six-and-a-half hour nonstop filibuster against Mon C. Wallgren to head the National Security Resources Board, which was successful as he withdrew after the Senate Armed Services Committee voted to reject the nomination. Cain believed that Wallgren was unqualified for the role, but this would harm his standing among Washington voters. The following year, Cain performed another solo filibuster, for 12 hours and 8 minutes against legislation extending rent control, but rent control would be extended.

Cain, after his filibuster of Wallgren.

In the 1952 election, even though Eisenhower won resoundingly including in the state of Washington, four Republican senators lost reelection, and Cain lost the biggest of all of them, with Congressman Henry Jackson winning the election by 13 points. He would later reflect that he had talked too much and listened too little (Smith, 2023). Cain’s DW-Nominate score was a 0.352, higher than that of other Washington Republicans serving at the time, and he only sided with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 18% of the time. Cain would in 1971 letter to C.J. Skreen explain how he voted thusly, “as a reactionary I reacted strongly against measures believed to be adverse to the public interest. It seldom bothered me that a number of my positions were supported only by a small minority. Had I been concerned with self rather than country I would have acted much differently. I was often angry and too impatient for my own good”.

Post-Senate

After departing the Senate, President Eisenhower appointed him to head the Subversive Activities Control Board. Although Cain had been a staunch supporter of Senator Joseph McCarthy (R-Wis.) and was a close personal friend, he turned into a liberal reformer on the board. He came to oppose the Eisenhower Administration’s internal security program, found the Attorney General’s List of Subversive Organizations too broad to be relied on in loyalty cases, and came out against the loyalty oath that all government employees were required to take (Smith, 2023). He did so publicly, and this became known as the “Cain Mutiny”. He also criticized McCarthy for his term “Fifth Amendment communist” as disrespecting the Constitution (Bird). Despite this, Cain and McCarthy remained friends until the latter’s death. Cain was not reappointed, although he read the writing on the wall and had not sought to be reappointed.

Florida Politics

In 1957, Cain moved to Florida where he continued his work in the banking sector and was active in the state’s Republican Party. He decided to run for public office again in 1972, when he determined that his position of County Commissioner of Dade County would not be confined to a mere interim role, finding the call to public service irresistible, “…I was struck by the great need for public services – sewers, transportation and so forth – and I concluded that unless something is done, within 10 years this government will be unmanageable and this splendid community will be undesirable to live in” (The New York Times). His philosophy was although still economically conservative, more liberal on social issues, particularly civil rights. That year, he described himself as “basically a political pragmatist – from time to time and for different reasons a conservative, militant, liberal, moderate, purist, radical and now and again what some call a populist. The record consists of doing the best I could when confronted by any situation demanding action” (Cardwell). Cain won the election. While commissioner, he successfully pushed for bilingualism given the considerable Cuban population and was even an early supporter of gay rights. Cain also successfully pushed for a smoking ban in all indoor public facilities. The latter was quite personal for him, as he had for many years smoked two packs a day. Unfortunately, Cain had not quit in time to avoid serious consequences for his health. By 1976, his health was in decline and he lost reelection. Cain would make return trips to Tacoma throughout his later years, and he did so one last time in December 1977 to accept an award honoring his stand against Japanese-American internment. He died from complications of emphysema on March 3, 1979.

References

12 Hours, 8 Minutes. (1950, June 19). Time Magazine, 20.

Bird, M. (1979, March 4). Ex-Senator Harry Cain Dies at 73; A Critic of McCarthy-Era Excesses. The New York Times.

Retrieved from
 https://www.nytimes.com/1979/03/04/archives/exsenator-harry-cain-dies-at-73-critic-of-mccarthyera-excesses.htmlrom

Derieux, J.C. (1949, August 13). Hurry Cain Out of the West. Collier’s.

Cardwell, R. (1972, July 16). He’s Back in Politics. Tacoma News Tribune.

Ex-Senator Runs for County Post. (1972, September 10). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Harry P. Cain, letter to C.J. Skreen, December 9, 1971. C.M. Smith collection.

Smith, M.C. (2011). Raising Cain: the life and politics of Senator Harry P. Cain. Book Publishers Network.

Smith, M.C. (2023, May 15). Cain, Harry Pulliam. History Link.

Retrieved from

https://www.historylink.org/file/22698

Fascinating Politics

Roland Libonati: Al Capone’s Lawyer Goes to Congress

On July 18, 1957, octogenarian Congressman James B. Bowler of Illinois’ 7th district, based in Chicago, died. Running in his place was Roland Libonati (1897-1991), controversial lawyer who represented Al Capone during his heyday and had connections and friendships with the mob in general.

In 1930, Libonati, often known as “Libby”, was elected to the Illinois House of Representatives, serving until 1934, and then was elected again in 1940, serving a single term. He was then elected to the Illinois Senate, where within his five years of service he rose to be minority whip. and in 1940 secured election to the Illinois Senate, where he rose in the Senate leadership to be minority whip. Throughout his career, Libonati was, in addition to his connections to mobsters, known for his malapropisms, which included calling Slavic voters “Slavishes”, speaking of late autumn as the time of year when “the moss is on the pumpkin” and “I am trying not to make any honest mistakes” (Time Magazine).

When running for the special election in 1957, his victory was never in doubt given the district’s staunchly Democratic makeup and the firm grip the Daley machine had in the district. His relations with mobsters were maintained right to his time in Congress, with Time Magazine (1957) noting that “Libonati is still on chummy terms with Capone henchmen such as Tony Accardo and Paul (“the Waiter”) Ricca, who are really “charitable” and “patriotic” fellows, according to Libby”. During his career in Congress, Libonati sat on the House Judiciary Committee, which considered civil rights legislation Libonati’s record was strongly liberal; he sided with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 93% of the time and the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action only 3% of the time. His DW-Nominate score was a -0.415. The only major issue that Libonati opposed liberals regarding public power with the Hanford facility in Washington state. Libonati was considered a staunch man of the Daley machine, but his loyalty would be tested with a subject of which he was passionately in support: civil rights.

As a member of the Judiciary Committee, Libonati was involved in the consideration of the civil rights bill, and he was for a very strong bill. The issue was that strong proposals in the past had either been filibustered to death in the Senate or had been watered down considerably. The hope of the Kennedy Administration and the leadership of the Judiciary Committee was to produce a bill that was strong but could also attract needed Republican votes. Although Libonati was pressured by President Kennedy and Mayor Daley to support the compromise bill, he voted with liberals for the stronger bill. After this, Libonati reported to a colleague that the Daley machine informed him that his career was over (Purdum, 144-145). This may not have been the only factor, however. The Cosa Nostra was reported to have ordered Libonati to retire, with the decision being made in late 1962 given him having fallen into disfavor by Salvatore Giancana (The Chicago Sun-Times Post-Dispatch). He was succeeded in Congress by Frank Annunzio, who is an interesting figure himself.

References

Gang Reported Forcing Out Rep. Libonati. (1964, January 15). The Chicago Sun-Times Post-Dispatch.

Retrieved from

Click to access CIA-RDP73-00475R000200220003-9.pdf

Illinois: Meet Your Congressman. (1957, November 25). Time Magazine.

Retrieved from

https://time.com/archive/6826839/illinois-meet-your-congressman/

Libonati, Roland Victor. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/5654/roland-victor-libonati

Roland V. Libonati. (1991, May 28). Chicago Tribune.

Retrieved from

ROLAND V. LIBONATI

Purdum, T. (2014). An idea whose time has come: two presidents, two parties, and the battle for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Company.

Fascinating Politics

Frank Church: Idaho’s Last Liberal in Congress

The year is 1956, and Senator Herman Welker is in a uniquely weak position. Although President Eisenhower writes a letter of endorsement of him, it is perceived as lukewarm, and furthermore he pointedly refuses to come to Idaho to campaign for him. In the world of politics, a lukewarm endorsement can be worse than no endorsement. Welker was a staunch ally of Senator Joseph McCarthy and not seen as an individual who could be relied upon by the Eisenhower Administration. Worse yet, as I covered in my last post, Welker’s behavior was noticeably increasingly erratic and his increasingly poor balance to many pointed to heavy drinking (it turned out to be a terminal brain tumor). Enter young Boise attorney Frank Church (1924-1984).

Church contrasted positively to Welker as well as the third-party nominee, Glen H. Taylor, who was extremely liberal. His campaign slogan was highly effective, “Idaho Will Be Proud of Frank Church”, and he also refused to engage in negative campaigning, rather contrasting his positions with those of Welker. Welker repeatedly voted to cut foreign aid and supported the Bricker Amendment while Church was an internationalist, Welker supported private power development while Church supported public power. Church was also greatly assisted in his campaigns and career by his wife, Bethine, whose influence was such that she would be commonly known as “Idaho’s third senator”. Although Eisenhower won Idaho convincingly with 61% of the vote, Welker ran 23 points behind him, with Church getting 56% of the vote. Something to bear in mind about Idaho at the time was that it was less conservative than than it is now. Democrats, for instance, from Democrat Compton White’s win of the 1st district in 1932 until Republican James McClure’s win of the district in 1966 were able to win the district in all elections save 1946 and 1950.

Relations with LBJ and Ideology

Church’s initial relations with Senate Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson (D-Tex.) were difficult because he voted for a Senate rule to curb the filibuster, and he was frozen out for six months. However, Church got back in Johnson’s good graces by agreeing to support two amendments to ease passage of civil rights legislation; the Anderson-Aiken Amendment striking the authority of the Attorney General to initiate 14th Amendment lawsuits under the bill, and co-sponsoring the O’Mahoney-Kefauver-Church Jury Trial Amendment to require jury trials in voting rights cases of criminal contempt, although Church was sure to include a proviso that required such juries not be segregated. He would prove himself in the Senate as a solid liberal, strongly supporting most New Frontier and Great Society programs, such as the Economic Opportunity Act, Medicare, Mass Transit legislation, and federal aid to education. Despite his earlier record supporting limiting amendments on civil rights legislation, he would not support Lyndon Johnson’s (D-Tex.) maneuvering to limit the Attorney General’s authority for the 1960 Civil Rights Act and voted for all of the 1960s civil rights laws. Although a liberal, he was not without exceptions. For example, in 1966, he supported both of Minority Leader Everett Dirksen’s (R-Ill.) proposed Constitutional amendments counteracting Warren Court decisions, namely on state legislative reapportionment and school prayer. He also supported the conservative position on some hot-button social issues, such as his opposition to strong gun control, his support for a federal death penalty, and for restricting federal funds for abortion. Church sided with the conservative Americans for Constitutional Action 17% of the time during his career, while he conversely sided with the liberal Americans for Democratic Action 83% of the time. His DW-Nominate score was a -0.384. However, Church wasn’t a politician who merely catered to the political whims of his state.

Vietnam War Critic

Church became an early Senate critic of the Vietnam War along with Foreign Relations Committee chairman J. William Fulbright (D-Ark.), and his stance provoked enough dissatisfaction with him in Idaho that a recall effort was initiated by conservative Kootenai County commissioner Ron Rankin, but not only did this effort get snuffed when a federal court found that recall laws don’t apply to US senators but it also backfired on Church’s opponents as many Idahoans came to sympathize with the senator. In 1968, he won reelection with 60% of the vote, his best performance, against Congressman George Hansen. Church’s opposition to the Vietnam War continued into the Nixon Administration, and he became a legislative leader in opposition. In 1970, Church sponsored with John Sherman Cooper (R-Ky.) the Cooper-Church Amendment, which if enacted would have blocked funds for US troops in and over Cambodia and Laos. While this amendment passed the Senate, it lost a vote in the House. Nonetheless, this was the first time that an amendment to limit the Vietnam War passed a House of Congress, and indeed, the first time the Senate had ever adopted a proposal to limit the president’s authority to deploy troops during a war. Church would also support the McGovern-Hatfield “End the War” Amendment that year, which if adopted would have set a timetable for withdrawal from Vietnam. He would get a successful amendment through in 1973 that he sponsored with Senator Clifford Case (R-N.J.) that barred any funds for further operations in Indochina (Vietnam), Laos, or Cambodia or off the shores of these nations after August 15, 1973. Faced with veto-proof margins of support, President Nixon reluctantly signed it into law on July 1st.  

The Church Committee

On December 22, 1974, The New York Times published Seymour Hersh’s expose of CIA operations attempting assassinations on foreign officials, and this plus revelations about the domestic surveillance program of the US Army resulted in the Senate voting 82-4 to create a committee to investigate intelligence agencies (The Levin Center). This committee was chaired by Church, and vice-chaired by Senator John Tower (R-Tex.). This committee was one of three governmental bodies to investigate such activities, and this included the Rockefeller Commission in the Executive Branch as well as the Pike Committee in the House, but the Church Committee was the most successful of the three. This can be in part due to Church’s approach of seeking bipartisanship as well as pushing for consensus. The Church Committee’s investigations uncovered numerous operations that constituted abuses of power or were outright illegal. The FBI operation was COINTELPRO, that had agents infiltrate numerous groups, primarily left-wing, that they regarded as subversive (The Levin Center). The CIA had multiple operations exposed. These were Project MKUltra (CIA mind control experiments with LSD), Project HTLINGUAL (interception of mail to the USSR and China), Project MKNaomi (collaborating with the military to stockpile biological weapons without executive or legislative authority), Project Mockingbird (journalists working for the CIA to spread propaganda), and the “Family Jewels” (operations attempting to assassinate foreign officials) (The Levin Center). The National Security Agency was also found to have their own illicit operations. These were Project SHAMROCK (intercepting mail coming to and from the USSR and China) and Project MINARET (monitoring with the cooperation of telecommunication companies of numerous individuals on its “watchlist” including Senator Church himself) (The Levin Center). The CIA also opened the mail behind the back of the US Postal Service, including the mail of that of prominent US politicians. One of these was presidential candidate Richard Nixon in 1968 (The New York Times, 1975). Nixon would ban the mail reading program during his administration. Also revealed was that the FBI from 1942 to 1968 conducted illegal burglaries at least 238 times against 14 targeted groups and individuals (The New York Times, 1975).

The Committee’s final report was unanimous. They concluded that “intelligence excesses, at home and abroad”, were not the “product of any single party, administration, or man”, but had been endemic from the administrations of FDR to Nixon and amped up with the Cold War (U.S. Senate). The committee issued 96 recommendations for change. Church would also that “The technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government … is within the reach of the government to know” (Healy, 2013). Reforms enacted after the Church Committee’s conclusion included President Ford’s Executive Order 11905 prohibiting political assassinations, included the establishment of permanent Select Senate and House Committees on Intelligence for oversight, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the limiting to ten-year terms of the post of FBI director so there couldn’t be a repeat of J. Edgar Hoover (The Levin Center).

Church for President

Critics of Church and the Church Committee asserted that this committee was a springboard for his presidential ambitions, and they weren’t necessarily wrong. In March 1976, he announced his candidacy for the Democratic nomination. Although he won the primaries of Idaho, Montana, Nebraska, and Oregon, there was too much momentum behind Jimmy Carter and he dropped out. Church would prove to be of great help to the new president.

Church and Carter

As an important member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Church was the floor manager of the Panama Canal Treaties and worked closely with the Carter Administration, Majority Leader Robert Byrd (D-W.V.), and Minority Leader Howard Baker (R-Tenn.) to get them ratified, as I had written about in an earlier posting. However, this did not mean that Church would always go along with Carter. He voted, for instance, to cancel the sale of jet fighters to Egypt, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. Another key collaborative effort between President Carter and Senator Church was the establishment of the Central Idaho Wilderness Act in 1980, conserving over 2 million acres of wilderness. However, this act was not popular in Idaho, nor were the Panama Canal Treaties, and the Anybody But Church Committee formed to defeat him in the next election, and Republican Congressman Steve Symms was their nominee.

The 1980 Election and The End

In 1980, Church faced his toughest challenge yet as he was up against the arch-conservative Symms who ran as a staunch supporter of Ronald Reagan. The election was very close, but Symms won by less than a point. With the departure of Church there left the last liberal to represent the state of Idaho in Congress and the last Democrat to represent it in the Senate, and he would practice international law after his term. Sadly, the fate of Frank Church bears some resemblance to that of his predecessor, Welker, in the sense that he would not have survived another term in the Senate and that he would die of a malignant tumor in his fifties.

On January 12, 1984, Church was hospitalized for what was discovered to be a malignant pancreatic tumor. Senator James McClure (R-Idaho) quickly introduced legislation to rename the wilderness established under his act “The Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness” so he could be recognized before his death, and it was signed four weeks before Church’s passing on April 7th. The wilderness today is commonly known in the area as “The Frank”.

References

40th anniversary: The act that created the largest wilderness in the lower 48 and honored an Idaho lawmaker. (2020, July 23). Boise State University.

Retrieved from

40th anniversary: The act that created the largest wilderness in the Lower 48 and honored an Idaho lawmaker

Church, Frank Forrester. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/1721/frank-forrester-church

Even Nixon’s Mail Was Read By the CIA. (1975, September 28). The New York Times.

Retrieved from                                                         

Click to access CIA-RDP90-01208R000100240073-7.pdf

Healy, G. (2013, September 30). ‘No Place to Hide’ from NSA, Then or Now. CATO Institute.

Retrieved from

https://www.cato.org/commentary/no-place-hide-nsa-then-or-now

Portraits in Oversight: Frank Church and the Church Committee. The Levin Center.

Retrieved from

Frank Church and the Church Committee

Reeves, P. (1984, April 7). Frank Church, a U.S. senator for 24 years, one-time… UPI.

Retrieved from

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1984/04/07/Frank-Church-a-US-senator-for-24-years-one-time/3877450162000/

Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities. U.S. Senate.

Retrieved from

https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/investigations/church-committee.htm

Fascinating Politics

Hells Canyon Dam – Private vs. Public Power

The 1952 election brought Dwight Eisenhower to the presidency as well as Republicans to a majority in Congress. One of Eisenhower’s policies was instead of public construction of dams, as had been the norm with the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations, that there would be a partnership between government and private companies, with government using private companies to construct and own the dams generating power. This proved highly controversial in the West, and the proposal for constructing the Hells Canyon Dam was at the center of this controversy.

Hells Canyon is a deep canyon between Idaho, Oregon, and a small portion of Washington, and has the snake river, and was seen as a rich source of hydroelectric power. The Eisenhower Administration favored the Idaho Power Company constructing three dams to generate power, but this met strong opposition from Democrats. Unfortunately for the Republicans, there was more opposition than that among the public. In 1954, Oregon Republican Senator Guy Cordon, the last conservative to represent the state in the Senate, narrowly lost reelection to Democrat Richard Neuberger despite President Eisenhower coming to Oregon to campaign with him, and one of the key issues Neuberger pushed was opposition to private power as opposed to public power, painting it as a giveaway of public rights (LaLande). After the 1954 election, Oregon had two Democratic senators for the first time since the Wilson Administration.

Votes on Hells Canyon Dam and an Alleged Deal

In 1956, the Senate voted down public construction of Hells Canyon Dam 41-51 on July 19th. Most Republicans voted against it along with several Southern Democrats. The 1956 election didn’t produce a different party makeup of the Senate, as Republicans and Democrats both gained and lost different seats. Yet, on June 21, 1957, the Senate approved public construction of Hells Canyon Dam 45-38. The senators who had voted against in 1956 but voted for this time were George Smathers (D-Fla.), Richard Russell (D-Ga.), Russell Long (D-La.), Margaret Chase Smith (R-Me.), James Eastland (D-Miss.), Sam Ervin (D-N.C.), and George Aiken (R-Vt.). The flip of five Southern Democrats was key to securing this victory, and Senator Charles Potter (R-Mich.), a supporter of a strong civil rights bill and opponent of public ownership of Hells Canyon Dam, alleged right after the vote that this flip was done in exchange for the support of Western Democrats for watering down the pending civil rights bill (The New York Times). Senator Wayne Morse (D-Ore.), a supporter of strong civil rights legislation and a co-sponsor of the Hells Canyon Dam denied the charge. Senator Frank Church (D-Idaho), who had voted for both of the key amendments weakening the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and had co-sponsored the Jury Trial Amendment as well as the Hells Canyon Dam bill, denied that a deal had occurred. He stated, “There was never any understanding between Lyndon Johnson and me that I would take a role in the Civil Rights Bill or I would join in the sponsorship of the Jury Trial Amendment in exchange for his help on Hells Canyon. That’s pure fiction utterly without any basis in fact” (Gellman). Although this flip of the Southern senators is suggestive of a deal, there was a public explanation for the flip from the de facto leader of the Southern Democrats. Senator Richard Russell (D-Ga.) stated as to his own reason, “I happen to be one of the five Democrats who changed his vote on Hells Canyon. I did it because of the tax amortization feature which made it very apparent that the Federal Government was going to pay for the dam in any event. If we were going to pay for it, I thought we ought to have title to it” (Bill Downs, War Correspondent). Several senators who were alleged to be participants in this deal denied that a deal occurred, but historian Robert Caro gave this allegation credence as he reported that Majority Leader Lyndon B. Johnson (D-Tex.) masterminded this deal. However, historian Irving Gellman (2015) contests this, holding that Hells Canyon Dam had been killed in a House subcommittee before the vote on the Jury Trial Amendment. However, this counter-argument might be off as well, as the exchange, according to Time Magazine, was over the vote to send the Civil Rights Act of 1957 to the Judiciary Committee, chaired by segregationist James Eastland (D-Miss.), to undo Minority Leader William Knowland’s (R-Calif.) maneuver bypassing it. Indeed, the vote on sending the bill to the Judiciary Committee was held the day before the Hells Canyon Dam vote and numerous Western senators voted with the South on this one, with the five Southern senators voting for the dam allegedly in gratitude for the support of Western senators. Interestingly, Frank Church was not among the senators to vote to bring it back to committee, pointing to his denial being accurate that he didn’t make a deal. Although Wayne Morse voted to send it back, his record was consistent as a stickler for legislative procedure and he voted against efforts to weaken the bill, making his denial credible as well. Although several senators had denied there was a deal, Russell Long (D-La.) would give credence to the notion of an informal deal, stating, “Johnson put together sort of a gentleman’s agreement where about four of us would vote for the high dam at Hells Canyon and about four on the other side would vote with us (…) on a completely unrelated subject: civil rights” (Lange, 69).

Political Consequences of Support for Private Power

There were significant political consequences for those in the Pacific Northwest who supported private construction and ownership of the Hells Canyon Dam; although President Eisenhower easily won reelection in Oregon, Oregon Republicans got hit hard; Oregon Republican Congressmen Sam Coon and Harris Ellsworth lost reelection in districts that had been held by Republicans since the 1942 election. Coon’s loss was directly attributed to his opponent Al Ullman’s opposition to private construction of dams in Hells Canyon (Foss). Indeed, the 1956 election had bad results for Oregon Republicans by and large. That year, Republican Governor Elmo Smith lost reelection to Democrat Robert Holmes and Democrats won control of the state legislature for the first time since 1878 (Swarthout). In Idaho, Democrat Frank Church, a supporter of public ownership of dams at Hells Canyon, defeated Republican incumbent Herman Welker, a supporter of private ownership, in the last election in which a Democrat would defeat a Republican Senate incumbent in Idaho. Although in this case, Welker’s loss was attributable to more than that as his behavior was increasingly volatile and erratic, with him being prone to temper tantrums and bouts of depression as well as appearing to have poor balance, which included a public incident of stumbling and falling down airplane stairs (Hill). At the time his critics alleged that this was the product of heavy drinking, but the truth was worse: it turned out Welker had a brain tumor, and it would kill him on October 30, 1957. Welker’s strong support of Joseph McCarthy also proved a hindrance rather than a help by 1956.

Despite these political consequences, the Hells Canyon legislation being killed in the House subcommittee proved to be the final word on it, as the Idaho Power Company would later construct three dams on the Snake River.

References

Foss, C. Albert Conrad “Al” Ullman. Oregon Encyclopedia.

Retrieved from

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

Gellman, I.F. (2015, November 9). Robert Caro Gives LBJ More Credit than He Deserves for the Passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. History News Network.

Retrieved from

https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/robert-caro-gives-lbj-more-credit-than-he-deserves

Hill, R. Idaho’s Conservative: Herman Welker. The Knoxville Focus.

Retrieved from

https://www.knoxfocus.com/archives/this-weeks-focus/idahos-conservative-herman-welker/rom

HR. 6127. Civil Rights Act of 1957. Point of Order Against Objection by Knowland to Referral of Bill to Judiciary Committee. Rejected. (Bill Thus Bypassed the Judiciary Committee). Govtrack.

Retrieved from

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/85-1957/s57

LaLand, J. (2022, September 16). Guy Cordon. Oregon Encyclopedia.

Retrieved from

https://www.oregonencyclopedia.org/articles/cordon_guy_1890_1969_/

Lange, O.M. (2017). “The Miracle of 1957”: Southern senators and the making of the 1957 Civil Rights Act (Master’s thesis). University of Oslo.

Retrieved from

Click to access MASTEROPPGAVE—Opplasting-til-print.pdf

National Affairs: Balance Tipped. (1957, July 1). Time Magazine.

Retrieved from

https://time.com/archive/6611890/national-affairs-balance-tipped/

Potter Charges Dam – Rights Deal. (1957, June 22). The New York Times.

Retrieved from

Russell Rejects Criticism of South on Civil Rights. (2024, February 13). Bill Downs, War Correspondent.

Retrieved from

https://www.billdownscbs.com/2024/02/1957-senator-richard-b-russell-rejects.html

S. 1333. Authorize Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Hells Canyon Dam. Govtrack.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/84-1956/s200

S. 555. Authorize Federal Construction of Hells Canyon Dam. Govtrack.

Retrieved from

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/85-1957/s59

Swarthout, J.M. (1957). The 1956 Election in Oregon. The Western Political Quarterly, 10(1).

Retrieved from

https://www.jstor.org/stable/444252