DOCSLIB.ORG

Richard Russell, the Senate Armed Services Committee & Oversight of America’S Defense, 1955-1968

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Richard Russell, the Senate Armed Services Committee & Oversight of America’S Defense, 1955-1968 BALANCING CONSENSUS, CONSENT, AND COMPETENCE: RICHARD RUSSELL, THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE & OVERSIGHT OF AMERICA’S DEFENSE, 1955-1968 DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Joshua E. Klimas, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2007 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor David Stebenne, Advisor Professor John Guilmartin Advisor Professor James Bartholomew History Graduate Program ABSTRACT This study examines Congress’s role in defense policy-making between 1955 and 1968, with particular focus on the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), its most prominent and influential members, and the evolving defense authorization process. The consensus view holds that, between World War II and the drawdown of the Vietnam War, the defense oversight committees showed acute deference to Defense Department legislative and budget requests. At the same time, they enforced closed oversight procedures that effectively blocked less “pro-defense” members from influencing the policy-making process. Although true at an aggregate level, this understanding is incomplete. It ignores the significant evolution to Armed Services Committee oversight practices that began in the latter half of 1950s, and it fails to adequately explore the motivations of the few members who decisively shaped the process. SASC chairman Richard Russell (D-GA) dominated Senate deliberations on defense policy. Relying only on input from a few key colleagues – particularly his protégé and eventual successor, John Stennis (D-MS) – Russell for the better part of two decades decided almost in isolation how the Senate would act to oversee the nation’s defense. Russell’s oversight concept weighed multiple competing considerations: the reality that modern presidential power was an outgrowth of the Congress’s acknowledged inability to manage the expanded scope of government; the requirement that the Executive Branch demonstrate ii wisdom and managerial competence; the duty to conduct thorough oversight as a prerequisite for congressional consent to presidential proposals; and the Cold War imperative to buttress presidential leadership with at least the appearance of a broad governing consensus. While initially hesitant to craft a substantive policy role, perceived shortcomings in presidential wisdom and managerial competence steadily prompted Russell to insert himself and his committee more directly into the policy-making process. The principle vehicle became incremental expansion of the annual defense authorization bill, although in practice this impacted only at the margins of the defense program. In any case, Russell never fundamentally rejected the necessity for presidential leadership, nor the desirability of relatively closed congressional oversight procedures – both of which proved increasingly out of step with the emerging Senate majority of the late 1960s. iii Dedicated to Lisa iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The completion of this manuscript would not have been possible without the guidance and support, whether direct or indirect, of countless individuals. While it is not possible for me to thank here all those who are due, I would like to note my particular gratitude to the following. I owe a special debt to my two doctoral advisors, Professor Allan R. Millett – now Professor Emeritus at Ohio State – who guided me through my candidacy exams and the early development of my research proposal, and Professor David Stebenne, who graciously stepped in after Professor Millett’s retirement to guide me through the project’s completion and defense. My work and my understanding have each benefitted greatly from the guidance and commentary they provided. While having gained enormously from personal and professional interaction with so many of Ohio State’s faculty, I would also like to note in particular Professors John Guilmartin, James Bartholomew, and Warren Van Tine for their comments and support in bringing this manuscript to a successful completion. I likewise owe a special debt to the History Department’s Graduate Studies Coordinator, Joby Abernathy, who guided me through the mechanics of completing the candidacy process, and guided my paper work through the university’s bureaucracy as I completed requirements while residing in the Washington, DC area. v The archival research on which this study was founded would not have been possible without the generous financial assistance provided by The Ohio State University through its Presidential Fellowship program, which enabled both a year’s residence in Washington and the extensive research opportunities in the National Archives that such residency permitted. In addition, The Ohio State University’s Mershon Center for International Security Studies provided travel grant assistance that allowed research trips to the Richard Russell, John Stennis, and Lyndon Johnson libraries. Similarly, the John Kennedy Library provided travel grant assistance that permitted research into the manuscript collections housed there. I am indebted to these institutions, and I hope the quality of the finished work demonstrates a sufficient return on their investments. I likewise owe an enormous debt to the research and archivist staffs at the National Archives and each of individual libraries mentioned above. The time an advice of the dozens of knowledgeable and dedicated individuals I had the pleasure of interacting with at these locations improved the quality of the supporting research immeasurably. I would like to note in particular the assistance provided by two individuals. Richard McCulley, historian at the Center for Legislative Archives of the National Archives, provided valuable advice that helped to frame this study’s research focus and interpretations, as he shared his own interests in the development of the Senate Armed Services Committee during the period in question and after. Archivist Rodney Ross, also of the Center for Legislative Archives, spent countless hours helping to identify and sort through the archive’s extensive holdings. I owe both tremendously for their help. vi In addition, I am personally indebted to the following individuals for the encouragement they provided at various steps toward this study’s completion. As a visiting professor at The George Washington University, Williamson Murray provided the “push” toward Ohio State and into the advanced study of history, without which I would have likely ended my graduate studies at the master’s level. Similarly, I owe a tremendous debt to E. B. Vandiver, Director of the Center for Army Analysis, who continually demonstrates his commitment to the education and professional development of his analysts. This commitment manifested in my case through the allowance of time and the subtle (or not so subtle) encouragement to finish the manuscript, without which I may never have brought this project to completion. Most importantly, I am indebted to the constant love, support, and encouragement of my family – to my mom, my grandma, and my Uncle Ed, who instilled in me from an early age a respect for education and an expectation that I would someday complete a doctorate in something, and to my always supportive and eternally patient wife, Lisa, who always knew I could get to this point, but must have often wondered if I actually would. I cannot repay the sacrifices these wonderful people have made for me, but I will do my best to try, and they will always most dear to me, to the end of days. vii VITA April 28, 1973 . Born – Detroit, MI 1996 . B.A. Physics and History, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 2000 . M.A. Security Policy Studies, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 2001, 2003 . Distinguished University Fellow, The Ohio State University 2002 . Foreign Language and Area Studies Fellow, The Ohio State University 2004 – present . Analyst, The Center for Army Analysis, Ft. Belvoir, VA FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: History viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract……………………………………………………………………………..…ii Dedication. ...............................................................................................................iv Acknowledgments .....................................................................................................v Vita……….............................................................................................................viii Chapters: 1. Introduction...........................................................................................................1 Notes on Sources.............................................................................................23 2. Power and the Senate...........................................................................................29 The Growth of Executive Leadership ..............................................................29 Power in the Senate: An Overview..................................................................42 Power in the Senate: Richard Russell ..............................................................52 3. Richard Russell ...................................................................................................71 Russell, the Executive Branch, & National Security Policies and Processes.....71 Goals and Motivations: An Overview.......................................................71 Defusing Congressional Investigations & Interventions............................77 Foreign Aid: The Occasional Helping Hand .............................................88
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 111 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 111 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION SENATE—Wednesday, November 18, 2009 The Senate met at 9:30 a.m. and was RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY Since coming to the Senate in 1959, called to order by the Honorable TOM LEADER Senator BYRD has cast more than 18,500 UDALL, a Senator from the State of The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- votes. No one else, past or present, New Mexico. pore. The majority leader is recog- even comes close. He is the only Sen- nized. ator who has ever been elected to nine PRAYER full terms in this body. He has presided The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- f over both the shortest session in Sen- fered the following prayer: SCHEDULE ate history—not even one second Let us pray. long—and presided for the longest con- Eternal God, the Lord of life, we love Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will be in a tinuous period—more than 21 hours. No You but not enough. We look to You one has ever served on a Senate Com- but depend too often on our own period of morning business. Senator ROCKEFELLER will then be recognized mittee longer than Senator BYRD. Just strength. We listen for You but make a days after being sworn in, he joined the lot of noise ourselves at the same time. for as much time as he may consume. Appropriation Committee he would We try to understand, as long as it Following his remarks, there will be an later chair.
    [Show full text]
  • The Position of Secretary of Defense: Statutory Restrictions and Civilian-Military Relations
    The Position of Secretary of Defense: Statutory Restrictions and Civilian-Military Relations Updated January 6, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R44725 Position of Secretary of Defense: Statutory Restrictions and Civilian-Military Relations Summary The position of Secretary of Defense is unique within the United States government; it is one of two civilian positions within the military chain of command, although unlike the President, the Secretary of Defense is not elected. Section 113 of the United States Code states that the Secretary of Defense is to be “appointed from civilian life by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.” The section goes on to elaborate a key mechanism by which civilian control of the armed forces is maintained: A person may not be appointed as Secretary of Defense within seven years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a regular component of an armed force. The proposed nomination of General (Ret.) Lloyd Austin, United States Army, who retired from the military in 2016, to be Secretary of Defense may lead both houses of Congress to consider whether and how to suspend, change, or remove that provision. This provision was originally contained in the 1947 National Security Act (P.L. 80-253), which mandated that 10 years pass between the time an officer is relieved from active duty and when he or she could be appointed to the office of the Secretary of Defense. In 2007, Section 903 of the FY2008 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 110-181), Congress changed the period of time that must elapse between relief from active duty and appointment to the position of Secretary of Defense to seven years.
    [Show full text]
  • Truman, Congress and the Struggle for War and Peace In
    TRUMAN, CONGRESS AND THE STRUGGLE FOR WAR AND PEACE IN KOREA A Dissertation by LARRY WAYNE BLOMSTEDT Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2008 Major Subject: History TRUMAN, CONGRESS AND THE STRUGGLE FOR WAR AND PEACE IN KOREA A Dissertation by LARRY WAYNE BLOMSTEDT Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Approved by: Chair of Committee, Terry H. Anderson Committee Members, Jon R. Bond H. W. Brands John H. Lenihan David Vaught Head of Department, Walter L. Buenger May 2008 Major Subject: History iii ABSTRACT Truman, Congress and the Struggle for War and Peace in Korea. (May 2008) Larry Wayne Blomstedt, B.S., Texas State University; M.S., Texas A&M University-Kingsville Chair of Advisory Committee: Dr. Terry H. Anderson This dissertation analyzes the roles of the Harry Truman administration and Congress in directing American policy regarding the Korean conflict. Using evidence from primary sources such as Truman’s presidential papers, communications of White House staffers, and correspondence from State Department operatives and key congressional figures, this study suggests that the legislative branch had an important role in Korean policy. Congress sometimes affected the war by what it did and, at other times, by what it did not do. Several themes are addressed in this project. One is how Truman and the congressional Democrats failed each other during the war. The president did not dedicate adequate attention to congressional relations early in his term, and was slow to react to charges of corruption within his administration, weakening his party politically.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Redistricting in Georgia
    GEORGIA LAW REVIEW(DO NOT DELETE) 11/6/2018 8:33 PM THE HISTORY OF REDISTRICTING IN GEORGIA Charles S. Bullock III* In his memoirs, Chief Justice Earl Warren singled out the redistricting cases as the most significant decisions of his tenure on the Court.1 A review of the changes redistricting introduced in Georgia supports Warren’s assessment. Not only have the obligations to equalize populations across districts and to do so in a racially fair manner transformed the makeup of the state’s collegial bodies, Georgia has provided the setting for multiple cases that have defined the requirements to be met when designing districts. Other than the very first adjustments that occurred in the 1960s, changes in Georgia plans had to secure approval from the federal government pursuant to the Voting Rights Act. Also, the first four decades of the Redistricting Revolution occurred with a Democratic legislature and governor in place. Not surprisingly, the partisans in control of redistricting sought to protect their own and as that became difficult they employed more extreme measures. When in the minority, Republicans had no chance to enact plans on their own. Beginning in the 1980s and peaking a decade later, Republicans joined forces with black Democrats to devise alternatives to the proposals of white Democrats. The biracial, bipartisan coalition never had sufficient numbers to enact its ideas. After striking out in the legislature, African-Americans appealed to the U.S. Attorney General alleging that the plans enacted were less favorable to black interests than alternatives * Charles S. Bullock, III is a University Professor of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia where he holds the Richard B.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms. Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan the UNIVERSITY of OKLAHOMA
    This dissertation has been 65-12,998 microfilmed exactly as received MATHENY, David Leon, 1931- A COMPAEISON OF SELECTED FOREIGN POLICY SPEECHES OF SENATOR TOM CONNALLY. The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1965 ^eech-Theater University Microfilms. Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLLEGE A COMPARISON OP SELECTED FOREIGN POLICY SPEECHES OF SENATOR TOM CONNALLY A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY DAVID LEON MATHENY Norman, Oklahoma 1965 A COMPARISON OP SELECTED FOREXON POLICY SPEECHES OP SENATOR TOM CONNALLY APPROVED BY L-'iJi'Ui (^ A -o ç.J^\AjLôLe- DISSERTATION COMMITTEE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express thanks to Professor Wayne E. Brockriede and members of the University of Oklahoma Speech Faculty for guidance during the preparation of this dissertation. A special word of thanks should go to Profes­ sor George T. Tade and the Administration of Texas Christian University for encouragement during the latter stages of the study and to the three M's — Mary, Melissa and Melanie — for great understanding throughout the entire project. TABLE OP CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................... Ill Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ......................... 1 Purpose of the S t u d y ..................... 6 Previous Research......................... 8 Sources of Material....................... 9 Method of Organization ................... 10 II. CONNALLY, THE SPEAKER....................... 12 Connally's Non-Congresslonal Speaking Career.......... 12 General Attributes of Connally's Speaking............................... 17 Conclusion . ........................... 31 III. THE NEUTRALITY ACT DEBATE, 1939............. 32 Connally's Audience for the Neutrality Act Debate.............. 32 The Quest for Neutrality ............ 44 The Senate, Connally and Neutrality.
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms International 300 N
    INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the Him inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin Hlming at the upper left hand comer of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Mail Logs for the President (1)” of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 8, folder “Congress - Congressional Mail Logs for the President (1)” of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. r Digitized from Box 8 of The John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library Presi dent's Mail - May 11, 1976 House 1. Augustus Hawkins Writes irr regard to his continuing · terest in meeting with the President to discuss the· tuation at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission prior to the appoint­ ment of a successor to Chairman owell W. Perry. 2. Larry Pressler Says he will vote to sustain e veto of the foreign military assistance se he believes the $3.2 billion should be u ed for nior citizens here at horne. 3. Gus Yatron Writes on behalf of Mrs. adys S. Margolis concerning the plight of Mr. Mi ail ozanevich and his family in the Soviet Union. 4. Guy Vander Jagt Endorses request of the TARs to meet with the President during their convention in June.
    [Show full text]
  • Committee on Appropriations UNITED STATES SENATE 135Th Anniversary
    107th Congress, 2d Session Document No. 13 Committee on Appropriations UNITED STATES SENATE 135th Anniversary 1867–2002 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 2002 ‘‘The legislative control of the purse is the central pil- lar—the central pillar—upon which the constitutional temple of checks and balances and separation of powers rests, and if that pillar is shaken, the temple will fall. It is...central to the fundamental liberty of the Amer- ican people.’’ Senator Robert C. Byrd, Chairman Senate Appropriations Committee United States Senate Committee on Appropriations ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, TED STEVENS, Alaska, Ranking Chairman THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ANIEL NOUYE Hawaii D K. I , ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania RNEST OLLINGS South Carolina E F. H , PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico ATRICK EAHY Vermont P J. L , CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri OM ARKIN Iowa T H , MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky ARBARA IKULSKI Maryland B A. M , CONRAD BURNS, Montana ARRY EID Nevada H R , RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama ERB OHL Wisconsin H K , JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire ATTY URRAY Washington P M , ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah YRON ORGAN North Dakota B L. D , BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado IANNE EINSTEIN California D F , LARRY CRAIG, Idaho ICHARD URBIN Illinois R J. D , KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas IM OHNSON South Dakota T J , MIKE DEWINE, Ohio MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JACK REED, Rhode Island TERRENCE E. SAUVAIN, Staff Director CHARLES KIEFFER, Deputy Staff Director STEVEN J. CORTESE, Minority Staff Director V Subcommittee Membership, One Hundred Seventh Congress Senator Byrd, as chairman of the Committee, and Senator Stevens, as ranking minority member of the Committee, are ex officio members of all subcommit- tees of which they are not regular members.
    [Show full text]
  • Strom Thurmond
    -rc-. l'15d] ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND RECORD OF STROM THURMOND A MAN OF COURAGE Strom Thurmond's record as Agriculture Teacher, County School Superintendent, State Senator, Circuit Judge, Combat Soldier and as Governor is one of service to the People of South Carolina and the Nation and establishes his outstanding qualifications to represent our State with Honor and Distinction in the United States Senate. Written, printed and distributed by friends of Governor Thurmond who are supporting his election to the Senate because he has character and integrity and is a fighter for principle. ~ighlights of Governor Thurmond's Life and Distinguished Career Farm reared, Clemson graduate, teacher, lawyer and Judge ••• Dropped from the skies over Nor• mandy on D-Day, decorated for heroism in action against the enemy. As Governor, has instilled charac­ ter and efficiency in state govern­ ment; curbed the liquor ring; ended the pardon racket; provided for fair and honest elections; cleaned up the Industrial Commission for the bene­ fit of labor; and eliminated dual­ office holding. Brought new indus­ tries to South Carolina with $104,· 000,000 in new payrolls and addi­ tional jobs for 48,500; extended government services and maintained balanced budget. Led South's fight for real demo­ cracy; carried four states and be­ came first South Carolinian to re­ Governor Thurmond comes from a ceive electoral votes for President fine old Edgefield family . His father, since Andrew Jackson ••• Chairman the late Judge J. William Thurmond, shown reading book at an Edgefield of Southern Governor's Conference, County political meeting, was a close being the first South Carolina Gov­ friend of the late Senotor Ben Till­ ernor to hold this honored and im­ man.
    [Show full text]
  • Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agen- Cies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2003
    S. HRG. 107–769 DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGEN- CIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON S. 2778 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENTS OF COM- MERCE, JUSTICE, AND STATE, THE JUDICIARY, AND RELATED AGEN- CIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2003, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Department of Commerce Department of Justice Department of State Federal Communications Commission Federal Trade Commission Nondepartmental witnesses Securities and Exchange Commission The judiciary Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 78–462 PDF WASHINGTON : 2002 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania TOM HARKIN, Iowa PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri HARRY REID, Nevada MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CONRAD BURNS, Montana PATTY MURRAY, Washington RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho MARY L.
    [Show full text]
  • Write-Ins Race/Name Totals - General Election 11/03/20 11/10/2020
    Write-Ins Race/Name Totals - General Election 11/03/20 11/10/2020 President/Vice President Phillip M Chesion / Cobie J Chesion 1 1 U/S. Gubbard 1 Adebude Eastman 1 Al Gore 1 Alexandria Cortez 2 Allan Roger Mulally former CEO Ford 1 Allen Bouska 1 Andrew Cuomo 2 Andrew Cuomo / Andrew Cuomo 1 Andrew Cuomo, NY / Dr. Anthony Fauci, Washington D.C. 1 Andrew Yang 14 Andrew Yang Morgan Freeman 1 Andrew Yang / Joe Biden 1 Andrew Yang/Amy Klobuchar 1 Andrew Yang/Jeremy Cohen 1 Anthony Fauci 3 Anyone/Else 1 AOC/Princess Nokia 1 Ashlie Kashl Adam Mathey 1 Barack Obama/Michelle Obama 1 Ben Carson Mitt Romney 1 Ben Carson Sr. 1 Ben Sass 1 Ben Sasse 6 Ben Sasse senator-Nebraska Laurel Cruse 1 Ben Sasse/Blank 1 Ben Shapiro 1 Bernard Sanders 1 Bernie Sanders 22 Bernie Sanders / Alexandria Ocasio Cortez 1 Bernie Sanders / Elizabeth Warren 2 Bernie Sanders / Kamala Harris 1 Bernie Sanders Joe Biden 1 Bernie Sanders Kamala D. Harris 1 Bernie Sanders/ Kamala Harris 1 Bernie Sanders/Andrew Yang 1 Bernie Sanders/Kamala D. Harris 2 Bernie Sanders/Kamala Harris 2 Blain Botsford Nick Honken 1 Blank 7 Blank/Blank 1 Bobby Estelle Bones 1 Bran Carroll 1 Brandon A Laetare 1 Brian Carroll Amar Patel 1 Page 1 of 142 President/Vice President Brian Bockenstedt 1 Brian Carol/Amar Patel 1 Brian Carrol Amar Patel 1 Brian Carroll 2 Brian carroll Ammor Patel 1 Brian Carroll Amor Patel 2 Brian Carroll / Amar Patel 3 Brian Carroll/Ama Patel 1 Brian Carroll/Amar Patel 25 Brian Carroll/Joshua Perkins 1 Brian T Carroll 1 Brian T.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Maryland's Electoral College Meetings 1789-2016
    A History of Maryland’s Electoral College Meetings 1789-2016 A History of Maryland’s Electoral College Meetings 1789-2016 Published by: Maryland State Board of Elections Linda H. Lamone, Administrator Project Coordinator: Jared DeMarinis, Director Division of Candidacy and Campaign Finance Published: October 2016 Table of Contents Preface 5 The Electoral College – Introduction 7 Meeting of February 4, 1789 19 Meeting of December 5, 1792 22 Meeting of December 7, 1796 24 Meeting of December 3, 1800 27 Meeting of December 5, 1804 30 Meeting of December 7, 1808 31 Meeting of December 2, 1812 33 Meeting of December 4, 1816 35 Meeting of December 6, 1820 36 Meeting of December 1, 1824 39 Meeting of December 3, 1828 41 Meeting of December 5, 1832 43 Meeting of December 7, 1836 46 Meeting of December 2, 1840 49 Meeting of December 4, 1844 52 Meeting of December 6, 1848 53 Meeting of December 1, 1852 55 Meeting of December 3, 1856 57 Meeting of December 5, 1860 60 Meeting of December 7, 1864 62 Meeting of December 2, 1868 65 Meeting of December 4, 1872 66 Meeting of December 6, 1876 68 Meeting of December 1, 1880 70 Meeting of December 3, 1884 71 Page | 2 Meeting of January 14, 1889 74 Meeting of January 9, 1893 75 Meeting of January 11, 1897 77 Meeting of January 14, 1901 79 Meeting of January 9, 1905 80 Meeting of January 11, 1909 83 Meeting of January 13, 1913 85 Meeting of January 8, 1917 87 Meeting of January 10, 1921 88 Meeting of January 12, 1925 90 Meeting of January 2, 1929 91 Meeting of January 4, 1933 93 Meeting of December 14, 1936
    [Show full text]