DOCSLIB.ORG

With Your Headlights on All Day Keep

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
With Your Headlights on All Day Keep SENATORIAL VOTE ANALYSIS ON THE DRIVE PANAMA CANAL TREATIES: Alabama Indiana Nebraska Rhode Island WITH YOUR Senator John Sparkman Senator Birch Bayb Senator Carl Curtis Senator John Chalee counted FOR announced FDR announced AGAINST counted FDR. but Senator James Allen Senator Richard Lugar Senator Edward Zorlnsky switchable HEADLIGHTS ON announced AGAINST counted AGAINST UNDECIDED Senator Clalborne Petl Alaska Iowa Nevada counted FDR. but Senator Ted Stevens Senator Dick Clark Senator Howard Cannon switchable ALL DAY UNDECIDED counted FDR UNDECIDED South Carolina Senator Mike Gravel Senator James Culver Senator Paul Laxalt Senalor Ernest Rollings counted FDR counted FDR announced AGAINST counted FDR Arizona Kansas ' New Hampshire Senator Strom Thurmond FEB.22— Senator Barry Goldwater Senator Bob Dole Senator John Durkin announced AGAtNST announced AGAINST counted AGAINST counted FDR. but South Dakota Senator Dennis DeConcIni Senator James Pearson switchable Senator James Abouresk UNDECIDED counted FOR Senator Thomas Mclntyre announced FOR Arkansas Kentucky counted FOR. but Senator George McGovern Senator Dale Bumpers Senator Wendell Ford switchable announced FDR counted FDR UNDECIDED New Jersey Tennessee Senator Kaneaster Hodges Senator Walter Huddleston Senator Clifford P. Case Senator Howard Baker counted FDR announced FDR, but counted FDR announced FDR. but California switchable Senator Harrison Williams switcbable Senator Alan Cranston Louisiana counted FDR Senator James Sasser announced FDR Senator Bennett Johnston New Mexico counted FOR. but Senator S. I. Hayakawa UNDECIDED Senator Pete Domenici switchable announced FOR Senator Russell Long UNDECIDED Texas Colorado UNDECIDED Senator Harrison Schmilt Senator Lloyd Bentsen Senator Gary Hart Maine announced AGAINST announced FOR. but counted FDR Senator William Hathaway New York switchable Senator Floyd Haskell counted FDR. but Senator Jacob Javlts Senator John G. Tower counted FOR switchable announced FDR announced AGAINST Connecticut Senator Edmund Muskle Senator Daniel P. Utah Senator Abratiam Ribicotf counted FDR Moynlban Senator Jake Garn counted FOR Maryland " announced FOR. but announced AGAINST Senator Lowell lA/eicker Senator Charles McC. switchable Senator Orrin Hatch counted FDR. but Mathias North Carolina announced AGAINST switchable announced FDR Senator Jesse Helms Vermont KEEP OUR Delaware Senator Paul Sarbanes announced AGAINST Senator Patrick Leahy Senator Joseph Biden counted FDR Senator Robert Morgan counted FDR. but counted FOR, but Massachusetts " counted FOR. but switchable switchable Senator Edward W. Brooke switchable Senator Robert Statlord CANAL DAY Senator tA/illiam Roth counted FDR, but North Dakota counted FDR counted FOR. but switchable Senator Eugene Burdick Senator Edward M. Virginia switchable leaning FDR Senator Harry F. Byrd Kennedy Senator Milton Young Florida counted FDR announced AGAtNST Senator Lawton Chiles leaning AGAINST Senator William Scott counted FDR. but Michigan Ohio announced AGAINST Don't lie fooled by talk that amendments will make Senator Robert Griltin the treaties acceptable. switchable Senator John Glenn Washington Senator Richard Stone announced AGAINST Senator Donald Riegle counted FDR. but Senator Henry Jackson Pro-surrender Senators are using this device to announced FDR switchable counted FOR UNDECIDED persuade gullible voters that the "bad parts" of the Georgia Senalor Howard Senator Warren Magnuson Minnesota new treaties have been corrected. These Senators Senator Sam Nunn Metzenbaum UNDECIDED are hoping that they will, In this way, cut any politi UNDECIDED Senator Wendell Anderson announced FOR WesI Virginia Senator Herman Talmadge announced FOR cal losses they may suffer back home from con Senator Muriel Humphrev Oklahoma Senator Robert Byrd stituents who oppose the surrender and payoff. UNDECIDED Senalor Dewey Bartlett announced FOR announced for Hawaii announced AGAINST Senator Jennings Let them know that we are not as dumb as they hope Senator Daniel K. Inouye Mississippi —- Senator Henry Bellmon Randolph and believe. announced FOR Senator James 0. counted FDR, but UNDECIDED Senator Spark Matsunaga Eastland switchable There must be no aurronder of American sovereign announced AGAINST Wisconsin announced FDR Oregon Senalor Gaylord Nelson jurisdiction and control of the canal and zone. Senator John C. Stennis Senator Mark 0. Hattield Idaho announced AGAINST counted FDR Senator Frank Church announced FOR Senator William Proxmire Senator Robert Packwood announced FOR Missouri counted FDR. but announced FOR. but switchable Senator James McClure Senalor John Dantorth switchable announced AGAINST UNDECIDED Wyoming Senator Thomas Eagleton Pennsylvania Senator Cliflord P. Hansen Members Report Illinois „ UNDECIDED Senator John Heinz announced AGAINST Senator Charles H. Percy counted FDR. but Senator Malcolm Wallop announced FOR Monlana .. .. switchable The Conservative Caucus Senator Paul Hattield counted FOR. but Senator Adial E. Senator Richard switchable Stevenson position UNKNOWN Schweiker Vol. II, No. 1, February, 1978 announced FOR Senator John Melcher counted AGAINST UNDECIDED MEMBER S REPORT rt pubttihed quwiedy W Tht Conseivauve Ctucuj. Inc . 7777 Leesbuf® PtKe, falls Oiurch, Va 2204^ SuBscfipitons avaiUtXe lo membeis at Si 00 per year PuWuher-Howanj Phrihps KWO'-C« Charles thoma"".
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Kentucky Lawyer, 1993
    KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COLLEGE OF LAW-1993 APANTHEON OF DEANS: Tom Lewis, Bob Lawson, David Shipley and Bill' Campbell Ci David Shipley becomes Dean of the College of Law he College of Law welcomes David E. fall. His areas of legal expertise are copyright and ad­ Shipley as its new dean, effective July 1, ministrative law. His most recent publication is a 1993. Dean Shipley comes to us from the casebook, Copyright Law: Cases and Materials, West ~---~ University of Mississippi School of Law, Publishing 1992, with co-authors Howard Abrams of the where he served as Dean and Director of the Law Center University of Detroit School of Law and Sheldon for the last three years. Halpern of Ohio State University. Shipley also has Dean Shipley was raised in Champaign, Illinois, and published two editions of a treatise on administrative was graduated from University High School at the Uni­ procedure in South Carolina entitled South Carolina versity of Illinois. He received his B.A. degree with Administrative Law. He has taught Civil Procedure, Highest Honors in American History from Oberlin Col- Remedies, Domestic Relations and Intellectual Property lege in 1972, and is as well as Copyright and Administrative Law. In addi­ a 1975 graduate of tion, he has participated in a wide variety of activities the University of and functions sponsored by the South Carolina and Mis­ Chicago Law sissippi bars. School, where he Dean Shipley enjoys reading best-selling novels by was Executive authors such as Grisham, Crichton, Turow and Clancy as Editor of the Uni­ well as history books about the Civil War.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 Vol. 155 WASHINGTON, MONDAY, JANUARY 12, 2009 No. 6 House of Representatives The House was not in session today. Its next meeting will be held on Tuesday, January 13, 2009, at 12:30 p.m. Senate MONDAY, JANUARY 12, 2009 The Senate met at 2 p.m. and was The legislative clerk read the fol- was represented in the Senate of the called to order by the Honorable JIM lowing letter: United States by a terrific man and a WEBB, a Senator from the Common- U.S. SENATE, great legislator, Wendell Ford. wealth of Virginia. PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE, Senator Ford was known by all as a Washington, DC, January 12, 2009. moderate, deeply respected by both PRAYER To the Senate: sides of the aisle for putting progress The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, of- Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, ahead of politics. Senator Ford, some of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby fered the following prayer: appoint the Honorable JIM WEBB, a Senator said, was not flashy. He did not seek Let us pray. from the Commonwealth of Virginia, to per- the limelight. He was quietly effective Almighty God, from whom, through form the duties of the Chair. and calmly deliberative. whom, and to whom all things exist, ROBERT C. BYRD, In 1991, Senator Ford was elected by shower Your blessings upon our Sen- President pro tempore. his colleagues to serve as Democratic ators.
    [Show full text]
  • Reform and Reaction: Education Policy in Kentucky
    Reform and Reaction Education Policy in Kentucky By Timothy Collins Copyright © 2017 By Timothy Collins Permission to download this e-book is granted for educational and nonprofit use only. Quotations shall be made with appropriate citation that includes credit to the author and the Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs, Western Illinois University. Published by the Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs, Western Illinois University in cooperation with Then and Now Media, Bushnell, IL ISBN – 978-0-9977873-0-6 Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs Stipes Hall 518 Western Illinois University 1 University Circle Macomb, IL 61455-1390 www.iira.org Then and Now Media 976 Washington Blvd. Bushnell IL, 61422 www.thenandnowmedia.com Cover Photos “Colored School” at Anthoston, Henderson County, Kentucky, 1916. http://www.loc.gov/pictures/ item/ncl2004004792/PP/ Beechwood School, Kenton County Kentucky, 1896. http://www.rootsweb.ancestry. com/~kykenton/beechwood.school.html Washington Junior High School at Paducah, McCracken County, Kentucky, 1950s. http://www. topix.com/album/detail/paducah-ky/V627EME3GKF94BGN Table of Contents Preface vii Acknowledgements ix 1 Reform and Reaction: Fragmentation and Tarnished 1 Idylls 2 Reform Thwarted: The Trap of Tradition 13 3 Advent for Reform: Moving Toward a Minimum 30 Foundation 4 Reluctant Reform: A.B. ‘Happy” Chandler, 1955-1959 46 5 Dollars for Reform: Bert T. Combs, 1959-1963 55 6 Reform and Reluctant Liberalism: Edward T. Breathitt, 72 1963-1967 7 Reform and Nunn’s Nickle: Louie B. Nunn, 1967-1971 101 8 Child-focused Reform: Wendell H. Ford, 1971-1974 120 9 Reform and Falling Flat: Julian Carroll, 1974-1979 141 10 Silent Reformer: John Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Divide and Dissent: Kentucky Politics, 1930-1963
    University of Kentucky UKnowledge Political History History 1987 Divide and Dissent: Kentucky Politics, 1930-1963 John Ed Pearce Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Thanks to the University of Kentucky Libraries and the University Press of Kentucky, this book is freely available to current faculty, students, and staff at the University of Kentucky. Find other University of Kentucky Books at uknowledge.uky.edu/upk. For more information, please contact UKnowledge at [email protected]. Recommended Citation Pearce, John Ed, "Divide and Dissent: Kentucky Politics, 1930-1963" (1987). Political History. 3. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/upk_political_history/3 Divide and Dissent This page intentionally left blank DIVIDE AND DISSENT KENTUCKY POLITICS 1930-1963 JOHN ED PEARCE THE UNIVERSITY PRESS OF KENTUCKY Publication of this volume was made possible in part by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities. Copyright © 1987 by The University Press of Kentucky Paperback edition 2006 The University Press of Kentucky Scholarly publisher for the Commonwealth, serving Bellarmine University, Berea College, Centre College of Kentucky, Eastern Kentucky University, The Filson Historical Society, Georgetown College, Kentucky Historical Society, Kentucky State University, Morehead State University, Murray State University, Northern Kentucky University,Transylvania University, University of Kentucky, University of Louisville, and Western Kentucky University. All rights reserved. Editorial and Sales Qffices: The University Press of Kentucky 663 South Limestone Street, Lexington, Kentucky 40508-4008 www.kentuckypress.com Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Pearce,John Ed. Divide and dissent. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Kentucky-Politics and government-1865-1950.
    [Show full text]
  • Congress: Does It Abdicate Its Power?
    Saint Louis University Law Journal Volume 52 Number 1 (Fall 2007) Article 23 2007 Congress: Does It Abdicate Its Power? Thomas F. Eagleton Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Thomas F. Eagleton, Congress: Does It Abdicate Its Power?, 52 St. Louis U. L.J. (2007). Available at: https://scholarship.law.slu.edu/lj/vol52/iss1/23 This Article by Senator Eagleton Previously Published in the Saint Louis University Law Journal and the Saint Louis University Public Law Review is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Saint Louis University Law Journal by an authorized editor of Scholarship Commons. For more information, please contact Susie Lee. SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW CONGRESS: DOES IT ABDICATE ITS POWER?* ** ADDRESS OF THOMAS F. EAGLETON I. INTRODUCTION “Original Intent,” just what do these words mean? Justice Clarence Thomas1 often uses these two words — likewise, with the Wall Street Journal2 and Rush Limbaugh.3 Senate and House members resort to these words when it is convenient to do so.4 Today — just for today — I find it convenient to argue in favor of “original intent.” Today, I want to praise our Founding Fathers and argue that we should follow the letter and spirit of what they expressed in the Constitution with respect to how our nation goes to war. Today I am the Gabriel of original intent. II. THE CONSTITUTION Article I authorizes Congress, among other things, to “provide for the common defense;”5 to “declare war;”6 to “make rules for the government and regulation of land and naval forces;”7 to raise armies and navies;8 to make all * Originally published at 19 ST.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TAKING of AMERICA, 1-2-3 by Richard E
    THE TAKING OF AMERICA, 1-2-3 by Richard E. Sprague Richard E. Sprague 1976 Limited First Edition 1976 Revised Second Edition 1979 Updated Third Edition 1985 About the Author 2 Publisher's Word 3 Introduction 4 1. The Overview and the 1976 Election 5 2. The Power Control Group 8 3. You Can Fool the People 10 4. How It All BeganÐThe U-2 and the Bay of Pigs 18 5. The Assassination of John Kennedy 22 6. The Assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King and Lyndon B. Johnson's Withdrawal in 1968 34 7. The Control of the KennedysÐThreats & Chappaquiddick 37 8. 1972ÐMuskie, Wallace and McGovern 41 9. Control of the MediaÐ1967 to 1976 44 10. Techniques and Weapons and 100 Dead Conspirators and Witnesses 72 11. The Pardon and the Tapes 77 12. The Second Line of Defense and Cover-Ups in 1975-1976 84 13. The 1976 Election and Conspiracy Fever 88 14. Congress and the People 90 15. The Select Committee on Assassinations, The Intelligence Community and The News Media 93 16. 1984 Here We ComeÐ 110 17. The Final Cover-Up: How The CIA Controlled The House Select Committee on Assassinations 122 Appendix 133 -2- About the Author Richard E. Sprague is a pioneer in the ®eld of electronic computers and a leading American authority on Electronic Funds Transfer Systems (EFTS). Receiving his BSEE degreee from Purdue University in 1942, his computing career began when he was employed as an engineer for the computer group at Northrup Aircraft. He co-founded the Computer Research Corporation of Hawthorne, California in 1950, and by 1953, serving as Vice President of Sales, the company had sold more computers than any competitor.
    [Show full text]
  • Edmund Muskie
    Edmund Muskie Folder Citation: Collection: Records of the 1976 Campaign Committee to Elect Jimmy Carter; Series: Noel Sterrett Subject File; Folder: Edmund Muskie; Container 89 To See Complete Finding Aid: http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/library/findingaids/Carter-Mondale%20Campaign_1976.pdf -~ MUSKIE News RUSSELL OFFICE BUILDING • WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 • TELEPHONE (202) 224-5344 CONTACT: Bob Rose FOR P.ELEASE PM Is 'IUESDAY Al From February 3, 1976 MUSIGE INIIDDUCES SPENDING REFORM BILL Sen. Edmund S. Muskie, D-Maine, introduced today (Tuesday) legislation to improve the degree of control Congress exercises over the federal bureaucracy by requiring Virtually every federal program to receive a formal review and reauthori- zation at tl.aast once every four years. The 11 Goverrnnent Econany and Spending Reform Act of 1976 11 would also require so-called zero-based review of the programs. Original cosponsors of the bill are Sens. William V. Roth Jr., R-Del. _, a.uu. John Glenn, r...... Ohio. ·· n ••• Government inefficiency is becoming today's number one villain," Musld.e said in a speech prepared for the Senate. :1Horror stories about bureaucratic .~ungling make good copy, and Pm Sti:;.'"'e that all of us ·at one time or another have ::heen guilty of taking a ride on some well-intentioned government worker's mistake. \)But I think the time has passed when the American people will be satisfied .. with such press release exclamations of outrage. lliey P.re ready for hard evidence and real results that prove we are serious about maldng governnent more productive.!~··: he said. Muskie said he submitted the legislation 11 not as a suggestion that· :we ab~ don our commitment to solving the nation's problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Directory Speaker of the Until the 20Th Amendment House of Representatives Vania
    522 SESSIONS OF CONGRESS, 1st–112th CONGRESSES, 1789–2011 [Closing date for this table was September 15, 2011.] MEETING DATES OF CONGRESS: Pursuant to a resolution of the Confederation Congress in 1788, the Constitution went into effect on March 4, 1789. From then until the 20th amendment took effect in January 1934, the term of each Congress began on March 4th of each odd-numbered year; however, Article I, section 4, of the Constitution provided that ‘‘The Con- gress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.’’ The Congress there- fore convened regularly on the first Monday in December until the 20th amendment became effective, which changed the beginning of Congress’s term as well as its convening date to January 3rd. So prior to 1934, a new Congress typically would not convene for regular business until 13 months after being elected. One effect of this was that the last session of each Congress was a ‘‘lame duck’’ session. After the 20th amendment, the time from the election to the beginning of Congress’s term as well as when it convened was reduced to two months. Recognizing that the need might exist for Congress to meet at times other than the regularly scheduled convening date, Article II, section 3 of the Constitution provides that the President ‘‘may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them’’; hence these sessions occur only if convened by Presidential proclamation. Except as noted, these are separately numbered sessions of a Congress, and are marked by an E in the session column of the table.
    [Show full text]
  • Ernest Gruening, Wayne Morse and the Senate Debate Over United States Participation in Vietnam 1965-1969 and Its Affect on U.S
    ERNEST GRUENING, WAYNE MORSE AND THE SENATE DEBATE OVER UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION IN VIETNAM 1965-1969 AND ITS AFFECT ON U.S. FOREIGN POLICY A. Dwayne Beggs A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS December 2005 Committee: Dr. Gary R. Hess, Advisor Dr. Walter E. Grunden ii ABSTRACT Dr. Gary R. Hess, Advisor On 2 August 1964, while patrolling in the Gulf of Tonkin, the U.S.S. Maddox was attacked by the North Vietnamese Navy. Then on 4 August both the U.S.S. Maddox and the U.S.S. C. Turner Joy were also allegedly attacked. These events were used by President Johnson to secure authority from the United States Senate, by a vote of 88-2, to take actions he deemed necessary to protect United States military personnel, national security interests, and United States allies. In this thesis, the Gulf of Tonkin incidents will be summarized and the ensuing Senate debates analyzed with a specific focus on the dissenting position of Senators Ernest Gruening (Democrat-Alaska) and Wayne Morse (Democrat-Oregon), the only members of Congress to vote against the resolution. There has been much written about the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Congressional debate; however, there has been little focus on the continued arguments of these two senators from 1964-1968. This continuing debate over Vietnam deeply divided the Senate into three main groups who each held distinct opinions on the support they should give Johnson in relation to the issue.
    [Show full text]