What makes America Great?

Some of you who follow this blog may not realize that I am a published author of two books, one published by a university press and the other published by a respected New York publisher.  This means that both books faced the scrutiny of scholars or other knowledgeable reviewers to examine my research and reasoning.  For one of my books I was recognized as the Georgia Author of the Year for Nonfiction during the time we lived in Atlanta.  Both books dealt with history and the American Constitution.

I mention this to explain my motivation to devote nearly a decade to researching and writing a book about the late 1800s from the perspective of a community in southcentral Kansas.  The community in which I grew up was part of a movement strong and successful enough to have created a third party that challenged the two old political parties.  The People's Party of the late 1800s, created largely by farmers, laborers, and small businessmen, was one of the most, if not the most, successful third party in America's history.  Many people living today have never heard of the People's Party, although their ancestors may have been a part of the Populist Movement. 

They believed ordinary Americans mattered, and they believed in our Constitution.  What they also believed was that education is essential if America is to work as the founding fathers intended.  They knew what the Constitution said and how it was meant to work.  Although the People's Party faded into history, their movement left behind many of their goals, assimilated by the two old parties and adopted into laws we accept today without recognizing their roots in the forgotten People's Party.

Antonin Scalia

In a past post, I shared the words of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (1936-2016) from a speech he gave in 2011.  Although he acknowledged that most Americans consider the Bill of Rights  the source of America's greatness, he disagreed.  "The real key to the distinctiveness of America is the structure of our government," he insisted.  In other words, the separation of powers--a President, a House of Representatives, and a Senate, each operating as a check on the others is the source of our greatness.  As Scalia said, we Americans should "Learn to love the separation of powers..."

The founding fathers did not want our government to be a smoothly operating machine where there was no debate, no conflicting perspectives.  The House of Representatives has members elected by voters from various districts within their states, a mix of urban, rural, conservative, liberal, multiracial, of different faiths, educations, and income levels.  The Senate has two members from each state and must consider the entire population of the states each represents.  While these Representatives and Senators serve the people who elected them, they are not compelled to ignore their own knowledge nor conscience, and they are entitled to benefit from their own experience and judgment in deciding matters that come before them.  What amazing wisdom the founding fathers showed in creating America's unique system, with the checks and balances necessary to represent such a diverse citizenry.

James Madison

James Madison said it well:  "The great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department of the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachment of the others.  ...It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government.  ...In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this:  you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

So long as the men and women we send to Washington remember their responsibilities under the constitution, America will be great, but when they forget their personal responsibility to serve as the check and balance on our system of government, the very foundation of the Constitution begins to crack.

In Isaac Werner's time, the common man had begun to believe that those they sent to Washington and their state capitals were answering only to the wealthy, and they formed a third party to remind their elected leadership of the corruption of power and the danger of serving only one segment of the population, or of forgetting the importance of each of the three parts of our system checking and balancing the other two.  Every generation needs to be aware of what truly makes America great and every generation needs to remind those they elect of the danger of forgetting that the abuse of power can eventually be cast back on them when they are no longer the ones in control.

The Populist Movement had its roots in Texas, but at the peak of the movement, Kansas was at its center.  Finding the Journal of Isaac Werner was an exciting discovery, and it was his Journal that enticed me to learn more about the Populist Movement.  My Civil War veteran great grandfather did not join the movement, but two other great grandfathers that lived in the community did participate.  Perhaps some of you who follow the blog also had family in Kansas during the late 1800s that may have been part of the Populist Movement.  I hope my blog acquaints you with a historic political movement that swept our state and in which your ancestor might have been a part.

Words from the Grave

James Madison by Gilbert Stuart

It often surprises me that a favorite quote I interpret to mean one thing is discovered to be a favorite quote of someone else who interprets it to mean something entirely different.  That is why it is essential to place quotes within the full context of their meaning and to understand the historic moments surrounding the speaker.  

When Isaac Beckley Werner was born, America was not even a century old, and yet the nation had been tested by a civil war.  America was about at the century mark when Isaac began writing in the journal which inspired my research, writing about the Populist Movement that was so significant in our own state and region of Kansas.

It was a time when political parties formed to confront the two older and more powerful parties, the two parties which dominate our political environment today, and many of our ancestors were participants in this mix of parties.  

Prohibition Party of late-1800s

 If you, as I was when I began my research, are unfamiliar with the upstart parties of that era, here is a very brief summary of some of the more successful political challengers:  Green back Party (1874-1889) begun on an agrarian platform to support metal-backed rather than paper money; Social Labor Party (1876-   ) supporting workers rights and unions; Know nothing Party (1845-1860) with concerns about immigration; Readjuster Party (1877-1895) involving both Blacks and Whites in concerns about public education and Civil War debts of the South; Silver Party (1892-1911) focused on bi-mentalism; Independence Party (1905-1911) advocating a Department of Labor and a set work day; Populist or People's Party (1891-1908) particularly involving farmers in our region seeking a party to represent their issues in opposition to the rich and powerful.

As you can see by reading through that list, the issues were mixed, but many of their concerns remain significant today, and, as then, the same two political parties remain predominant.

"Scene at the Signing of the Constitution"

History conveys to us the 'words from the graves' of our ancestors who tried to make their voices heard during their lifetimes.  It also conveys the words from the graves of our founding fathers, who speak most clearly in the words of the Constitution they gave to us.

As James Madison wrote in The Federalist Papers No. 51 regarding the separation of powers of the three branches of government upon which our Constitution is based:  "But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department of the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachment of the others. ...It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. ...If men were angels, no government would be necessary to control the abuses of government. ...In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this:  you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

United States Capitol west front

The amazing wisdom of the founding fathers was to create a constitution in which powers among the three divisions of government--legislature, executive, and judicial--are divided into distinct branches to limit any single one of them to encroach on the functions of the other.  The common reference to this structure is "checks and balances" to prevent unchecked power by any one branch.  

The final voice from the grave whose words I share belong to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (1936-2016).  In a speech given October 5, 2011, he began by acknowledging that in speaking to groups he would often ask them what they considered the most important thing about our Constitution, and inevitably they would answer "Freedoms," of speech or other freedoms.  He asked instead, "What is it in our Constitution that makes us what we are?" and answered his own question:  "The Bill of Rights is not the greatness of America...The real key to the distinctiveness of America is the structure of our government."  In short, he believed the single most important thing we posses as Americans is a Constitution in which our three branches have limited powers and can act to limit the power of each other.

North & South views of White House

Justice Scalia believed that we Americans are not aware of how important separation of powers is and that most of us are ignorant of the ways our Constitution differs from the governance of other nations.  He explained that unlike our House and Senate, "[There are] Very few countries in the world that have a bi-cameral legislature...two separate bodies in the legislature equally powerful."  He aimed a joke at legislators present for his speech, acknowledging:  "That's a lot of trouble to get the same language through two different bodies elected in a different fashion."  To citizens who complained to Scalia that the bi-cameral legislatures led to gridlock, he replied, "Learn to love the separation of powers...learn to love the gridlock."  He wanted Americans to understand how the difficulties of getting laws through both the house and the Senate defeats mistaken laws and improves laws that pass. 

 

United States Supreme Court

Scalia also opined on our election of a President, saying, "Very few countries in the world have a separately elected Chief Executive."  He explained that in many countries the Chief Executive simply tells the legislators what to do and they do it, or the legislators tell the Chief Executive what to do and if he doesn't they vote to replace him.  Under our Constitution the President has limited powers, members of the House of Representatives and Senate must act independently and reach agreement, and the justices of the Supreme Court affirmed for life have the final say on the Constitutionality of our laws.

Before leaving the remarks of Justice Scalia, I must mention the importance of differences among the justices with whom they serve.  Scalia and Justice Ruth Banner Ginzburg could not have been more different in many of their legal views; yet, they were the best of friends.  That is difficult to understand for many of us, who know them only through the court opinions that they wrote.  However, it illustrates the importance of the varying perspectives on the Court, which enable them to question the attorneys who appear before them, to argue with each other as the Court reaches its majority opinion, and to write independent opinions in which they express their views beyond the content of the majority opinion--whether they may have agreed with the majority but not their reasoning or whether they disagree in a minority opinion or their own dissenting opinion.  Many Americans are only aware of the majority opinion, but all of these functions are important and necessary in shaping our laws.

Page one of the American Constitution

 Each branch of our government checks and balances the acts of the other branches, and within each branch the ability of differing views to be considered is essential.  As Scalia said, that is what "makes us what we are."

When we Americans and those we elect fail to understand the importance of preserving the intricate checks and balances our founding fathers built into the American Constitution, only then is the greatness of America threatened.

Our ancestors understood that elections matter, and when they believed those they elected had forgotten the responsibility to represent all the people, they formed their own political parties.  Those third parties never have gained much political power for long, and have sometimes unintentionally served as spoilers.  It is also true that many of the populist ideas have now become part of the major parties' values after gaining acceptance of the wider population.  As this blog has often said, history is our best teacher, and those voices from the grave can remind us how precious the Constitution we were given truly is,  We must understand that importance.

Survey Results for $10 Bill Image

Alexander Hamilton

I have just finished "The Quartet" by Joseph J. Ellis, in which he describes his conclusion that four men were key to making the transition from a confederation to a nation in the drafting and passage of our American Constitution.  Those four men were George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison.  While the analysis by Ellis of the importance of those four may not be broadly shared by all historians, he certainly made a strong case for the key roles they played.

Last week's blog did not bring much of an outcry to secure Hamilton's place on the $10 bill.  One follower did write:  "What is wrong with the ten the way it is?  ...people need to forget changing the gender on the money.  How many people actually use paper money?"

Sacagawea

Another follower suggested adding a $25 bill to accommodate the call for a woman's image on our paper currency.  A couple of people suggested using Lady Liberty.

In fact, if there is a great outcry to remove Hamilton and put a woman on the $10 bill, it was not reflected in replies from blog followers.  The follower who asked why any change was needed did suggest Sacagawea might be an appropriate choice if the change to a woman's image were necessary.  The detail at left of Sacagawea with Lewis and Clark is from a painting by Edgar Samuel Paxson located in the Montana State Capitol.   I did not receive any chorus of supporters demanding that Hamilton remain on the bill, nor did names of female  replacements flood the comments on facebook or this blog. 

My survey indicated that people who read my blog really don't give much attention to the faces that appear on our paper currency  Perhaps if I had included the cost involved in making a change, I might have received more responses!