Historic Tidbit: The campaign of Martin Van Buren’s use of the term”okay” (simply “O.K” in those days) made the word part of the everyday America lexicon And Teddy Roosevelt’s use of the phrase “good to the last drop” upon trying Maxwell House Coffee became an enduring term still used today? See. For everything, there is a story.
By Scott Crass
Following the election, President Obama has vowed to make election reform a major priority. While he and Congress may have different approaches, this issue may be one of the few not destined to fall victim to the piercing partisan rancor between the branches. Most know what’s needed. More machines in urban areas, expanding voting days, and common-sense voter identification laws. For Washington and the states, courage is the furthest thing that’s required on this issue. Not in the 21st century. But deep within history, there are some early and unsung advocates of courage on voting equality. One of them was Rutherford B. Hayes, our 19th President.
The ironic thing about the legend of the Spiegel Grove estate is that, until 2000, the election that made him President in 1876 was actually the most disputed in American history. His deficit in the popular vote was 3%, and he seemed destined to lose at least one of the four states — Florida, Louisiana, Oregon, and South Carolina) that were in dispute months after voting was complete. And the election did drag on for months, four in fact, before being resolved on March 2, 1877, just two days before the new President was scheduled to take office. Hayes emerged the victor by a single electoral vote, a win almost universally attributed then and now to shenanigins, which culminated with the promise of his supporters to rid the south of the federal troops placed there after the Civil War.
For his supporters, Hayes’ win meant jubilation. For his opponents, it was thievery, a belief that would cause him to be referred to in some quarters as “Rutherfraud.” When someone yelled to Samuel Tilden that “he was robbed,” the defeated Democratic nominee replied, “no, you were robbed.” But with considerable class, Tilden decided not to challenge the outcome, saying he’d prefer four years of a Hayes Presidency “to four years of Civil War.”
After being jarred by so many questions over his own legitimacy, many individuals might shy away from an issue that would draw more attention to the controversy. George W. Bush worried that an emphasis on voter reform would undermine his fragile electoral credibility.
And Hayes didn’t go directly to the heart of voting reform. In that day, it was what it was, though it can be credibly argued that his quest to reform the civil service system and his refusal to “take care” of people with jobs was a baby step toward that kind of reform. Ironically, it was Chester Arthur, our 21st President whom Hayes fired for holding one of those jobs who would complete that task. But what Hayes did do was vocally go to the heart of equal voting under the law, a remarkable and unpractical step for any national politician in the 1870’s, and that is truly intertwined with the issues of today.
Hayes’ commitment to equality was displayed from his very first day in office — his inaugural address in fact. But it was his 1880 State of the Union message that Hayes went for the jugular, and the words were powerful and eloquent.
In his written message (President’s didn’t deliver State of the Unions in person in those days), Hayes was stern. He said,”continued opposition to the full and free enjoyment of the rights of citizenship conferred upon the colored people by the recent amendments to the Constitution still prevails in several of the late slaveholding States. It has, perhaps, not been manifested in the recent election to any large extent in acts of violence or intimidation. It has, however, by fraudulent practices in connection with the ballots, with the regulations as to the places and manner of voting, and with counting, returning, and canvassing the votes cast, been successful in defeating the exercise of the right preservative of all rights–the right of suffrage–which the Constitution expressly confers upon our enfranchised citizens.”
Stunning. Yet the Republican from Fremont, Ohio who fought for the Union during the Civil War didn’t stop there.
“The disposition,” he continued, “to refuse a prompt and hearty obedience to the equal-rights amendments to the Constitution is all that now stands in the way of a complete obliteration of sectional lines in our political contests.
The paramount question still is as to the enjoyment of the fight by every American citizen who has the requisite qualifications to freely cast his vote and to have it honestly counted. With this question rightly settled, the country will be relieved of the contentions of the past; bygones will indeed be bygones, and political and party issues, with respect to economy and efficiency of administration, internal improvements, the tariff, domestic taxation, education, finance, and other important subjects, will then receive their full share of attention.I trust the House of Representatives and the Senate, which have the right to judge of the elections, returns, and qualifications of their own members, will see to it that every case of violation of the letter or spirit of the fifteenth amendment is thoroughly investigated, and that no benefit from such violation shall accrue to any person or party. It will be the duty of the Executive, with sufficient appropriations for the purpose, to prosecute unsparingly all who have been engaged in depriving citizens of the rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution.”
For Hayes, none of that was just talk. In fact, Hayes powerfully and unambiguously walked the walk, and in doing so, set the tone that action was more important than words. And as evidence of the expression the more things change, the more things stay the same, it also involved voting procedures.
In the third year of his Presidency, Hayes forces were engaged in a tug of war with the Democratic Congress that was doing it’s best to undermine the implementation of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. That first came to head in April of 1879 when Congress repealed a provision allowing federal troops to maintain a presence at the polls. Hayes vetoed it. Congress then sent him a bill prohibiting military interference at polling sites. The veto pen was used again. Ditto for the repeal of parts of the Enforcement Act, another veto. And an act compensating poll workers. And an act compensating military officials at the pols. The vetoes were upheld.
Stunning! What’s that saying, the more things change, the more things stay the same? Nearly 140 years later, tactics are still being used to explicitly undermine the right to vote. This time, it’s not so much Congress as the individual states. Many of the laws were ultimately struck down, particularly those restricting early voting and extremely restrictive voter id laws.
If Hayes knew that the Secretary of State in Ohio advocated for substantial cuts in early voting, and upon rejection by the courts, was aided by an appeal from the Attorney General, Hayes would feel that his home-state and party was giving him both a black eye and punch in the gut.
If he witnessed the 7-8 hour waits for voting lines in Florida lines (in the most astonishing tidbit of the whole campaign, people in Miami-Dade, were still waiting to vote after Mitt Romney conceded the Presidency), Hayes would be ashamed that Florida was one of the states that put him over the top. And if he knew that ending early voting the weekend before was tried because poll workers needed time to prepare for the regular Election Day, he would call it disingenuous. The same goes for super-restrictive voter id laws, though Hayes being a commonsense man would certainly be open to common-sense ideas.
After Hayes’ Presidency, his commitment to advancement continued. Hayes served as director of several funds that promoted education to black in the rural south. One of it’s recipients was W. E. B. Du Boise, a future co-founder of the National Advancement for Colored People. Giving women educational opportunities was also a pet cause. Nor did Hayes forget about black citizens of his home state, wanting to “uplift the descendants of those who have been oppressed.”
Hayes’ quest for social improvement was not limited to Civil Rights. He took on may issues, again ahead of his time. One was public education.”As knowledge spreads, wealth spreads,” he said. “To diffuse knowledge is to diffuse wealth. To give all an equal chance to acquire knowledge is the best and surest way to give all an equal chance to acquire property.” Increasing training (“skilled labor”) was a must. He took the same approach to prison reform and rehabilitating those in jail. Wealth disparities was a concern as well.
Where would Hayes stand today on the political front. It’s likely that he’d still be a Republican, as in his later years, he continued to back candidates he was not totally enamored with. But he would be at the lonely end, probably a member of the “Main Street Partnership” that the once vibrant moderate Republicans in Congress founded. definitely would favor higher taxes on the rich and the closing of Guantanamo Bay.
It goes without saying that Rutherford Hayes was not the most distinguished Presidents nor was he the most revered. But for a man whose own election will likely be questionable to some degree for ever and always, the man of Spiegel Grove’s commitment to equality and the right to vote is something that those who hold the power today should take note of.