Monday, November 30, 2020

Margaret Chase Smith in Washington, DC

First Female Nominated to the Presidency by a Major Political Party

Mar 24, 2010 Michael Streich

After serving in the House for 8 years, Margaret Chase Smith was elected 4 times to represent Maine in the Senate and nominated in 1964 for the presidency.

At the 1964 Republican Convention in San Francisco, political history was made when Vermont Senator George Aiken placed in nomination the Senior Senator from Maine, Margaret Chase Smith. This represented the first time that a woman had been nominated for the presidency by a major political party. Although Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater won the nomination, it was a victory for women. In her first 18 years in the Senate, Smith had been the only female in an all-male club.

The Early Years in the PineTree State

Margaret Chase Smith was born and raised in Skowhegan, Maine. As a young teenager, she began working part-time jobs to help her family that included six siblings. After completing high school, she worked as a teacher, telephone operator, newspaper writer, and office manager. In 1930 she married Clyde Smith, politically connected and soon to enter Congress as Maine’s 2nd District representative.

Margaret Chase Smith in the House of Representatives

Clyde Smith died from a heart attack in 1940, related to a diagnosis of tertiary syphilis. Margaret had pledged to enter the Maine primary election in place of her husband – at his request. In January 1941, Congresswoman Smith became one of a select minority to sit in the Congress; few women had been elected to the national legislature up to that point.

Margaret Chase Smith refused to be identified on the basis of gender; she saw herself as the representative from Maine’s 2nd district, although she championed women’s rights and equality. She supported the ERA and as a member of the House Naval Affairs Committee, worked to equalize the status of women in the military. According to Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Senator Smith “favored a completely gender-blind society.”

Serving in the U.S. Senate for Four Terms

When Margaret Chase Smith lost her bid for reelection in 1972, she had served the people of Maine for 24 years in the U.S. Senate. She was first elected in 1948, the 100th anniversary of the Seneca Falls Convention where Elizabeth Cady Stanton delivered the Declaration of Sentiments, that advocated, among other things, a woman’s right to vote. Senator Smith would deliver a declaration of her own in 1950, but the issue would be the tactics of Wisconsin’s junior senator, Joseph McCarthy.

On June 1, 1950, Margaret Chase Smith rose in the Senate to deliver her Declaration of Conscience. She was the first senator to challenge McCarthy’s hearings on alleged Communist sympathizers in government departments. Of the six senators that supported her, only Oregon’s Wayne Morse stood by her. Her courage cost her committee assignments but she never regretted her actions. After the Eisenhower victory in 1952, Smith would serve on both the Appropriations and Armed Service committees.

A Democrat in the White House

John F. Kennedy won the 1960 election but, as historians have pointed out, was unable to see many of his ideas approved by Congress. As a senator, Kennedy had been less than industrious, often shunning important committee work. Senator Smith recalled that Kennedy had missed the 1954 censure vote of Joseph McCarthy and believed the young president was not forceful enough in combating Nikita Khrushchev.

Yet following the assassination of JFK in November 1963, it was Senator Smith who delivered the most poignant eulogy and tribute: removing the red rose from her lapel – a trademark for the indomitable senator, and placing the flower on the desk once occupied by Kennedy. A year later she thrust herself into the Republican primaries, taking on Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller.

The Break-Through Senator Returns to Maine

Senator Smith’s first priority was to be an effective and transparent legislator, although her public life and successes made her a “break through” woman. Senator Hutchison writes that, “Despite the press’s tendency to treat women legislators as novelties…Margaret managed to convince the voters that she was an effective presence on Capitol Hill.” This was the great legacy of Margaret Chase Smith.

References:

Lewis L. Gould, The Most Exclusive Club (Basic Books, 2005)
Kay Bailey Hutchison, American Heroines (Harper, 2006)
Margaret Chase Smith, Declaration of Conscience (Doubleday & Company, 1972) edited by William C. Lewis, Jr

The copyright of the article Margaret Chase Smith in Washington, DC in American History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Margaret Chase Smith in Washington, DC in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

Huey Long's Assassination and Political Alienation

May 15, 2010 Michael Streich

Huey Long, the Louisiana Kingfish, ruthlessly eliminated political opposition and used patronage to solidify his political machine in Louisiana.

On September 8, 1935, a young man stepped from behind a column in the Baton Rouge capital building pointing a .38 caliber revolver at Louisiana Senator Huey Long. What happened next is a mystery. The assailant, Dr. Carl Weiss, was riddled with bullets from Long’s body guards. His body had been hit with 61 bullets. Long, who received one shot to his abdomen, died following a failed operation. Speculation still exists if Dr. Weiss actually discharged his gun, or if Long had been assassinated by a stay bullet that ricocheted off the marble columns. Long, the self-styled “Kingfish,” was dead and would pose no threat as a third party candidate against President Roosevelt in the election of 1936.

The Rise of Huey Long in Louisiana

Huey Long came from a poor family and grew up in a parish (or county) that had a reputation for challenging the status quo. By the time he became governor at age 34, he was, according to historical writer Jack Pearl, the “supreme dictator of Louisiana.” University of Texas historian Lewis L. Gould agrees, referring to Long as “virtual dictator.” Long’s political machine controlled the politics of the state through patronage and Long himself was ruthless in his actions toward enemies.

Carl Weiss, Long’s assassin, had good reason to hate the man. His father-in-law, a judge, had been ruined by Long, his reputation falsely impugned. Weiss’ wife had become depressed over the affair and their children were treated as outcasts. But given Huey Long’s reputation, Weiss was viewed sympathetically after his assassination of the demagogue. This was particularly true of the Louisiana wealthy class. As governor, Long “taxed the rich practically into extinction,” according to Pearl.

Huey Long, FDR, and the U.S. Senate

Senator Long was a firebrand on Capital Hill. Labor Secretary Frances Perkins recalls how Senator Long held up an appropriations bill to fund the newly created Social Security system with a 19-hour filibuster at the moment Congress was set to adjourn. His “Share the Wealth” redistribution proposal, though completely unworkable, was embraced by millions of poor and unemployed Americans, particularly at a time the New Deal seemed to be foundering.

Long cared nothing for Senate protocols. He took on Senate leaders, like Arkansas Senator Joseph Robinson, and helped elect Hattie Caraway to the U.S. Senate in 1932, directly challenging Robinson’s state political machine. This action demonstrated very clearly Long’s ability to defeat the political machines of Southern state politics as well as the leaders of those machines. FDR, always wary of Long, knew that he needed the support of those Southern political bosses to pass New Deal measures. Huey Long was a threat.

Long, who had cautiously supported FDR in 1932, had become an adversary by 1935. Long saw himself as a future president and curried the favor of those that had not benefited from the New Deal. Historian Albert Fried writes that Long became a “militant advocate” for “Labor, the unemployed, small farmers and businessmen, the poor…” Long proposed a redistribution of wealth This included the government confiscation of personal wealth over $2 million and the distribution of $5,000 payments to every family in America.

The Death of Huey Long

Ironically, Huey Long, according to Pearl, was obsessed “with the subject of assassination.” He was always surrounded by body guards, many of them common thugs. At the time Weiss confronted Long, one of those body guards actually used a machine gun.

Even if assassination had not ended the career of a corrupt and self-absorbed politician, the government might have. The same Treasury agent who had brought down Al Capone in 1931 was investigating the Long machine in Louisiana. Ultimately, numerous cronies would be brought to justice. It was the one reliable tool FDR’s justice department could level against the Kingfish. For Huey Long, it was only a matter of time.

References:

Albert Fried, FDR And His Enemies (Palgrave for St. Martin’s Griffin, 1999)
Lewis L. Gould, The Most Exclusive Club: A History of the Modern United States Senate (Basic Books, 2005)
Robert Mann, Legacy of Power: Senator Russell Long of Louisiana (Paragon House, 1992) [Senator Russell Long was the son of Huey Long – see Chapter One]
Jack Pearl, The Dangerous Assassins (Derby, CT: Monarch Books, Inc., 1964)
Frances Perkins, The Roosevelt I Knew (NY: Viking Press, 1946)

The copyright of the article Huey Long's Assassination and Political Alienation in American History is owned by Michael Streich. Permission to republish Huey Long's Assassination and Political Alienation in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.

The Plot to Kill FDR

May 16, 2010 Michael Streich

Whether Giuseppe Zangara acted alone or as part of a larger conspiracy is still a mystery. But on February 15, 1933, Zangara fired 5 shots at FDR in Miami.

Giuseppe Zangara entered the United States from Italy on September 2, 1923 and became a naturalized citizen several years later. Uneducated, Zangara was a brick-layer, managing to earn a better than average salary. In 1926, however, he was no longer receiving jobs. The 1929 Wall Street Crash further left him bitter. This “little man with a big boast” (Philadelphia Inquirer, March 18, 1933) decided to kill the President. Although Herbert Hoover was the target, Zangara saw an opportunity on February 15, 1933 while living in Miami. President-elect Franklin D. Roosevelt was scheduled to deliver a speech at Bayfront Park.

Zangara’s Assassination Attempt

Zangara arrived in Miami from Paterson, New Jersey weeks before FDR’s visit to the city. Intending to travel to Washington to shoot Hoover, Zangara elected to remain in Miami and kill Roosevelt instead. According to FBI memoranda, he bought a cheap 32 caliber pistol at a local pawn shop. (FBI memo to J. Edgar Hoover from Agent C. D. McKean) At Bayfront Park, Zangara unloaded all five shots, 25 feet from Roosevelt who was just completing his speech. Several in the audience were wounded but only Mayor Cermak of Chicago would eventually die.

Analysis of an Assassin

In a January 10, 1934 New York Times article, Dr. Adolph Meyer of Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland stated that Zangara had a “normal brain.” At his trial, Zangara was fully conscious of his actions and vocally defended them saying that he hated all kings and presidents. He had no remorse for the innocent by-standers that had been wounded, including Chicago Mayor Anton Cermak, on vacation in Miami, who would die days later from Zangara’s stray shot.

Courtroom testimony reprinted in the Miami Herald (February 21, 1933) however, disclose that Zangara was found to be a “social misfit” with a “psychopathic personality.” But the issue of an insanity defense was never raised. The 1964 Warren Commission Report on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy contained a chapter on “Presidential Protection.” Appendix 7 summarizes previous assassinations and assassination attempts. It states that Zangara had “a professed hatred of capitalists and Presidents.”

Was Zangara Part of a Larger Conspiracy?

FBI files indicate that within days of the attempted assassination, reports were received that Zangara was acting on the part of an Italian Anarchist group and may have had accomplices. This track, furthered by Italian authorities and even Fascist leader Benito Mussolini, (Philadelphia Record, March 18, 1933) would have helped the propaganda effect of European fascism over Communism. Although “leaked” by an Italian consular official the day after the Miami shooting (FBI files), the story was further enhanced by allegations that Zangara had participated in the Philadelphia house-bombing of a leader with the Sons of Italy. (Philadelphia Record)

Another theory tied Zangara to Chicago gangsters. This theory is mentioned in the Warren Report. The FBI investigated claims that a check had been found on Zangara, drawn on a defunct Chicago bank, and signed by a reputed mobster. Although the check was never found, and no other ties were established in the investigation, the theory is still brought up, particularly since Chicago Mayor Cermak was killed. Cermak was a reformist mayor and, allegedly, was the target of a “mob hit.”

Trial and Execution of Giuseppe Zangara

The initial trial of Zangara took place days after the assassination attempt. According to the Miami Herald, Mayor Cermak stated, “They certainly mete out justice pretty fast in this state” after hearing that the shooter was given an 80-year sentence. Cermak, however, died shortly thereafter from the gun shot and Zangara was sentenced to death. He was electrocuted on March 20, 1933. According to Florence King, Zangara’s death was “the swiftest legal execution in this century.” (Florida Department of Corrections “Time Line”)

Notes:

The FBI file on the Zangara attempt is archived by the University of Miami

Cuban Statehood Discussed by Congress in 1902 and 1903

Jun 3, 2010 Michael Streich

The Newlands Resolution invited Cuba to seek territorial status leading to statehood in an effort to further both political and economic unity.

Cuba came under American influence following the Spanish American War of 1898, a conflict designed to free the Cuban people from oppressive Spanish colonial rule. Part of the April 19, 1898 war resolution included the Teller Amendment, which acted as a formal disclaimer regarding U.S. goals. Congress stipulated that U.S. goals did not include the “…intention to exercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over said island…” But in early 1902, Nevada Congressman Francis Newlands presented the House with a Joint Resolution “inviting” Cuba to become a U.S. territory and ultimately a state. Newlands revived the resolution in November 1903 while serving his first term in the Senate.

Commercial Reciprocity verses Political Union

Newlands was the author of an earlier resolution that resulted in the annexation of Hawaii. His notion to welcome a Cuban bid toward statehood was tied to linking commercial reciprocity with political union. In February 1902, Newlands stated that, “By coming into our political union Cuba will secure immediately the highest degree of freedom and with it a large market for her varied products.” (New York Times, February 2, 1902)

Elections in Cuba took place in December 1901 and once a new, independent government was in place early in 1902, American troops began to withdraw (May 20). At the same time, Congress was crafting a commercial reciprocity treaty giving Cuba distinct trade advantages with the United States. This new agreement was not completed, however, until 1903.

A Single Cuban State of Several Islands

The Newlands resolution envisioned a state comprised of Cuba as well as other islands that had relationships with the U.S. “When the time for statehood comes, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and other West Indies Islands in our possession can be incorporated into the Union as one state.” Puerto Rico, however, had a different relationship with the U.S., as it still does today.

Newlands scheme to create one state out of several islands was to avoid possible “over-representation” in the U.S. Senate. In his 1903 resolution (S.R. 15), Newlands states that the Cuban President and Vice-President would become “the governor and lieutenant-governor, respectively, of the State of Cuba…” (Clause Two) Newlands also addressed Cuban bonds that were about to be issued to pay for “its army during war with Spain.” According to the resolution, they would be reduced from 5 to 3 percent once statehood was achieved.

Opposition to the Newlands Resolution

Critics in the Senate were quick to note that the resolution violated the 1898 Teller Amendment. The New York Times (November 24, 1903) pointed out that even though the resolution was a “welcome” and not an indication of U.S. annexation, it was creating uneasiness in Cuba. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge commented that Puerto Rico already had a special relationship with the United States through the 1900 Foraker Act.

Senator Eugene Hale of Maine suggested that Newlands’ logic and arguments could apply as easily to Canada. Other objections included the appearance that the U.S. government was being driven by American corporations eager to exploit Cuban resources. Ultimately, the resolution was defeated although the commercial reciprocity treaty was enacted.

Statehood is Still Discussed

In 2007, Arturo C. Castro published Statehood for Cuba (BookSurge Publishing) which explores the Cuban Revolution that brought Fidel Castro to power as well as the idea of “Cuban Statehood.” Writing in Cuba News (July-August 2008), Castro stated that, “The door to statehood is with the Cubans who live in Cuba and the younger generation of Cuban-Americans.”

Writing in Time Magazine International (November 30, 1998), Christopher Ogden declared that any review of the U.S. “bankrupt” policy toward Cuba that began with the embargo under President Kennedy should include a blueprint for Cuban statehood. Although much of the piece is “tongue-on-cheek,” the notion of Cuban statehood would be bold and “creative,” according to Ogden.

The Likeliness of Future Cuban Statehood

One of the significant global features of the post-Cold War has been the reemergence of ethnic identities. Several plebiscites in Puerto Rico, the last in 1998, left the island’s status unchanged. The global trend continues to be that indigenous groups are seeking to break from larger nations in order to forge their own independent futures. Why should Cuba be any different?

Neo Conservatism Linked to Barry Goldwater in 1964

Jun 12, 2010 Michael Streich

Defeating moderate presidential hopefuls Nelson Rockefeller and William Scranton, Goldwater led the Republican conservative wing toward party nomination.

Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater announced his presidential bid in 1964 saying, “I will offer a choice, not an echo.” A Choice, Not an Echo became the title of Phyllis Schlafly’s 1964 book. Goldwater’s presidential campaign set him against the moderate Republicans of the Northeast, led by New York’s Nelson Rockefeller and Pennsylvania’s William Scranton. Defeating his rivals in the primaries, Goldwater arrived for the National Convention in San Francisco confident and determined. But many voters mistrusted Goldwater and viewed his most ardent supporters as, in the words of Vermont Senator George Aiken, “weird and vulgar.”

Barry Goldwater’s Conservatism

Unlike other Republicans willing to accept FDR’s New Deal, Goldwater wanted to dismantle it. He was fiercely anti-Union and stated, during the New Hampshire primary, that Social Security should not be mandatory. According to Goldwater, big government was creating a welfare state. During a campaign TV ad, he referred to this as the “cult of individual and government irresponsibility.”

Barry Goldwater rejected negotiating with the Soviet Union and believed that the United Nations was incompatible with American beliefs and the Constitution. He opposed federal funding for education and voted against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, calling it, “a threat to the very essence of our basic system.” The future conservative senator from North Carolina, Jesse Helms, stated that Goldwater was, “the last hope of the capitalistic, free enterprise system.”

Goldwater’s Attack on Communism

Barry Goldwater never criticized Senator Joseph McCarthy’s “witch hunts” of the early 1950s. He believed that every American child needed to be taught the evils of Communism. Ironically, the detonation of China’s first atomic bomb as well as the Kremlin’s removal of Russian leader Nikita Khrushchev in October, 1964 may have helped Johnson more than Goldwater. Goldwater was perceived by many voters as someone willing to launch a nuclear war.

The Lyndon Johnson campaign reinforced this view with the famous “Daisy” ad, featuring a young girl plucking a daisy as a nuclear bomb explodes in the background. As the commercial ends, Johnson tells the viewers, “These are the stakes.” Goldwater, however, told Americans that the country was, “not far from the kind of moral decay that has brought on the fall of other nations and people.” Writing about the 1964 election, Jon Margolis commented that Goldwater’s “real enemy was neither communism nor liberalism but the modern world.”

The Seeds of an Ultra-Conservative Republican Wing

Goldwater’s nomination was raucous and impolite. Goldwater’s faction controlled the convention’s Platform Committee and beat back any attempts by moderate Republicans to amend it. Moderate Republicans were shouted down. It helped Goldwater that the convention was in California where the party leadership had fallen to the ultra-conservatives who were led by former Senator William Knowland.

Moderates saw the rising conservative wing as upstart devotees of Ayn Rand and supporters of the John Birch Society. In his acceptance speech, Goldwater told the delegates that, “Our people have followed false prophets…” He spoke of freedom and how it applied to the conservative agenda and elaborated the failures of the Kennedy-Johnson years. He ended with the party’s new marching orders: “The Republican cause demands that we brand Communism as the principal disturber of peace in the world today…Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!”

The November Election

Goldwater’s stupendous defeat in November 1964 brought the moderate Republicans back into party control. Goldwater was, in the words of Walter Lippmann, “a radical reactionary who would…dismantle the modern state.” In 1968 Richard Nixon would be elected. Reelected in 1972, Nixon resigned the presidency in disgrace after being implicated in the Watergate scandal cover up. By 1980, however, Ronald Reagan was elected after the Republican Party embraced New Conservatism.

Traced back to the days of Barry Goldwater, Republican New Conservatism triumphed in 1994 when the party gained control of Congress after forty years of Democratic leadership. Today, in many ways, the emerging Tea Party Movement led by such conservatives as former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin owes much to the days of Barry Goldwater and the party’s attempt to silence the moderates.

References:

Paul F. Boller, Jr., Presidential Campaigns From George Washington to George W. Bush (Oxford University Press, 2004)
Jon Margolis, The Last Innocent Year: America in 1964 (William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1999)
Gayle B. Montgomery and James W. Johnson, One Step From the White House: The Rise and Fall of Senator William F. Knowland (University of California Press, 1998)
Theodore H. White, The Making of the President 1964 (NY: Atheneum Publishers, 1965)