200 Notable Days :Senate Stories, 1787 to 2002
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ssiiiii RICHARD A. BAKER has directed the U.S. Senate Historical Office since its creation in 1975. He holds a Ph.D. in history from the University of Maryland and master’s degrees from Columbia University and Michigan State University. Baker has taught courses in congressional history lor Cornell University and the University of Maryland. Before joining the Senate’s staff, he served as a specialist in American history at the Library of Congress. He is the author of many articles related to Senate history and several books, including a biography of New Mexico Senator Clinton Anderson and a one-volume history of the Senate. An occasional guest on C-SPAN, Baker most recently assisted that network with its 25th anniversary special programming on the history of the Capitol. He also served on the content development team for the exhibition gallery of the Capitol Visitor Center. Cover illustration: Oliver Ellsworth, senatorfrom Connecticut (17S9-1796) NOTABLE DAYS SENATE STORIES • 1787 TO 2 0 02 RICHARD A. BAKER, Senate Historian Prepared under the direction of Emily J. Reynolds, Secretary of the Senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, DC Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Baker, Richard A. 200 notable days : Senate stories, 1787 to 2002 / Richard A. Baker, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-16-076331-2 (alk. paper) 1. United States. Congress. Senate—History. 2. United States. Congress. Senate—History—Anecdotes. 3. Legislative bodies—United States—History. 4. Legislative bodies—United States—History—Anecdotes. I. Title. II. Title: Two hundred notable days. JK1161.B313 2006 328.73’071 —dc22 2006046631 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Prinung Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001 ISBN 0-16-076331-2 CONTENTS Introduction v I: FORMATIVE YEARS OF THE SENATE, 1787-1800 1 II: THE “GOLDEN AGE” OF THE SENATE, 1801-1850 29 III: WAR AND RECONSTRUCTION, 1851-1880 57 IV: ORIGINS OF THE MODERN SENATE, 1881-1920 83 V: ERA OF INVESTIGATIONS, 1921-1940 125 VI: WAR AND REORGANIZATION, 1941-1963 151 VII: THE MODERN SENATE, 1964-2002 191 Acknowledgements 218 Credits for Illustrations 219 Index 223 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/200notabledaysse00wash INTRODUCTION t is impossible to walk through the busy corridors of the United States Capitol without hearing stories. The building’s marble and sandstone halls echo widt loud stories, whispered stories, stories told in I English and in a multitude of other languages. Members of Congress tell stories to colleagues and constituents. Red-jacketed Capitol tour guides spend long days as professional storytellers, and serve as models for the many congressional staff, seasonal interns, and even legislative pages called on to help introduce the Capitol and Congress to the millions who flock annually to Washington, D. C. Knowing that individual visitors may come to Capitol Hill only once in a lifetime, these hosts rely on historical vignettes to enliven the experi- ence. Years later, many of those visitors will recount to family and friends, in letter-perfect detail, the stories they heard on their first visit to the United States Capitol. Over the past 30 years as Senate Historian, I have prepared coundess historical narratives to inform senators, staff, constituents, and others who are curious about the traditions, personalities, and legislative landmarks of the “World’s Greatest Deliberative Body.” More recently, I have reshaped many of these stories into brief sketches for those who have a strong interest in the subject but lack the time to explore extended historical essays. From hundreds of Senate anecdotes, I have selected the 200 that appear in this volume. Each includes references for further reading. There are stories reflecting all areas of Senate activity, from its important constitutional prerogatives—such as confirmation of presidential nominations—to historical milestones of decidedly less importance. An example of the latter occurred in 1930 as senators confronted the choice of continuing with traditional operator- assisted telephones or accepting a daunting new product of communications technology—the dial phone. From the well-known and notorious, to the unusual and even whimsical, these stories are presented to enlighten, inspire, amuse, and inform. Each story amplifies the narratives that precede and follow it. Read collectively, they provide clear impressions about the forces, events, and personalities that have shaped the Senate of the 21st century. Richard A. Baker, Senate Historian * * t ! ' » i CHAPTER I FORMATIVE YEARS OF THE SENATE 1787-1800 e June 7, 1787 State Houses Will Elect Senators ho should elect United States senators? When On June 7, 1787, the framers settled on a third option. They the framers of the Constitution convened in decided that state legislatures should select senators, without W Philadelphia in 1787, they struggled over three any involvement by the House of Representatives. The state possible answers to this question. legislatures, they argued, would provide the necessary “filtration” Under one plan, each state legislature would send a list to produce better senators—the elect of the elected. The framers of candidates to the U.S. House of Representatives so that the hoped that this arrangement would give state political leaders a House could make the selections. sense of participation, calming their fears about the dangers of a Yet this would have made the strong centralized government. The advantage of this plan, they Senate dependent upon the House, believed, was that all laws would be passed by a “dual constitu- ignoring James Madison’s advice ency” composed of a body elected directly by the people (or at that the best way to protect against least the white males entitled to vote for members of their state 3V 4 * J - tyrannical governments was to legislatures) and one chosen by the elected representatives of < “A-J- balance the ambitions of one branch individual states. Mr against those of a corresponding After several decades, as service in the Senate became more branch. Madison and his constitu- highly prized and political parties gained wider influence in tion-writing colleagues had in mind directing state legislative operations, this system of indirect elec- a system in which the Senate keeps tion began to break down. When separate parties controlled a an eye on the House, while the legislature’s two houses, deadlocks frequently deprived states of House watches the Senate. their frill Senate representation. Fifty-five delegates met in Or perhaps the people could elect their own senators. This A plan for direct popular election lingered for decades. Philadelphia during the hot had the disadvantage, as far as city dwellers and those with Finally, a campaign to make governmental institutions more summer of 1787 to fi'am commercial interests were concerned, of favoring the nation’s responsive to the people propelled the measure to ratification in a new constitution for the larger agricultural population. Connecticut’s Roger Sherman 1913 as the Constitution’s 17th Amendment. United States. warned against direct election. “The people should have as little to do as may be about the government. They lack information and are constantly liable to be misled.” Further Reading Ahmar, Akhil Reed. America’s Constitution: A Biography. New York: Random House, 2005. Crook, Sara Brandes, and John R. Hibbing. “A Not-so-Distant Mirror: The 17th Amendment and Congressional Change.” American Political Science Review 91 (December 1997): 845-853. June iy, 1787 Seven-Year Senate Terms? n June 19, 1787, the framers of the U.S. Constitution making this legislative body the focus of the Constitutional decided that the term of a senator should run for Convention’s Senate term debates. O seven years. They also tentatively agreed that House Framers either praised Maryland’s long terms for checking members should serve three years, that Congress should elect the the lower house’s populist impulses, or feared them for the president, that the president should serve for a term equal to that same reason. Some convention delegates believed that even of a senator, and that the Senate should appoint Supreme Court five-year U.S. Senate terms were too short to counteract the justices. Obviously, the framers had a lot of work ahead of them dangerous notions over the following three months to shape the delicately balanced likely to emerge Constitution we know today. from the House of Why a seven-year term for senators? Members of the existing Representatives. Congress under the Articles of Confederation—a unicameral James Madison body—served one-year terms. In deciding to create a bicameral first supported the congress to replace that moribund institution, the Constitution’s seven-year term but framers recognized that the Senate, chosen by state legislatures, then raised it to nine, would be a smaller body than the popularly elected House. so that one -third To avoid being unduly threatened by public opinion, or over- of the Senate seats whelmed by the House’s larger membership, senators would need could be renewed the protection of longer terms. every three years. The framers looked to the various state legislatures for Others thought that models. Although the majority of states set one-year terms for was too long. On June 26, the convention compromised on Theframers of the both legislative bodies, several established longer tenures for the six-year term, with a two-year renewal cycle. None of this Constitution met in Philadelphia at the upper house members. Delaware had three-year terms with pleased New York Delegate Alexander Hamilton, who believed Pennsylvania State one-third of its senate’s nine members up for election each year. that the only protection for senators against the “amazing House, now known as New York and Virginia state senators served four-year terms.