Everett Dirksen - Geskiedenis

Everett Dirksen - Geskiedenis


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Everett Dirksen

1896- 1969

Amerikaanse politieke leier

Die Amerikaanse politikus Everett Dirksen is gebore in Pekin, Illinois, en het in die Eerste Wêreldoorlog gedien. Na die oorlog keer hy terug na sy tuisdorp om regte te beoefen.

In 1932 word Dirksen in die Huis van Verteenwoordigers verkies as 'n Republikein, waar hy tot 1948 bly. In 1950 hardloop hy suksesvol vir die Amerikaanse senaat en dien daar tot sy dood.

Dirksen word 'n partysweep in 1957 en 'n minderheidsleier in 1959. Hy was 'n gewilde Republikein en ondersteun senator Joseph McCarthy en handhaaf 'n konserwatiewe houding in buitelandse en binnelandse sake.

In die 1960's het Dirksen sy standpunte gemodereer, president Kennedy gehelp om die verdrag oor die verbod op kerntoetse in 1963 te slaag en president Johnson se wet op burgerregte te ondersteun.

.


Everett McKinley Dirksen Gerechtsgebou van die Verenigde State

Die Everett McKinley Dirksen, hofgebou van die Verenigde State, algemeen na verwys as die Dirksen Federale Gebou, is 'n wolkekrabber in die Chicago Loop in South Dearborn Street 219. Dit is ontwerp deur Ludwig Mies van der Rohe en voltooi in 1964. Die gebou is 117 m hoog en het 30 verdiepings, vernoem na die Amerikaanse kongreslid Everett Dirksen. Die gebou huisves die Amerikaanse appèlhof vir die sewende kring, die Amerikaanse distrikshof vir die noordelike distrik van Illinois, die Verenigde State se bankrotskapshof, die Amerikaanse marskalk vir die noordelike distrik van Illinois, die Amerikaanse prokureur vir die noordelike distrik van Illinois en plaaslike kantore vir verskillende hofverwante federale agentskappe, soos die Federal Public Defender, die Amerikaanse proefdiens, die trustee van die Verenigde State en die National Labor Relations Board. Dit is een van drie geboue uit die modernistiese Federal Plaza -kompleks wat deur van der Rohe ontwerp is, saam met die Amerikaanse poskantoor (Loop Station) en die Kluczynski Federal Building. Afsonderlik van die Federal Plaza, maar oorkant die Kluczynski -gebou oorkant Jackson Boulevard, is die Metcalfe Federal Building.


Verdere leeswerk

Everett McKinley Dirksen is opgeneem in politieke profiele vir die Truman-, Eisenhower-, Kennedy-, Johnson- en Nixon -jare en in die Biografiese Gids van die Kongres. Dirksen het talle toneelstukke en ses romans geskryf, waarvan nie een gepubliseer is nie. Sy toesprake is in die Kongresrekord. 'N Uitstekende biografie van die Illinois -wetgewer is geskryf deur Edward L. Schapsmeier en Frederick H. Schapsmeier, getiteld Dirksen van Illinois: Senatoriale staatsman (1985). Agtergrondmateriaal is geredelik beskikbaar in Amerikaanse tydperk (1980) deur Arthur S. Link en William B. Catton in Stephen E. Ambrose, Eisenhower (1983-1984), en in Lawrence S. Wittner, Koue Oorlog Amerika (1974).


Seks in die senaat

Bobby Baker se onheilspellende geheime geskiedenis van Capitol Hill.

Todd S. Purdum is senior skrywer by Politiek en bydraende redakteur vir Vanity Fair, asook skrywer van 'N Idee van wie se tyd gekom het: twee presidente, twee partye en die stryd om die burgerregtewet van 1964.

Op 1 Januarie 1943 het Robert Gene Baker op die hoogtepunt van die Tweede Wêreldoorlog in Washington aangekom om 'n Senaatblad te word. Twee dekades later het hierdie seun van 'n posbode uit Pickens, SC, die heersende Washington-wielhandelaar en regter geword van sy tyd as sekretaris van die Demokratiese meerderheid van die Senaat. In die era van president John F. Kennedy se New Frontier was Baker onontbeerlik op Capitol Hill: The Man Who Knew Too Much.

Presies 50 jaar gelede hierdie herfs, te midde van 'n groter amptelike ondersoek na sy privaat sake en lewendige sosiale lewe - 'n ondersoek wat dreig om die Kennedy White House in 'n seksskandaal te verswelg en Baker se politieke beskermheer, vise -president Lyndon Johnson, te vernietig - Baker het vier martini's tydens die middagete gedrink en impulsief bedank. Hy was so na aan Johnson as 'n seun, met die diepste geheime van die vise -president. Op Vrydag, 22 November 1963, het die tragedie van Kennedy se sluipmoord die Baker-ondersoek kortgeknip en Johnson se loopbaanbeëindiging ontsien.

Tog het aanklaers uiteindelik Baker ingehaal, indien nie sy beskermheer nie, en hy het uiteindelik 18 maande gevangenisstraf uitgedien op aanklagte van federale belastingontduiking. In 1978 skryf hy saam Wheeling en Hantering, 'n rollende memoir met Larry L. King, veral bekend as die skrywer van die musiekblyspel Die beste klein hoerhuis in Texas.

Maar Baker het die afgelope jare in stilte 'n nog meer onvervulde verslag van sy alles-in-die-era in Washington aangeteken, wat Politico Magazine nou vir die eerste keer publiseer. Sy herinneringe - van 'n tyd toe senatore die hele dag gedrink het, seksuele stryd aangegaan het met sekretarisse en kiesers, duisende dollars aan omkoopgeld aanvaar het en steeds die belangrikste wetgewing van die 20ste eeu kon aanvaar - is ingesamel deur Donald Ritchie van die Senaat Historiese Kantoor in onderhoude met Baker in 2009 en 2010. Die gevolglike manuskrip van 230 bladsye was so ribbelend en ontroerend, so opvallend en opspraakwekkend dat die historiese kantoor van die gewone gebruik daarvan afgehou het om sulke onderhoude aanlyn te plaas.

Vandag leef Baker gesond en woon hy in Florida en bestuur hy die suksesvolle eiendomsbeleggings wat hy op een of ander manier gedurende sy donkerste dae behou het. Vroeër hierdie maand het hy 85 geword. In die herinnerings wat daarop volg, bied hy 'n onuitwisbare bewys dat die goeie ou dae nie altyd goed was nie: een senator sterf met $ 2 miljoen in onverklaarbare kontant en 'n ander het $ 200,000 betaal om sy stem te verander, waarvoor sommige opgedaag het. dronk werk. Maar hy verduidelik ook hoe die ou dae 'n beter model as die huidige tyd sou kon bied vir hoe om sake te doen op Capitol Hill: sy tyd was 'n tyd waarin senatore mekaar ken en respekteer, en tweesydige samewerking die norm was. Dit is 'n besliste vraag of die gesanksionaliseerde immoraliteit van 50 jaar gelede vir die wetgewende proses erger was as die gekodifiseerde korrupsie van vandag. Lesers, wees die beoordelaar. Maar harken intussen na die woorde van miskien die laaste lewende man wat dit alles gesien het.

Wat hierna volg, in aanhalings, is die herinneringe van Baker, die notas van die skrywer is kursief.

Bobby Baker (links) in die vroeë 1960's. | Foto AP

'My eerste indruk was toe ek sien dat al die soldate met hul bajonette die Capitol bewaak. Dit het my die skrik op die lyf geslaan, want ek was nog nooit 50 myl verder as Pickens toe ek met 'n bus na Washington kom nie ... Ek sê vir jou, vir 'n heuwel uit Suid -Carolina, kon ek die grootsheid van die Capitol en Washington nie glo nie ...

Baker op die beskermheer wat hom na Washington, senator Burnett Maybank (D-SC), gebring het.
'Hy was baie, baie gaaf. ... Hy het een swakheid gehad. Hy moes ongeveer 'n halwe glas bourbon drink toe hy die oggend wakker word. Ek dink hy is dood toe hy ongeveer 51 was ... " 1

1. Burnett Maybank (1899-1954) was 'n afstammeling van vyf goewerneurs van Suid-Carolina, en het uiteindelik self die pos beklee nadat hy sy loopbaan as wethouer en later burgemeester van Charleston begin het. Hy het as voorsitter van die Senaat se bankkomitee gedien, en kort voor sy dood is hy aangewys Fortuin tydskrif as een van die "20 invloedrykste Amerikaners."

en senator Clyde Hoey (D-N.C.) ...
'Senator Hoey het 'n slukstertjas gedra. Die sekretaresses het my gereeld in die kleedkamer gebel, want toe het ons altyd twee keer per maand kontant betaal. Hulle sou sê: 'Is die ou teef daar buite by die waterfontein?' Want wat sou hy doen, as 'n mooi meisie daar sou kom, bel hy haar en dan probeer hy met haar speel borste. ” 2

2. Clyde Hoey (1877-1954) het op 16-jarige ouderdom 'n weeklikse koerant gekoop en op 20-jarige ouderdom verkies tot die staatswetgewer van Noord-Carolina. Hy is in 1944 tot die Senaat verkies, en in 1950 het hy hom teen staatskaping teen Hawaii gekant op grond daarvan dat dit ondenkbaar om 'n gebied met slegs 'n klein persentasie wit mense toe te laat om tot die vakbond toe te tree.

Baker oor die ontmoeting met Lyndon Johnson, wat sy mentor sou word-hoewel die verhouding 'n bietjie andersom begin het, terwyl Johnson advies van die 20-jarige gekry het na sy verkiesing tot die senaat in 1948.
'Ek was 'n maer seuntjie, ek het ongeveer 120 kilogram geweeg. Hy weeg ongeveer 280. Toe [Johnson se hulp] John Connally my toe neem om my voor te stel aan die uitverkore senator Johnson, spring Johnson op en hy sê: 'Mnr. Baker, hulle sê vir my jy is die slimste jakkals daar. ’Ek het gesê:‘ Wel, wie ook al vir jou gesê het wat gelieg het. ’Ek het gesê:‘ Ek ken al die personeel aan ons kant. Ek weet wie die dronkies is. En ek weet wie se woord goed is. ’Hy het gesê:‘ Jy is die man wat ek wil ken. ’Ons het goeie vriende geword…”

Teen die tyd van Johnson se aankoms het Baker reeds die 'hoof telefoonblad' van die Demokrate geword, wat verantwoordelik was vir die opsporing van die aksie op die vloer van die senaat en vir die hulpverleners van die senaat kon sê of hul base nodig is vir 'n stemming. Hy leer al die optrede en persoonlikhede van die Senaat ken, waaronder die sekretaris van die Demokratiese meerderheid, Felton "Skeeter" Johnston, 'n lakoniese Mississippian. Soos ander bladsye, wat voltyds op Capitol Hill gestap het, sou Baker elke oggend skoolgaan voordat die dag van die Senaat begin.
'Skeeter het 'n alkoholprobleem gehad, maar destyds het die senaat eers om 12 uur bygewoon, so ek sou ongeveer 12 uur uit die klas [by die bladsyskool] kom, omstreeks 12:20 terug na die senaat . Daarna was ek basies in beheer van wat gebeur, omdat hy daarvan gehou het om in die sekretaris van die senaat te wees, wat 'n fantastiese kroeg vir die Demokratiese senatore was. 3

Teen die tyd dat John F. Kennedy vermoor is, het Bobby Baker se verbintenis met Lyndon Johnson die loopbane van albei politici begin bedreig. | Foto AP

3. Felton Johnston (1909-1973) word later die sekretaris van die senaat, belas met die bestuur van die administratiewe en prosedurele funksies van die kamer. In die dae toe die senaat 96 lede gehad het (voor die toelating van Alaska en Hawaii tot die vakbond), het senator John Stennis van Mississippi eenkeer verklaar: 'Meerderhede kan kom en meerderhede kan gaan, maar Skeeter is altyd die 97ste senator op die vloer aan ons kant. ”

In 1953, toe Johnson die Demokratiese vloerleier van die senaat word, bevorder hy Baker tot die pos van sekretaris van die meerderheid. Die twee werk so intiem saam dat Baker bekend staan ​​as 'Little Lyndon' en as Johnson se oë en ore funksioneer. Na Johnson se hartaanval in 1955 wat langdurige afwesigheid vir herstel tot gevolg gehad het Baker se raad het des te belangriker geword. Met die verloop van jare het hy die voorste kenner van die Senaat geword om stemme te tel. Hy het verduidelik hoe belangrik dit is om lede te leer ken in ontspanne, na-ure instellings.
'Hulle laat hul hare in die steek as hulle 'n paar drankies gedrink het, vertel hulle van hul voorkeure en afkeure, en jy lê dit weg. U vind uit wie graag reis oor die hele wêreld wil onderneem, en probeer dan diegene terugbetaal wat teen hul gewete gestem het om u te help. Senator Johnson was baie vaardig in die sorg van senatore en hul wense en die rekeninge wat hulle wou hê ... "

Ons het hierdie banke en stoele gehad, en daar is die spieël waar ... Kennedy gesê het: 'God, waarom het u my so mooi gemaak?'

Vriendskappe en werksverhoudinge strek oor die partydige kloof, toe Baker onthou van sy eerste kennismaking met Richard Nixon. In 1949 trou Baker met Dorothy Comstock, 'n sekretaris van senator Scott Lucas (D-Ill.), Maar sy verlaat die pos vir 'n beter betaalde een by Nixon na sy verkiesing tot die senaat in 1950.
'Ek het hom geken toe hy die eerste keer in die senaat verkies is. Hy het 'n pragtige vrou en twee mooi dogters gehad. My vrou het op sy betaalstaat gegaan omdat hy 'n oorskot kontant gehad het uit sy veldtog in Kalifornië. Die senaatsersersant by Arms het 'n lys gehou van mense wat die Hill ken, en hy het my vrou aanbeveel by senator Nixon se sekretaris, Rose Wood [s]. Sy het daar gewerk totdat ek op die regte skool was en meer geld nodig gehad, en senator [Pat] McCarran [D-Nev.] Administratiewe assistent, Eva Adams, het my vrou 'n vet verhoging gegee, en sy het bedank uit die personeel van senator Nixon.

4. Nadat die Demokrate die Wet op Burgerregte van 1957 suksesvol verswak het deur 'n bepaling in te voeg wat verweerders in federale burgerregtelike sake die reg op 'n jurieverhoor verleen-algemeen beskou as 'n verraad deur burgerregtegroepe omdat dit onwaarskynlik is dat die hele Suid-Suid-juries skuldig bevind word wit beskuldigdes in burgerregte - Nixon verklaar: 'Dit is een van die hartseerste dae in die geskiedenis van die senaat. Dit was 'n stemming teen die stemreg. ”

'Veral aan die begin van die Eisenhower -administrasie sou ek mnr. [Roy] Wilkins en al die lobbyiste van die NAACP in en uit die klein ou kantoor van vise -president Nixon sien, net buite die senaatsvloer. Hy was regtig besig om hulle te hof te maak. En hulle was gereed om 'n ooreenkoms te sluit, want hy was baie, baie meer liberaal oor die negervraag as wat die Demokrate was. Vir my lewe verstaan ​​ek nie hoe hy met soveel haat en afkeer beland het nie - hy het nie van Jode gehou nie, hy het niemand gehou nie ... " 4

5. Everett McKinley Dirksen (1896-1969) het 'n volledig gevulde kroeg agter in sy kantoor gehou, in 'n privaat kamer bekend as die "Twilight Lodge", met 'n horlosie aan die muur waarvan elke uur vyf genommer was, so dit was altyd na vyf en dus 'n geskikte tyd vir 'n drankie.

Baker herinner aan die mag van lobbyiste om kwessies te beïnvloed, en vertel van 'n gesprek met die jare lange Republikeinse leier van die Senaat, Everett Dirksen (R-Ill.) ...
'Een keer het senator Dirksen my na sy kantoor geroep. ... Hy het ... die regse bomwerpers [daar vergader]. Senator Dirksen het begin deur te sê: 'Mnr. Baker, u is die beste stemmeester in die geskiedenis van die senaat. Sal u my kollegas vertel hoeveel stemme u oor hierdie kwessie het? ’Ek het gesê:‘ Mnr. Leier, ek het 40 stemme aan my kant en 12 stemme aan u kant. ’Hulle het gesê:‘ Verdomme! Hoe kan u 12 stemme aan ons kant hê? ’Ek het gesê:‘ Wel, my lobbyist -vriend van die Railway Union, Cy Anderson, het my sy blad gewys. Hy het stembeloftes verseker van die volgende ... 'Ek sou op die lys val. Hulle het gesê: ‘Daai bastards!’ Hulle was regtig ontsteld. Dirksen sê: 'Neem nog 'n drankie. Laat ons 'n eenparige toestemmingsooreenkoms kry en 'n langnaweek hê. 'Dit is hoe hy gewerk het. … Dirksen het 'n wonderlike vriend geword. Ek bedoel, as dit nie vir senator Dirksen was nie, sou die [Wet op Burgerregte van 1964 en die Wet op Stemreg van 1965] nooit geslaag het nie ... So ek sal jou vertel dat ek groot bewondering vir hom het ... Hy het nooit 'n rekening van $ 100 gesien waarvan hy nie gehou het nie. " 5

Sy het gesê: 'Lyndon, ek het raad nodig.' Sy het gesê: 'Styles het $ 2 miljoen kontant hier en ek weet nie hoe ek dit moet hanteer nie.

Op die vraag oor hoe hy te werk gegaan het, het Baker die volgende verduideliking gegee ...
'Wel, ek het basies die posisie of neigings van 'n senator geken, of 'n senator 'n konserwatief of 'n liberaal was. Basies wyk hulle nie daarvan af nie. As jy 30 liberale en 20 konserwatiewes het, het jy dit. Een van die min kere wat ek nie geweet het hoe die stemming sou uitloop nie, was toe president Kennedy op soek was na Medicare. Ek het eers later geleer waarom senator Jennings Randolph [D-W.Va.] Daarteen gestem het. Senator [Robert] Kerr, ['n demokraat uit Oklahoma en 'n welgestelde oliemagnaat] het 'n ooreenkoms met die dokters in Oklahoma aangegaan om Medicare dood te maak. Hy was net vasberade in sy opposisie teen Medicare. Senator Jennings Randolph was 'n wonderlike senator. ... Nege-en-negentig keer uit 100, het ek geweet hoe hy gaan stem. ... Maar hy sou my nooit vertel hoe hy gaan stem oor president Kennedy se Medicare -wetsontwerp nie. ... Maar senator Kerr het hom $ 200,000 vir die stem gegee. Dit wys jou dat geld kan praat. ” 6

6. Jennings Randolph (1902-1998) was een van die oorspronklike borge van Kennedy se Medicare-wetsontwerp, maar het op die laaste oomblik sy stem verander toe die maatreël in Julie 1962 op die vloer van die senaat was, wat 'n hoorbare snak in die kamer veroorsaak het. Destyds het Randolph verduidelik dat hy dit gedoen het omdat hy gekant was dat die wetsontwerp as 'n ruiter geheg is aan 'n hangende maatreël vir hervorming van welsyn - 'n parlementêre instrument wat bedoel is om die Grondwet se bepaling dat inkomsterekeninge in die huis moet ontstaan, te omseil. Randolph het gesê dat hy vrees dat die insluiting van Medicare by die welsynsmaatreël die kans op die wetsontwerp in die gedrang sal bring en sy toestand van die broodnodige voordele sal ontneem.

Baker verduidelik die metode wat Walter Reuther, die jare lange hoof van die United Autoworkers Union, gebruik het om kontant aan senatore te kry in 'n tyd toe vakbonde belet was om politieke bydraes te lewer.
'Hy moes baie versigtig wees met kontantgeld wat na sy vakbond in die Verenigde State gekom het. Maar hy het nie so 'n reël in Kanada gehad nie. Gevolglik het Walter Reuther, waarskynlik as gevolg van sy kontantbydraes, 'n minimum van 20 senatore gehad wat sou stem soos hy wil. … Hy het meer sitplekke in die Amerikaanse senaat gekoop as iemand in my lewe. Ek sê vir jou, dit was onwerklik dat senator Ted Moss [D-Utah] of Gale McGee [D-Wyo.], Wat uit basies Republikeinse gebied kom, verkies is. Omdat Walter Reuther geld gegee het. Maar seun, toe ek hulle moes help om te stem, as Walter Reuther hulle bel, kon ek hulle nooit verander nie. ” 7

7. Walter Reuther (1907-1970) was 'n onvermoeide kruisvaarder namens georganiseerde arbeid en burgerregte. Die seun van 'n sosialistiese brouerywerker wat uit Duitsland na Wes -Virginia geëmigreer het, het in 1927 by die Ford Motor Company aangesluit as 'n gereedskapsmaker, en tien jaar later het hy die belangrikste arbeidsleier in Detroit geword.

Baker was van mening dat kontant vir stemme nie net tot die senaat beperk is nie, en vertel hoe Rein Vander Zee, 'n hulp van Hubert Humphrey, Humphrey se beroemde verlies aan JFK in die Demokratiese presidentsverkiesing in Wes -Virginia in 1960 beskryf het.
'Vander Zee het tot op sy sterfdag gesê dat Humphrey Kennedy sou verslaan het ... as dit nie was vir die groot kontant nie, het ou [Kennedy] die verkiesing gekoop. Ryan, 'n voormalige FBI-man, het elke balju in elk van die provinsies daartoe verbind om vir Humphrey te stem. En, seun, toe die verkiesingsdag aanbreek, was dit vir hom totale nuus. Hulle het Donderdag voor die Dinsdag verander. Vander Zee het gesê: 'Hulle sou nie eens my oproep terugbring nie.' '' 8

8. Kennedy se biograaf Robert Dallek het geskryf dat "in die politiek van Wes -Virginia geld was die koning", en opgemerk dat Humphrey se hele veldtogbegroting in die staat $ 25,000 was, terwyl Kennedy $ 34,000 alleen op televisie -advertensies bestee het. Dallek haal die Kenneth O'Donnell, mede -president van die Kennedy -veldtog, aan en sê dat betalings aan plaaslike politieke base nie die "aardse en realistiese mense van Wes -Virginia, wat gewoond was daaraan om die plaaslike kandidaat vir die balju te sien dra 'n swart sakkie bevat wat iets anders bevat as 'n paar bottels Bourbon -whisky. ”

... en hy beskryf die uitdaging om Robert F. Kennedy as prokureur -generaal in sy broer se administrasie bevestig te kry ...
'Die president het gesê:' Lyndon, ek het u hulp nodig ', want senator [Richard] Russell [D-Ga.] En die Republikeine was vasbeslote om Bobby as prokureur-generaal te wees. Hy het eintlik geen regservaring gehad nie. Johnson het vir my gesê: 'As die president deur my ondersteuners verslaan word, is dit 'n vreeslike situasie wat ek nie kan doen nie.' 'Kyk wat u met ons gemeenskaplike vriend, senator Russell, kan doen, want as u genoeg bourbon in hom kry, word hy meer redelik.' Ek het hom toe na die sekretaris van die senaat geneem en ek het gesê: 'Jou beste vriend is lief vir jou en hy het my gebel en hy het u hulp nodig, en sal u my asseblief 'n stem laat stem? 'En hy het teësinnig gesê:' U kan 'n stem stem. 'En senator Dirksen, as 'n ordentlike man, laat dit deurgaan op die manier. Maar as dit 'n stemoproep gehad het, sou Bobby Kennedy nooit die prokureur-generaal gewees het nie. Hy sou gelukkig gewees het om 40 stemme te kry. So het die senaat wat ek geken het, aan hom gedink. ” 9

9. Ten tyde van sy benoeming as prokureur -generaal het Robert Kennedy nog nooit soveel as die regte beoefen nie - 'n werklikheid waarvan sy broer kennis geneem het tydens die Gridiron Dinner van 1961 toe hy gesê het dat hy R.F.K. die werk, sodat hy 'eers 'n bietjie ervaring kan kry'. Toe R.F.K. sy broer het hom aangeraai dat dit goed is om met jouself te spot. 'U het nie met u gespot nie,' antwoord die prokureur -generaal. 'Jy het gespot ek!”

Russell was die eerbiedigste - en het gevrees senator van sy dag. Maar sy sterk segregasie -standpunte en onverbiddelike opposisie teen burgerregte -wetgewing het hom ontevrede gemaak met die nasionale Demokratiese Party ...
'Omdat hy uit Georgië was en baie meer konserwatief was as die Demokratiese Party, was daar geen kans dat hy standpunt sou inneem nie. As hy toegegee het dat die Suide die Burgeroorlog verloor het, en na die Brown v. Onderwysraad as hy gesê het dat ons gebruike in die suide heeltemal anders is, maar as u saam met my gaan, begin ons in die kleuterskool en sal ons integreer, sou hy president gewees het. Hy kon eintlik president gewees het en hy wou president wees. Maar burgerregte het hom doodgemaak, en dit is al wat hy geweet het, reël 22 [die filibusterreël.] ”

Baker het ook verhale vertel van die legendariese karakters van die Senaat uit sy tyd daar in die 1950's en 60's, met lewendige beskrywings van hul seksuele peccadillos, neigings en verskillende ander ondeugdes.
'Senator [Clinton] Anderson [D-N.M.] was 'n groot teleurstelling. Hy was vol haat. Ek het 'n klein Mexikaans-Amerikaanse kind gehad as 'n bladseun, en hy het vir my gesê: 'Senator Anderson is die gemeenste teun wat ek nog ooit ontmoet het.' Hy het gesê: 'Hy behandel jou net asof jy 'n hond is . 'En hy was ook 'n soort seksmaniak ... "

'Senator [Estes] Kefauver [D-Tenn.] Het 'n drankprobleem gehad. Hy het die heeltyd na drank geruik, maar hy was nie 'n gemene man nie. Sy personeel was lief vir hom ... 'n tragiese figuur, maar hy was al sy kollegas in die suide ver voor, want toe hy vir die eerste keer in die senaat verkies is, het hy 'n wetsontwerp van [Fair Employment Practices Commission] voorgestel [om diskriminasie op die gebied van werk te verbied], wat, o, die Suidlanders, het hulle gehaat. Hy was geminag onder al die Suid -Demokrate. Nie een van hulle het van hom gehou nie. Maar hy het 'n ernstige alkoholprobleem gehad en hy het ook 'n baie slegte rekord gehad dat hy wou gaan slaap met elke vrou wat hy ooit ontmoet het. Hy het 'n paar van hierdie jong kinders laat getuig voor sy jeugkomitee of so, en dan kon hy nie wag om saam met hulle te gaan slaap nie. " 10

“Senator [Jacob] Javits [R-N.Y.] Was 'n publisiteitshond. Hy was 'n baie, baie helder man, maar hy was 'n ander een - soos senator Jack Kennedy - hy was 'n seksmaniak. Een van die posbode het ingegaan en hom op sy bank betrap terwyl hy 'n seksuele verhouding met 'n negerdame gehad het. Hy kon nie wag om vir my te kom vertel nie. ”

'Ek was altyd baie lief vir senator Tommy Kuchel [D-Calif.]. Hy was 'n prettige ou. ... Die verskil tussen hom en senator Richard Nixon was dat senator Nixon 20 stemme kon kry en senator Tommy Kuchel 51. ... Kuchel het 'n verhouding met sy sekretaris, so hy het na my toe gekom en gevra of ek kon stuur 'n seuntjie om vir hom 'n paar rubbers te koop - 'n ware verhaal! "

“Senator [Herman] Talmadge was 'n uiters konserwatiewe demokraat uit Georgië wat 'n monumentale alkoholprobleem gehad het. Hy hou van senator Lyndon Johnson. Hy hou sy neus vas en stem vir sommige dinge wat senator Johnson voorstel, maar dit blyk dat hy eintlik te huur was. Hy was 'n skelm, 'n slegte skelm. ... Hy het 'n bitter egskeiding gehad. Ek dink sy het die storie uitgelek dat hy $ 100-rekeninge in sy topjas het [in vermoedelik slegte winste] of iets dergeliks. Hy is dood met 'n gebroke hart ... Toe ek in beheer was van senator Lyndon Johnson se visepresidensiële reis deur die Suide, was hy te dronk om op te daag. " 11

Baker is gereeld gevra om delikate advies te gee ...
'Toe Johnson vise-president was, het hy my genooi om saam met hom te gaan na die begrafnis van Senator Styles Bridges (R-N.H.). … Dolores Bridges was baie lief vir vise -president Johnson. Sy het gesê: 'Lyndon, ek het raad nodig.' Sy het gesê: 'Styles het $ 2 miljoen kontant hier en ek weet nie hoe ek dit moet hanteer nie.' vir Bobby. 'Ek het toe vir haar gesê:' Die banke is die regering. As jy dit in die bank sit, is jy dooie vleis. Wat jy ook al doen, moenie daardie geld in die bank sit nie. ’Ek weet nie wat de hel daarmee gedoen het nie.” 12

10. In 1955 het Estes Kefauver (1903-1963) uitgebreide verhore van die Senaat gehou oor jeugmisdaad en interstaatlike aannemingspraktyke. Skryf in die Atlantiese Oseaan, het die historikus David Greenberg berig dat die kandidaat hoor hoe hy uitroep (binne hoorafstand van Die New York TimesSe Russell Baker), "Ek moet fok!"


Gebore 4 Januarie: Everett Dirksen

Everett McKinley Dirksen, 'n jarelange kongresverteenwoordiger en Amerikaanse senator van Illinois, is op 4 Januarie 1896 in Pekin, Illinois, gebore.

Dirksen studeer aan die University of Minnesota College of Law in Minneapolis en werk later in 'n reeks verskillende poste en besighede. In 1927 is hy verkies tot die stadsraad van Pekin, en vyf jaar later is hy verkies tot sy eerste van agt opeenvolgende termyne as 'n kongreslid wat die staat se 16de distrik verteenwoordig.

Hy het die Republikeinse presidensiële benoeming in 1944 sonder sukses gesoek, en in 1948 besluit hy om nie herverkiesing te vra nie.

In plaas daarvan het hy die daaropvolgende jaar vir die senaat gedien en dien tot sy dood in 1969. Dirksen was bekend vir sy kragtige redenasies, sy skelm humor en sy uitgesproke manier van lewe, en hy het 'n gewilde figuur geword wat gereeld op televisie-nuus ondervra word. programme. Hy was die minderheidsleier in die senaat van 1959 tot 1969, het geveg vir die goedkeuring van die Wet op Burgerregte van 1964 en ondersteun president Lyndon Johnson se eskalasie van die Viëtnam -oorlog.

In 1967 het Dirksen 'n gesproke woord -album opgeneem, Galante mans, waarvoor hy die volgende jaar 'n Grammy -toekenning gewen het.

Dirksen sterf in 1969 op 73 -jarige ouderdom en word herdenk op 'n seël van 15 ¢ uitgereik op 4 Januarie 1981 (Scott 1874), wat sy 85ste verjaardag sou gewees het.


Kort geskiedenis van die Everett McKinley Dirksen Amerikaanse hofgebou

In April 1965 is die Amerikaanse hof in Chicago gesloop om plek te maak vir die huidige hof. Die ou hofgebou, wat deur Henry Ives Cobb ontwerp is, is in 1905 voltooi. Planne vir 'n moderne staalgebou was onvoldoende waardig, maar die massiewe struktuur was in klassieke styl, met 'n twee-verdieping basis, vier vleuels van ses verdiepings en 'n sentrale rotonde. bedek met 'n monumentale koepel. Die ou hofgebou het tot 1938 die Amerikaanse appèlhof vir die sewende kring gehuisves en die Amerikaanse distrikshof in die noordelike distrik van Illinois totdat die gebou gesloop is. Gedurende hierdie tyd het die hof 'n paar van die mees opspraakwekkende verhore van die land gesien, waaronder die verhore van Al Capone en James Hoffa. So indrukwekkend soos die hof was toe dit gebou is, maar teen 1964 het die tyd verbygegaan. In 'n Chicago Tribune -artikel in 1960 word die gebou beskryf as 'n "graniet seekat wat gedoem is deur die vordering".

Die nuwe hofgebou is in 1964 voltooi op 'n perseel direk oos van sy voorganger. Die bloklengebou van $ 35 miljoen, wat deur Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe ontwerp is, strek dertig verdiepings lank op 'n geraamte van konstruksiestaal, ondersteun deur betonnen saxons wat honderd voet onder sypaadjie se rots strek. Die struktuur is omhul in 'n gordynmuur van staal, aluminium en bronsgetinte glas. Die hele oppervlakte op die grondvlak is in graniet geplavei en strek tot by die voorportaal as 'n plaveisel aan die binnekant en op die kernmure van die hysbak. In 1970 is die gebou herwy ter nagedagtenis aan senator Everett McKinley Dirksen wat Illinois van 1950 tot 1969 in die Amerikaanse senaat verteenwoordig het.

Die Everett McKinley Dirksen United States Courthouse huisves die Amerikaanse appèlhof vir die sewende kring, die Amerikaanse distrikshof vir die noordelike distrik van Illinois en die Amerikaanse bankrotskapshof vir die noordelike distrik van Illinois, sowel as die kantoor van die Verenigde Staatsprokureur en die kringbiblioteek. Die Dirksen Courthouse is oorspronklik ontwerp met 15 hofsale, en het vandag meer as 50.


The Wizard of Ooze: Everett Dirksen van Illinois

1932 was 'n moeilike jaar vir die Republikeine. Hoover het slegs ses state gewen in sy poging tot herverkiesing, die GOP het groot verliese in die huis geneem en die senaat verloor. Dit was egter die begin van die loopbaan van een van die mees prominente politici van die 20ste eeu van die GOP ’. Everett Dirksen (1896-1969) van Illinois het die Republikeinse posbekleër in die voorverkiesing omvergewerp en die verkiesing gewen. Alhoewel hy aanvanklik meer versoenend was as baie ander Republikeine vir die New Deal, aangesien hy vir die Wet op Aanpassing van die Landbou en die Wet op Nasionale Nywerheidsherstel gestem het, het sy opposisie mettertyd gegroei, veral na die middeltermyn van 1938, en was hy altyd 'n vaste vyand van die idee dat die regering enige bedryf moet bedryf. Dirksen het sy steun vir sommige van hierdie maatreëls so verduidelik: Die dae van 1932 en 1933 was moeilik en moeilik. Vir sover skuldigbevinding dit toelaat, moes 'n mens alle partydigheid uitstel en deelneem aan die gemeenskaplike onderneming om die Nasie uit sy moedeloosheid te verwyder ” (Dirksen). Hy het ook terugskouend tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die New Deal lank op hervorming was, baie langer op verligting, maar baie kort op die werklike herstel en die herstel van normale toestande en dat dit versteur is deur die vlak van mag wat die presidentskap en die potensiaal vir erosie van vryheid, vra “ Sal die Amerikaanse leefstelsel, wat op die sedes van individualisme berus, die slagoffer word van 'n vrome kollektivisme en sal vryheid slegs 'n woord of 'n manier van lewe wees? ” (Dirksen) As 'n Republikein in Illinois is dit feitlik vanselfsprekend dat hy 'n nie-intervensionis was voor die Tweede Wêreldoorlog, en hy was een van die meer effektiewe, gegewe sy studie van die reëls van die Huis. Dirksen staan, met die steun van die Chicago Tribune, heeltemal agter hom, teen die herroeping van die neutraliteitswette, teen die vredestydskrif en teen Lend-Lease. Alhoewel hy gestem het vir die instelling van prysbeheer tydens die oorlog, was hy een van die leiers van die terugslag daarteen, veral omdat hy dringend op wysigings vereis dat mense wat prysbeheer instel, vyf jaar ervaring het op die gebied van die opstel van sodanige kontroles en om geregtelike hersiening moontlik te maak. van prysbeheer bevele. Dirksen was so bekend dat Union for Democratic Action, die linkse voorganger van Amerikaners vir Democratic Action, hom as een van die voorste konserwatiewe wetgewende obstruksies geïdentifiseer het.

Everett Dirksen het 'n primêr regte koers oor binnelandse beleid gevolg, maar het gestem vir die Truman -leerstelling en die Marshall -plan (hoewel hy spyt sou wees oor laasgenoemde). In 1948 besluit hy om uit die huis te tree, want hy staar 'n oogprobleem onder oë wat so ernstig is dat dokters aanbeveel dat dit verwyder word. Dirksen het geweier om dit te doen, gekies vir behandeling en rus. Na tien maande hiervan kon hy die grootste deel van die visie in sy oog herstel, en besluit om terug te keer na die politiek.

The 1946 election was mistaken by many Republicans to have been a referendum on New Deal liberalism, when it was largely a reaction to postwar adjustment issues, especially meat shortages caused by price controls. However, the 1950 election was the ideological election conservatives had wanted the 1946 election to be. Although Republicans didn’t win back either chamber, the victories were very ideologically clear, and the case study for this was certainly Dirksen’s race against Democratic Majority Leader Scott Lucas. Lucas stood firmly with Truman and with his domestic policies while Dirksen was a staunch critic and called the Marshall Plan “Operation Rathole”. He also got some help on the campaign trail from Senator Joseph McCarthy, whose influence, although often cited for this election, is perhaps overstated. Lucas counterattacked by having his staff produce a report, titled “The Diary of a Chameleon”, which found that Dirksen had “changed his position on military preparedness 31 times, on isolationism 62 times, and on farm policy 70 times” (Dirksen). However, Dirksen was a smooth political operator and instead of denying the charge, he embraced and defended his record. Dirksen ultimately toppled the Majority Leader for reelection, a repudiation of Truman and the Fair Deal by Illinois voters.

As a senator, Dirksen would develop a reputation as politically savvy, a flamboyant figure who loved the spotlight, and for delivering over-the-top oration, which gained him the nickname “The Wizard of Ooze”. In 1952, he backed Senator Robert Taft (R-Ohio) for president, and criticized Eisenhower supporters at the Republican National Convention. Specifically, he pointed his finger at Thomas E. Dewey and warned him to not lead the GOP down the road of defeat again through his support of Eisenhower. However, this time the moderates did win the election as Eisenhower was a formidable candidate. Dirksen was initially hesitant to aid in the moderation of Eisenhower and often butted heads with him in foreign policy, but events would develop that made Dirksen a valuable player in Washington politics. Robert Taft died in 1953, and his successor, William F. Knowland of California, proved a weak leader and regularly was outmaneuvered by his Democratic counterpart, Lyndon B. Johnson of Texas. Additionally, Dirksen’s friend and ally Joseph McCarthy was censured in 1954 resulting in the loss of his influence, and Illinois’ leading journalistic voice of conservatism, Colonel Robert R. McCormick, died in 1955. This opened the door to Dirksen becoming more accommodating to the Eisenhower Administration, which needed him as a point man in the Senate. Dirksen’s support of the Eisenhower Administration on foreign policy grew and his Taft-style conservatism softened.

Dirksen strongly backed the Eisenhower Administration’s civil rights proposals and regularly sided with the president’s vetoes, and was a logical choice for official leadership. In 1959, he ran for Minority Leader to replace the outgoing William F. Knowland of California and defeated the significantly more liberal John Sherman Cooper of Kentucky for the post in a close race. Dirksen would prove a far more effective leader than his predecessor and used his skill of wheeling and dealing along with mastery of the Senate rules to his advantage.

In 1961, Dirksen and House Minority Leader Halleck had a regular press conference on Meet the Press officially titled the “Republican Congressional Leadership Statement” in which they would criticize and respond to the Kennedy Administration’s initiatives. This was compared to a vaudeville act by political commentators given the contrast between Dirksen’s folksy manner and Halleck’s rough and easily angered persona and was universally called the “Ev and Charlie Show”. Although Halleck, true to his nature, was peeved at being made a joke, Dirksen loved it and urged reporters to compare them to other “great duos” in America, including “corned beef and cabbage” and “ham and eggs” (U.S. Senate). When Halleck lost the House leadership contest in 1964, it became the “Ev and Jerry Show”, but Gerald Ford wasn’t easily angered, thus the comedic value of the program declined.

As Senate Minority Leader, Dirksen commanded an unusual amount of power given his party’s decided minority status during his entire time as leader. He was a uniting figure in the party who was often able to appeal to the conservative and liberal wings. Dirksen’s man with the liberals was Minority Whip Thomas Kuchel of California and his man on the right was ultra-conservative Roman Hruska of Nebraska. He was also often able to win over Southern Democrats, many of whom agreed with him more than JFK and LBJ, thus keeping the Conservative Coalition a formidable force and often requiring Democratic presidents to negotiate with him. However, Dirksen was not necessarily an obstructionist…he could also be accommodating to the Democratic administrations of the 1960s. In 1963, for instance, Dirksen was crucial in winning over many Republicans in support of the Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which banned atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. He was on genuinely friendly terms with President Lyndon B. Johnson…both men shared a love for the political process…and bourbon after work. This relationship played a major role in producing the major civil rights legislation of the era. Dirksen was sure that the 1964 act wasn’t too hard on business to win over the votes of some reluctant conservatives yet aimed to make the measure strong enough so that it would command a consensus level of support. Unlike Johnson, who was a relatively new civil rights supporter, Dirksen had supported civil rights legislation such as anti-lynching and anti-poll tax bills since the 1930s. 73% of the Senate ultimately voted for the act, including all but six Republicans. He would again be of great assistance in the passage of the Voting Rights Act, and Dirksen would get all but two Senate Republicans to vote for it.

Dirksen largely opposed the Great Society, including its “War on Poverty” legislation, rent supplements, and its high domestic spending. However, he backed the Social Security amendments that included Medicare and Medicaid (which he had previously voted against) and supported the Appalachian Regional Development Act. He also took the lead, as I have written about before, in trying to pass constitutional amendments on school prayer and legislative reapportionment, both staunchly opposed by liberals but had most Republicans in support. Dirksen also was able to kill an effort backed by the Johnson Administration to repeal the “right to work” section of the Taft-Hartley Act. Dirksen was initially opposed to fair housing legislation and in 1966 he played a leading role in killing such legislation. However, in 1968 he worked out a compromise measure with Majority Leader Mike Mansfield (D-Mont.) and Senator Walter Mondale (D-Minn.) that passed in the wake of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr.

Dirksen was a hawk on the Vietnam War and wanted a stronger war effort than Johnson was employing, and offered counsel and support to the president in these times. In 1968, President Johnson, in one of his daily calls with the Senate Minority Leader, accused Nixon’s operatives of treason, and Dirksen agrees:


President Johnson: I want to talk to you as a friend, and very confidentially, because I think that we’re skirting on dangerous ground. I thought I ought to give you the facts, and you ought to pass them on if you choose. If you don’t, why, then I will a little later.

President Johnson: [with Dirksen assenting] Both Thieu and Ky stressed on us the importance of a minimum delay [between a bombing pause and the opening of peace negotiations]. Then we got some of our friends involved, some of it your old China [Lobby] crowd.
Here’s the latest information we’ve got: the agent says that they’ve just talked to the boss [Nixon] in New Mexico, and that he says that you must hold out, that . . . Just hold on until after the election.

Now, we know what Thieu is saying to ‘em out there. We’re pretty well informed on both ends.

President Johnson: Now, I’m reading their hand, Everett. I don’t want to get this in the campaign.

President Johnson: And they oughtn’t to be doing this. This is treason.

President Johnson: I don’t know whether it’s [Melvin] Laird I don’t know who it is that is putting it out, but here is the UPI [item number] 48 that came in tonight.

President Johnson: And I’m calling you only after talking to [Dean] Rusk and [Clark] Clifford and all of ‘em, who thought that somebody ought to be notified as to what’s happening.

President Johnson: Now, I can identify ‘em, because I know who’s doing this. I don’t want to identify it. I think it would shock America if a principal candidate was playing with a source like this on a matter this important.

President Johnson: I don’t want to do that.

President Johnson: But if they’re going to put this kind of stuff out, they ought to know that we know what they’re doing. I know who they’re talking to, and I know what they’re saying.

President Johnson: Well, now, what do you think we ought to do about it?

Dirksen: Well, I better get in touch with him, I think, and tell him about it.

President Johnson: I think you better tell him that his people are saying to these folks that they oughtn’t to go through with this meeting [in Paris]. Now, if they don’t go through with the meeting, it’s not going to be me that’s hurt. I think it’s doing to be whoever’s elected.

President Johnson: It may be—my guess—him.

President Johnson: And I think they’re making a very serious mistake, and I don’t want to say this.

President Johnson: And you’re the only one I’m going to say it to.

President Johnson: Now, Everett, I know what happens there. You see what I mean?

President Johnson: And I’m looking at his hole card.

President Johnson: Now, I don’t want to get in a fight with him there. I think Nixon’s going to be elected.

President Johnson: And I think we ought to have peace, and I’m going to work with him.

President Johnson: I’ve worked with you.

Dirksen: That’s right.
President Johnson: [with Dirksen assenting] But I don’t want these sons of bitches like Laird giving out announcements like this, that Johnson gave them the wrong impression. I gave them the right impression, except I gave it to him decently, when I said that you ought to keep the Mrs. Chennaults and all the rest of ‘em from running around here. Now, you see, I know what Thieu says to his people out there.

Dirksen: Yeah. I haven’t seen Laird.

President Johnson: Well, I don’t know who it is that’s with Nixon. It may be Laird. It may be [Bryce] Harlow. It may be [John] Mitchell. I don’t know who it is.

I know this: that they’re contacting a foreign power in the middle of a war.

President Johnson: And it’s a damn bad mistake.

President Johnson: [with Dirksen assenting] And I don’t want to say you, and you’re the only man that I have enough confidence in to tell ‘em. But you better tell ‘em they better quit playing with it. You just tell ‘em that their people are messing around in this thing, and if they don’t want it on the front pages, they better quit it. ” (Johnson)

Dirksen’s Decline and Death

Everett Dirksen had for his adult life been a heavy smoker and drinker, and by the 1960s this was catching up to him and it was apparent to those around him. A reporter once commented that, “His face looks like he slept in it” (Kenworthy). He also developed emphysema and on one occasion coughed so hard he cracked a vertebrae. Dirksen was not long for the world by the time Nixon was inaugurated and his influence declined as Nixon didn’t feel the need to negotiate with him to get things done. He developed lung cancer and died after an operation on September 7, 1969, aged 73. Senator Margaret Chase Smith left a marigold on his coffin…it was what he thought should be the national flower. Today he has a Senate office building named in his honor.

Dirksen was by and large a good representative of the GOP of his time: moderately conservative (MCI: 78%) and often but not always, negotiating with the Democratic majority. He represented a different time in America, one in which the parties were closer to each other ideologically and had divergent wings. Dirksen seemed to just fit where his party was at the time and the mood of the times. The days of friendly negotiation on legislation over bourbon after hours has been dead for some time now, but that’s how postwar politics rolled. Perhaps a Dirksen could be elected today but he would probably be too conservative for Illinois and possibly not conservative enough to be in Republican leadership, but given his flexibility and his ability to wheel and deal, who knows?

Dirksen in Brief. (2018). The Dirksen Congressional Center.

Hill, R. (2016, November 13). Senator Howard Baker: Part IV. Knoxville Focus.

Johnson, R. Did Nixon Commit Treason in 1968? What The New LBJ Tapes Reveal. Geskiedenis Nuus Netwerk.

Ontvang vanaf


Everett Dirksen: Forgotten Civil Rights Champion

Everett McKinley Dirksen / Robert Vickrey, 1964 /
National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution
gift of
Tyd tydskrif

June 10, 1964, was a dramatic day in the United States Senate. For the first time in its history, cloture was invoked on a civil rights bill, ending a record-breaking filibuster that had consumed fifty-seven working days. The hero of the hour was minority leader Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen (R-Ill.).

Dirksen, who had little support among Chicago’s black voters and who had been picketed at his home by rights activists, took pains to point out that he was “no Johnny-come lately” to civil rights legislation. During his sixteen years in the House of Representatives, he had voted for anti-poll-tax and anti-lynching measures. In the Senate he had sponsored or cosponsored scores of bills dealing with civil rights. But as an omnibus civil rights bill began to near passage in the House early in 1964, Dirksen, a pragmatic legislator and a consummate compromiser, realized that its provisions were too drastic for passage in the Senate.

In February, when he entered the hospital, afflicted with a bleeding ulcer, he took his dog-eared copy of the House bill with him, poring over it line by line and drawing up a list of conciliatory changes. During the spring, with the help of legal experts, he began to rewrite the bill, suggesting almost seventy amendments, many technical but others of substance. “I have a fixed pole star,” he said in April. “This is, first, to get a bill second to get an acceptable bill third, to get a workable bill and, finally, to get an equitable bill.”

In the beginning, Dirksen could only guarantee that twelve to fourteen of his thirty-three Republicans would join with floor manager Hubert Humphrey’s solid forty-one Democrats, leaving the total short of the sixty-seven votes necessary to shut down the southern Democrats. “The key,” said majority leader Mike Mansfield, “is Dirksen.” Dirksen himself acknowledged, “Getting cloture is going to be as difficult as hell.” He went to his members one by one, pleading with them, appealing to their moral sensibilities, reminding them of past favors, and warning of more civil unrest, exercising his beguiling talents to their fullest effect.

By June 10, the stage was set. The Democratic senator from West Virginia, Robert C. Byrd, sat down after speaking for fourteen hours and thirteen minutes, and Senator Richard Russell of Georgia summed up for the southern opposition. Senator Dirksen then took the floor. “Stronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come,” he said, quoting Victor Hugo in his basso profundo voice. “The time has come for equality of opportunity in sharing in government, in education, and in employment. It will not be stayed or denied. It is here.”

Dirksen produced twenty-three Republican votes to make a total of sevemty—three votes beyond the necessary two-thirds to break the filibuster (the final tally was 71–29). Swift passage of the civil rights bill followed, and the House, rather than argue, accepted the Senate version. On July 2, President Lyndon Johnson signed into law a bill that banned discrimination in public facilities, provided voting rights protection, and established equal opportunity as the law of the land.

Tyd magazine noted when Dirksen appeared on the cover of the June 19, 1964 issue, “it is Dirksen’s bill, bearing his handiwork more than anyone else’s.” That cover, by Robert Vickrey, the accomplished painter in egg tempera, is part of the Tyd collection of artwork that was presented to the National Portrait Gallery in 1978.


Everett Dirksen - History

The Republican leader stood by his seat in the front row to the left of the center aisle. Years and illness had taken toll of the stout, wavy-haired baker who had come to Congress in the year that Franklin D. Roosevelt moved into the White House.

Now the face beneath the gray curls was deeply lined, and there were heavy bags under the watery eyes. ("His face looks like he slept in it," a reporter had said.)

But the voice was still the voice--modulated to the words, now a whisper, now a deep growl, now rolling thunder--that for years had sent the cry through the press galleries, "Ev&aposs up!"

Mr. Dirksen recalled that "bright, sunny day" in August, 1945, when the bomb hatch of the Enola Gay opened over Hiroshima, and "for the first time, the whole bosom of God&aposs earth was ruptured by a man-made contrivance that we call a nuclear weapon."

"I want to take a first step, Mr. President," Mr. Dirksen said. "I am not a young man. One of my age thinks about his destiny a little. I should not like to have written on my tombstone. He knew what happened at Hiroshima, but he didn&apost take a first step.&apos"

It was Sept. 19, 1966, and the Senate floor was not crowded, for Everett Dirksen was to speak on his proposed amendment to the Constitution to permit prayers in public schools.

He called down the wrath of God on the ministers, priests and rabbis--"social engineers," he termed them--who opposed his amendment.

"I think of the children," he whispered, "the millions whose souls need the spiritual rehearsal of prayer."

"Imagine the Chicago Bears football team, made up of green, inexperienced, unpracticed and unrehearsed players, undertaking a game against the Cleveland Browns. It would be unthinkable because they have not been disciplined by practice. . . . Mr. President, the soul needs practice, too. It needs rehearsal."

These two speeches encompass--but do not entirely explain--that remarkable political phenomenon, Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican of Illinois.

He could aspire to the heights, climb them and take the long view, without regard to party and, apparently, without regard to his political fortune. But he could also descend into bathos.

There were some who believed that he figured it that way, and not entirely cynically--that what he lost by espousing the nuclear test-ban treaty or the civil rights bill he recovered by apostrophes to the flag and motherhood.

At a $100-a-plate dinner in Chicago in April, 1966, he brought tears and certainly votes when he intoned:

"No, you can&apost eat freedom, or buy anything with it. You can&apost hock it downtown for the things you need. When a baby curls a chubby arm around your neck, you can&apost eat that feeling either, or buy anything with it. But what in this life means more to you than that feeling, or your freedom?"

Mr. Dirksen spent most of his adult life under the dome of the United States Capitol. After 16 years in the House, he served since 1951 in the Senate, and as Republican leader since 1959.

Talent for Compromise

He was the very archetype of the politician, with all the politician&aposs shortcomings and virtues. Inconstant, often too apt in expedient, he was found, in the course of his career, on both sides of almost every question. But he also had the talent for compromise, adjustment and conciliation that is the secret of effective government under the American system.

Furthermore, he loved the processes of politics--the wiles, the guile, the wheelings and dealings, even its fustian. But he almost always stopped short of cant.

In a Senate increasingly composed of drab, machine-tooled men, Mr. Dirksen remained an original, a throwback to the more colorful, less inhibited politics of the Midwest at the turn of the century.

From boyhood, his ear was enraptured by the rolling phrase, the well-turned apothegm, and he rarely let a day pass without rolling or turning one of his own.

Sometimes they were 100-proof corn, but often they deserved a place in a political Bartlett. Thus, his lapidary "The oil can is mightier than the sword" captures in eight words the essence of the democratic process.

The comic spirit nestled in his locks, but it was the spirit of broad country humor rather than city wit. Like Lincoln, he loved to make his point with anecdote.

It was these qualities that explained his warm friendship with Presidents as different as John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, even though he delighted in needling both.

On one occasion, during his absence in a hospital, three Republican bills were narrowly defeated. On his return, he said:

"To my bedridden amazement, my pajama-ruffled consternation, yes, my pill-laden astonishment, I learned they were victims of that new White House telephonic half-Nelson known as the Texas twist."

Because he was such an unabashed sentimentalist and ham, some set him down as a fraud at worst or a buffoon at best. He was neither. He was naturally a ham, and he enjoyed the role. But he also stood outside himself while he played it. He was a political satirist and he did not spare himself. More than being himself, he relished being a caricature of himself.

Mr. Dirksen was by nature kind and understanding, but he could cut a Senator down for a breach of courtesy or an unfair attack. Once after Senator Thomas J. Dodd, a notable absentee from the floor, rolled in late in the day and demanded that Majority Leader Mike Mansfield "behave like a leader," Mr. Dirksen dismissed "the brave crusader from the Nutmeg State" as suffering from "cerebral incoherence."

After he became Republican leader in 1959, much of the old partisan spirit seemed to evaporate from Mr. Dirksen. It was true that the times had changed, that Mr. Dirksen himself was at last freed from the pressures both of campaigning and ambition for higher office. Nevertheless he seemed to realize that, now that he had became leader, his responsibilities lay with the national party and not to its right wing, and with the Presidency regardless of its occupant.

He did loyally support Barry Goldwater in 1964, but he confided to friends that he had little stomach for the assignment. He did do conservative battle against many New Frontier and Great Society domestic programs, and he resisted controls over his favored drug industry.

But on the great issues in international affairs (the nuclear test-ban treaty, the Vietnam war), and the most seminal in domestic affairs (the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act), Mr. Dirksen gave Presidents Kennedy and Johnson indispensable support. Keenly aware of their dependence on his help and grateful for it, the two Democratic Presidents made much of the Senate minority leader, calling him frequently to the White House to solicit his advice, Mr. Dirksen, who was not without vanity, basked in this attention.

This vanity was undoubtedly wounded when, with Richard M. Nixon in the White House, he discovered that he was not the "Mr. Big" he had been under Democratic Administrations.

Son of German Settlers

Everett Dirksen and his twin brother, Tom, were born Jan. 4, 1896, in Pekin, Ill., then a farm-belt community of about 5,000 people, near Peoria. The parents, Johann Frederick and Antje Conrady Dirksen, were German settlers who continued to speak their Ostfriesian dialect at home.

When Everett was 5, his father had a crippling stroke and died four years later. Everett and his brothers helped their mother milk the cows, slop the six hogs, then the 150 chickens and the 15 stands of bees, and plant and weed the vegetables. They sold milk, eggs and produce.

In 191[MISSING TEXT] he enrolled at the University of Minnesota as a pre-law student. To pay his fees, he worked as an ad-taker at The Minneapolis Tribune, as a lawyer&aposs assistant and in a railroad office.

In 1917 young Dirksen quit the university just short of a degree to enlist in the Army on the United States entry into World War I. Sent to France in May, 1918, he became--as he later described his service--a "gas-bag man." From a tethered, hydrogen-filled balloon 3,500 feet above the lines, observed and corrected artillery fire. He was commissioned a second lieutenant in the field and was discharged in October, 1919.

Returning to Pekin, he invested in a new washing machine business, which failed. From 1922 to 1925 he was general manager of a dredging company. Then he and his brothers bought a wholesale bakery business. Dit het geslaag.

In 1927 he was elected to the part-time position of city commissioner of finance, and he began to have visions of a political career.

But he also developed writer&aposs itch and became stage-struck. (Over the years he wrote five novels and more than 100 short stories--all unpublished.)

He and an old schoolmate, Hubert Ropp, collaborated on writing and producing community plays, mostly with Chinese themes.

The Dirksen-Ropp team also produced Percy MacKaye&aposs "A Thousand Years Ago" during the town&aposs centennial celebration. Mr. Dirksen played the lead who captured the heart of the Princess of Pekin, played by Louella Carver. The stage romance became a real one and in 1927 they were married.

Two years later they had a daughter, Danice Joy. She is married to Howard H. Baker Jr., now Republican Senator from Tennessee.

In the 1930 primaries Mr. Dirksen challenged the incumbent Republican Congressman, William E. Hull. He lost by 1,100 votes and immediately began campaigning for 1932.

Whisky-making Pekin had been hurt by Prohibition. In 1932 Mr. Dirksen, who had once orated against drink, attacked Mr. Hull for voting for a bill to strengthen the Prohibition Amendment. Mr. Dirksen got the nomination. In the campaign for the general election, he urged economic reforms to combat the Depression--without being too specific. He won by 23,147 votes.

From then on, all was clear sailing. He was regularly returned with large majorities up to 1946.

As soon as he arrived in Washington in 1933, Mr. Dirksen demonstrated that capacity for work and attention to legislative detail that characterized him up to the time of his death, even during extended periods of illness. Above all, he set out to be a good committeeman.

He went home each night with a bulging briefcase and arose every morning at 5:30. He completed his law degree by going to night school.

During his first four terms in the House he voted against many New Deal measures, including public housing, rural electrification and the Tennessee Valley Authority. But he supported enough of them--including Social Security (1935) and the minimum wage (1938)--to be accused of "me-tooism" by what he later called the "hard-bitten Republicans" back home.

In foreign policy, Mr. Dirksen began as a stanch isolationist. He voted against the Reciprocal Trade Act in 1934 and again in 1940. In September, 1940, three months after the fall of France, he voted against the first peace-time conscription in United States history. In February, 1941, he opposed the first lend-lease bill. In August, 1941, only four months before Pearl Harbor, when extension of the draft cleared the House by 203 to 202, Mr. Dirksen voted against it.

A month later, however, he began to veer around. He urged his fellow Republicans to show "a unity of purpose" behind the President. To do otherwise, he said, "could only weaken the President&aposs position, impair our prestige and imperil the nation." In October, 1941, he voted for additional lend-lease funds.

In 1944, Mr. Dirksen had hopes of second place on the ticket. But Thomas E. Dewey, the Republican Presidential nominee, chose John W. Bricker of Ohio. Mr. Dirksen did not forgive or forget.

One morning in 1947 Mr. Dirksen, then 51, awoke to find his right eye clouded. His doctors diagnosed the trouble as a degeneration of the retina, possibly caused by cancer. Specialists recommended removal of the eye, but after "weeping and praying" he decided against it.

But the eye required rest, and Mr. Dirksen retired from the House at the end of 1948 and did not seek re-election. After 10 months of rest and medication, the eye gradually recovered its vision.

In 1950 the Illinois voters sent Mr. Dirksen back to Washington as a Senator. But it was a different Dirksen who took his seat in January, 1951. The Korean war was on and he had hitched his wagon to the ill-fated Presidential star of Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio.

During the fight at the 1952 convention over whether a pro-Taft delegation from Georgia or one favoring General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower should be accredited, Mr. Dirksen went to the rostrum and in full view of millions of watchers on television, addressed himself to the New York delegation led by Governor Dewey, and Eisenhower strategist.

"When my friend Tom Dewey was the candidate in 1944 and 1948," he cried, "I tried to be one of his best campaigners, and you ask him whether or not I didn&apost go into 18 states one year and 23 states the next. Re-examine your hearts before you take this action [voting against the Taft delegation], because"--and here he pointed his finger at Mr. Dewey--"we followed you before and you took us down the path to defeat!"

In his speech nominating Mr. Taft, he gave what turned out to be a preview of much of the Eisenhower campaign. Hy het gesê:

"Once it was deemed to be the primary duty of government to keep the nation at peace. In the last 20 years those in power have given us the biggest, costliest, bloodiest war in the history of Christendom. They have given us more. They have given us an undeclared, unconstitutional, one-man war in Korea, now in its third year. It has become an inferno for the holy blood of American youth. As one Korean G.I. put it, &aposWe can&apost win. We can&apost lose. We can&apost quit.&apos He might have added, &aposWe can only die.&apos"

The chill of Mr. Taft&aposs loss of the nomination was deep in Mr. Dirksen&aposs bones, and even after his leader&aposs death in July, 1953, he followed a Taft course, voting to slash President Eisenhower&aposs foreign aid requests and to override his opposition to the Bricker amendment.

As Senate wrath slowly mounted against Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Mr. Dirksen went to the defense of the Wisconsin Republican and fought doggedly to prevent his censure in 1954.

After President Eisenhower&aposs re-election, Mr. Dirksen got on the team. ("Change," he was fond of saying, "is an inherent way of life.") In 1959, Senate Republicans, with the general&aposs approval, elected Mr. Dirksen minority leader, and he fell to with a will. "When you carry the flag, you carry the flag," he said. "I am of the stuff which cries, &aposChief, hand me the red-hot poker!&apos"

Three Great Reversals

With some, but not much, poetic license, The Chicago Sun-Times once charged Mr. Dirksen with changing his mind 62 times on foreign policy, 31 times on defense policy and 70 times on farm legislation.

As he got older, such chidings had all the effect--as he was to say of a Kennedy program--"of a snowflake on the bosom of the Potomac."

Mr. Dirksen probably assured himself a place in the history books by three great reversals over three years--on the United Nations bond issue of 1962 the nuclear test-ban treaty of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

He began by taking a jaundiced view of the Administration&aposs request for authority to purchase United Nations bonds to make up deficits resulting largely from the refusal of the Soviet Union and France to pay peace-keeping assessments.

But on April 5, 1962, he rose and admitted that he had done some soul-searching, He said:

& quotMnr. President, I will not charge my conscience with any act or deed which would contribute to the foundering of the United Nations, because I do not know how I would then be able to expiate that sin of commission to my grandchildren."

The bill passed, 70 to 22, with 22 Republicans voting for and 11 against.

Mr. Dirksen&aposs opposition to the test-ban treaty would have made ratification uncertain. At the outset he was against it. The pressure on him was great--40,000 letters and petitions containing 10,000 names in opposition to the treaty. But in studying the treaty, he became convinced that his fears had been based on misunderstanding.

He knew from his mail that millions probably shared the same misunderstanding. In handwritten notes to President Kennedy, he set forth questions on which Senators wanted assurance, and suggested that the President send a communication to Majority Leader Mansfield and himself clarifying issues raised by the critics. The President did so.

On Sept. 11, Mr. Dirksen rose and said that he had found that his earlier opinions "did not stand up." He read the President&aposs letter, and he said:

& quotMnr. President. . .this is a first single step. . . . But with consummate faith and some determination, this may be the step that can spell a grander destiny for our country and the world. If there be risks, Mr. President, I am willing to assume them for my country."

The treaty was approved 80 to 19, with 25 Republicans voting for it and against. The Illinois chapter of Republican Women passed a resolution condemning him, and The Chicago Tribune asked "Is Dirksen Going Soft?"

In the past Mr. Dirksen had supported civil rights bills, but these had been anti-lynching, anti- poll tax or suffrage measures such as the 1957 and 1960 acts. The 1964 bill, however, as it came from the House, aroused great doubts in him. With his highly developed sense of property rights, he was particularly worried about giving the Federal Government the power to enforce nondiscrimination in public accommodations and jobs.

On March 26, 1964, he opened an attack on the bill, saying, "They are remaking America and you won&apost like it." He proceeded to tear the bill apart.

But two months later, on May 26, he told the chair he was presenting "an amendment in the nature of a substitute" for the House bill, which had been shaped "on the anvil of controversy and discussion" with the Justice Department and the civil rights coalition. He hoped it would command enough support to make closure possible, and thus permit a vote.

Between those two dates Mr. Dirksen had gone through his greatest reversal and managed to carry most of his Republican colleagues with him. He insisted that actually "they"--the Justice Department--had come around to him. Attorney General Nicholas B. Katzenbach, the Administration&aposs liaison with Mr. Dirksen, said Mr. Dirksen had been "reasonable" in insisting on only minimal changes in the public accommodations and fair employment sections.

The Senate imposed closure by a vote of 71 to 29, four more than the necessary two-thirds. Mr. Dirksen had corralled 27 out of 33 Republican votes.

Mr. Dirksen, in explaining to reporters why he was fighting for the bill he had violently attacked only two months before, said:

"On the night Victor Hugo died, he wrote in his diary: &aposStronger than all the armies is an idea whose time has come.&apos"

In 1965 Mr. Dirksen, after again extracting adjustments from the Administration, led the battle for the Voting Rights Act.

But even as he reached the height of his career and was being heralded for his statesmanship, he began to divert his energies into causes that many believed to be not only backward-looking but futile.

Thus he fought and lost battles to stay Federal court orders on reapportionment of state legislatures to enact a constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court&aposs one- man, one-vote decision by permitting apportionment of one house of a state legislature on a nonpopulation basis, and to pass a school prayer amendment.

Inconstant in so many large things, Mr. Dirksen was ever constant to the marigold, which he sought to make the national flower and which he grew profusely in his garden at Leesburg, Va.

But he was also a sophisticated gardener, as those knew who saw him at his Florida home in DeBary, mulching his prize roses and fragile camellias and nursing his red and white poinsettias to bring them to their best for Christmas.

Mr. Dirksen&aposs last years were burdened with illness and injury--duodenal ulcers, chronic emphysema, a cracked vertebra from a violent fit of coughing, a broken hip. He wore a steel brace on his back and hobbled for months on crutches.

He never complained, and he refused to believe that the ills of the flesh would be cured by mortifying it. When a caller, seeing a glass of whisky in one hand and a cigarette in the other, said he thought the Senator had given them up on his doctor&aposs orders, he growled: "I have given up nothing."

The truth was not always in Everett Dirksen. But the juices of life and humanity flowed strong in him to the end.


Meer kommentaar:

Mark safranski - 1/30/2009

LBJ was certainly very angry with and disdainful of Hubert Humphrey and concerned with his own place in history.

It's very hard to sift all of the motives that a personality like LBJ had for any given action - Robert Caro's portrait of Johnson is a man beset by a spectrum of impulses, from the venal to the noble. Much like Richard Nixon in that regard.

Was the bombing halt an attempt to swing the election to Humphrey? Not directly but it's probable Johnson would have taken the credit after the fact had Humphrey squeaked by in 1968.

Paul Moreno - 1/28/2009

By the way, by "Johnson" I meant Lyndon B., not K.C.

Robert KC Johnson - 1/28/2009

Whether the South Vietnamese had incentive to attend the talks is somewhat beside the point in terms of the political ramifications of the Chennault effort. Had Johnson gone public with what he (and Dirksen, it's worth noting) considered treasonous activity by Nixon operatives, it's hard to imagine Nixon would still have prevailed.

On the first point, there's no evidence in the tapes that Johnson saw the bombing halt as a way to swing the election to Humphrey indeed, the tapes confirm how angry he was with Humphrey's distancing himself from LBJ's Vietnam policy.

Paul Moreno - 1/28/2009

I concur with the last two posts. In what way could Nixon possibly be construed as "levying war against the United States, or giving aid and comfort to their enemies"? It looks more like Johnson was ready to sell out our South Vietnamese ally for the sake of getting Humphrey elected. And when one considers the concurrent shenanigans to get his man, Abe Fortas, the chief justiceship, Nixon looks like a model of probity in comparison.

Brian Robertson - 1/26/2009

The Election eve bombing halt (or the Chennault affair)is still one of the most politically polarizing topics of the war. Democrats argue that Johnson legitimately hoped to achieve progress, while Republican sources argue that Johnson called that halt to swing the election to Humphrey. Also, many allege that Chenault acted largely on her own capacity. Which, even with LBJ's sparse wire-tapping evidence (The X file at the Johnson Library), is difficult to prove. Lost in this political finger pointing of "playing politics with war," in my opinion, is the fact that the South Vietnamese had no incentive to attend the talks before the 1968 election and Nixon convinced Thieu's government to attend the talks after the election (as Johnson wished). Thus, Nixon's alleged interference, if it did occur, did not prevent the Paris Peace Talks. In fact, Nixon based his Vietnamization policy on Johnson' De-Americanization policy.

William J. Stepp - 1/25/2009

Dick Milhous didn't commit treason in "politicizing" the war. If anyone had committed treason (against the Contitution), it was LBJ in his escalation of the war.
Of course, Milhouse proved to be an even bigger mass murderer when he became president.

And now comes word that Obamaramadrama is officially a mass murderer. What a shock!


Kyk die video: Everett Dirksens Washington


Kommentaar:

  1. Kaison

    Ekskuus, ek kan niks help nie. Maar dit is verseker dat jy die regte besluit sal vind. Moenie wanhoop nie.

  2. Johnn

    Wonderlik!

  3. Antilochus

    Ek stem absoluut met jou saam. Daar is iets hierin en ek dink dit is 'n goeie idee. Ek stem saam met jou.

  4. Eddrick

    Van die begin af was dit duidelik hoe dit sou eindig

  5. Jamall

    Welgedaan, jy is besoek deur die merkwaardige idee



Skryf 'n boodskap