Relief and Recovery

We were all in such a tizzy getting things ready for our building's grand opening a week ago, I completely forgot to blog about it! Now that the dust has settled and we've all taken a bit of time to rest here are some pictures from the opening of our galleries in the new Richard B. Russell Special Collections Library on Friday, February 17, 2012.

For a good recap of the event, check out this article in the Athens Banner Herald. It was a great event -- good food, lots of visitors, and some great speakers at the dedication ceremony. We hope the crowd was just the beginning and that the visitors to the gallery space keep on coming!

As we settle in and get back to planning programs, be sure to check the blog for information on upcoming events. In the meantime, be sure to come and visit the galleries from 8-5PM Monday-Friday and 1-5PM on Saturdays.

The Right to Vote

90 years ago today, on February 27, 1922 the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Leser v. Garnett, upholding as valid the 19th Amendment which granted women the right to vote.

The impetus for the case began on October 12, when Cecilia Streett Waters and Mary D. Randolph became Maryland’s first registered female voters. Though in accord with the newly amended federal constitution, they were violating the state constitution which limited the franchise to men. Oscar Leser, among others, sued the state board of registry to have the women’s registrations invalidated. Upon petitioning to the Supreme Court, the plaintiffs challenged the 19th Amendment using three claims.

(1) Congress’s power to amend the Constitution did not allow it to expand the franchise so drastically as to entirely subvert state autonomy in election procedures.

(2) A state whose own constitution limits the vote to men cannot legally ratify a contrary amendment to the federal constitution (as Pennsylvania and West Virginia had done).

(3) Tennessee and West Virginia’s ratifying resolutions were inoperative due to procedural missteps.

In a succinct opinion on behalf of a unanimous court, Justice Louis Brandeis rejected all three contentions. With regard to the first, the Court recognized that the 19th Amendment’s language had clearly paralleled that of the 15th (guaranteeing the right vote would not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude) and thus was permissible. For the second claim, Brandeis noted that states were employing a “federal function” in ratifying federal constitutional amendments and that consistency with state law was not required. On the last claim, the Court stepped back from what it saw as a matter for state officials to decide, while noting that Connecticut and Vermont’s subsequent ratifications, in September 1920 and February 1921 respectively, would render the problem of Tennessee and West Virginia moot anyway. With these three declarations, the Court endorsed the legitimacy of the 19th Amendment and of women’s suffrage.

Since Leser v. Garnett, all remaining states have ratified the 19th Amendment, from Delaware in 1923 to Mississippi in 1984. Later in 1922, Georgia would send to Washington the nation’s first female U.S. Senator, a one-day Democratic appointee named Rebecca Felton. The first elected female Senator, Hattie Caraway of Arkansas, would not arrive for another decade. There are currently 89 women in Congress, and women now make up a larger share of the electorate (roughly 52-53%) than men.

Packing the Court

During the Great Depression of the 1930s, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal economic relief programs revolutionized the relationship of private markets to the state and dramatically expanded the scope of services American citizens would come to expect from their federal government. In its own time, the New Deal proved extraordinarily controversial. Though occurring amid a recession of unparalleled duration and severity, such direct governmental intervention in the American economy seemed to many unusual in the wake of 1920s conservatism. In this vein, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down several major New Deal initiatives—both by the federal and state governments—between 1934 and 1936 as unconstitutional expansions of government power. While certain measures, like a federal law restricting gold ownership and the creation of the Tennessee Valley Authority, passed Supreme Court scrutiny, a litany of others (including the National Industrial Recovery Act, Agricultural Adjustment Act, and New York’s minimum wage law) were struck down.

By late 1936, popular media divided the Court into two warring factions. The conservative “Four Horsemen” —Justices Pierce Butler, James McReynolds, George Sutherland, and Willis Van Devanter— who consistently opposed New Deal relief efforts, and the liberal “Three Musketeers” —Justices Louis Brandeis, Harlan Stone, and Benjamin Cardozo— who were more amenable to Roosevelt’s programs. Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes and Justice Owen Roberts were considered the Court’s “swing votes,” though the former more often allied with the Musketeers and the latter with the Horsemen. After Roosevelt’s smashing reelection mandate on November 3rd over Kansas Governor Alf Landon, die-hard New Dealers and White House aides began planning for an assertive push against Supreme Court obstruction in the President’s second term.

75 years ago yesterday, February 5, 1937 the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill was proposed in Congress. Modeled closely on a proposal Justice McReynolds had offered in 1914 as Woodrow Wilson’s Attorney General, the bill would permit the President to expand the Supreme Court’s membership from nine to 15. He could appoint a new Justice for each sitting Justice over age 70. At the time, all Four Horsemen as well as Brandeis and Hughes, fit the bill – which meant six new appointments. Derided by opponents as Roosevelt’s “court packing plan,” the bill received an early boost from Senate Majority Leader Joseph Robinson, an Arkansas Democrat and key Roosevelt ally. Meanwhile Vice President John Nance Garner led the effort for House passage. Roosevelt explained and endorsed the bill in his March 9, 1937 Fireside Chat, and as far as pundits were concerned, the fight was on.

What Happened Next?
A series of events through the spring and summer derailed Roosevelt’s plan, though some in ways that helped his greater judicial agenda. On March 29, the Court issued a 5-4 opinion in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish that upheld Washington state’s minimum wage law. Justice Roberts had provided the liberal side a crucial fifth vote, a stark reversal from his stance on New York’s law the previous year; his jurisprudential change of heart would be known as “the switch in time that saved nine.” With Roberts beginning to side more reliably with Hughes and the Musketeers during the Court’s decisions near the end of that term, court packing no longer seemed necessary even to many Democrats. Then on May 18, Justice Van Devanter announced his retirement at age 78, granting Roosevelt the immediate opportunity to appoint a New Deal-friendly replacement and robbing his court packing plan of any perceived urgency. The same day, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected the bill by a 10-8 vote, issuing a scathing report that called it “a needless, futile and utterly dangerous abandonment of constitutional principle.” The final blow to court packing came on July 14, when Senate Majority Leader Robinson died suddenly at age 64. Garner informed the President that “You are beat. You haven’t got the votes.” The White House abandoned the legislation in late July and prepared for confirmation of Roosevelt’s new Supreme Court nominee, Hugo Black.

The late Chief Justice William Rehnquist characterizes the failure of Roosevelt’s court packing plan as a lost battle en route to a victorious war for the administration. Though taking on the Supreme Court shattered the President’s post-election political capital and divided the New Deal coalition heading into a sharp 1937-1938 recession, Roosevelt would eventually appoint eight Justices and cement a lasting liberal majority on the Court. Two Roosevelt appointees, Justice Black and Justice William Douglas, would serve into the 1970s, and the Court remained accordingly liberal-minded until about that time. More importantly, legislative interventions such as minimum wages, workplace regulations, and welfare expenditures that faced uphill constitutional battles in the 1930s have become staples of federal power, facing little credible opposition since 1937, though some vocal and popular political elements today espouse reversing these and other New Deal legacies.

Medicare Proposed

50 years ago today, on January 11, 1962, President John F. Kennedy formally endorsed the passage of Medicare, the government-funded health care program for seniors – which today enrolls approximately 48 million Americans. At the time of Kennedy’s State of the Union address, half of Americans aged 65 or older lacked health coverage, and nearly 30% lived below the federal poverty level. “Social security has long helped to meet the hardships of retirement, death and disability,” Kennedy noted. “I now urge that its coverage be extended without further delay to provide health insurance for the elderly.”

Health care has been a dominant issue in American politics for generations. Theodore Roosevelt supported including health care reform in the Progressive Party’s national platform in 1912. Franklin Roosevelt considered the exclusion of a national health program from the Social Security Act of 1935 a questionable concession. After the introduction of Congress’s first-ever national health bill, the Wagner National Health Act, in 1939, Roosevelt resolved to push for such a reform in his third term, though World War II would delay that effort until his Economic Bill of Rights campaign went underway in 1944.

But, it was Harry Truman who would most concertedly pursue universal health care. Truman endorsed the Wagner-Murray-Dingell Act, a medical plan covering doctors, nurses, laboratories, and dental care for all Americans not already covered by comparable insurance. Hopes for passage were dashed when Republicans won Congress in 1946, and as the policy battleground shifted from the hospital to the workplace during debates on the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947, Truman’s push lost focus. Although he once again backed national health care in his 1949 State of the Union, Truman remarked years later that:

I have had some bitter disappointments as President, but the one that has troubled me most, in a personal way, has been the failure to defeat the organized opposition to a National compulsory health insurance program. But this opposition has only delayed and cannot stop the adoption of an indispensable Federal health insurance plan.

The greatest obstacle to government health care programs had always been the American Medical Association, which opposed all varieties of national health care proposed during the 1930s-50s. When Kennedy’s White House sought a piecemeal approach in promoting Medicare – a program intended only to aid the age group at the time likeliest to lack health insurance – it once again collided with vociferous AMA opposition. In May 1962, the Palm Beach Post reported that Kennedy viewed the argument as one between the AMA and “the people,” though the President noted confidently that “I think more and more doctors are supporting it.” At the time, Kennedy told reporters he was open to a televised debate with former President Eisenhower on Medicare. Two months later, Medicare failed in a 52-48 Senate vote, an outcome the St. Petersburg Times called Kennedy’s “biggest legislative defeat” to date.

Ultimately, Medicare would pass (with Medicaid for the indigent) as part of the Social Security Act of 1965. After resounding Democratic victories in the 1964 election, President Johnson redoubled his Medicare efforts; the Act passed 307-116 in the House and 70-24 in the Senate. Johnson presented the nation’s first Medicare card to Truman, in a nod to the former President’s efforts to reform health care.

46 years into its existence and 50 after a President endorsed its creation, Medicare faces new fiscal challenges and a daunting future of rising health costs and an expanding elderly population. President Obama’s signature domestic achievement, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, seeks to vastly expand health coverage by 2014 via subsidies, insurance exchanges, and more widely available Medicaid plans. But today, millions of seniors and even working-age adults fear that Medicare will be unable to pay their future health costs. It is perhaps of historical interest in this era of fiscal uncertainty to recall the spirit in which Medicare came to be, and the legacy its founders sought to establish.

Where is Medicare in the Russell Library's Collections?

The quick answer seems to be everywhere. Discussions over various proposals for medicare (or other such health insurance programs) occur in collections documenting the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s -- Richard B. Russell, Jr., Herman Talmadge, Williamson Stuckey, John Flynt, Robert Stephens, Mack Mattingly and J. Roy Rowland just to name a few.

One of my favorite parts of the Talmadge collection to search through is the Flexys series -- which is largely constituent mail divided by topic, collected from 1965 through 1980. These letters let researchers tap into what the public in Georgia was thinking about major events during this period -- and Medicare was on their minds, just take a look and see.

As always, if you have any questions about how to navigate our collections just shoot us an email at russlib@uga.edu or call us at (706) 542-5788.

New Year, New Building

Welcome to Spring Semester 2012 at UGA! As you've read in recent posts, the Russell Library is now settled in its new home -- the Special Collections Building (300 South Hull Street) -- and we're once again open for regular research hours (8:30am - 4:30pm).

In August I blogged about our new exhibit galleries. Now, as we approach our grand opening on February 17th our exhibit fabricators are hard at work on the 2nd floor installing casework, furniture, and graphics that we've been developing with designers for the past two years. And, our staff is working like crazy to make sure all the objects, labels, and media for the galleries are ready for installation.

As promised in August, we have used our "Political Slang" series on the blog to preview some of the content that will fill our opening exhibition in the Harrison Feature Gallery (drumroll please...) On the Stump: What Does it Take to Get Elected in Georgia?

This exhibition considers the evolution of campaigning for political office in the state from the passage of the white primary in 1900 to the presidential election of 2008. The exhibition invites visitors to step into the shoes of a candidate and onto the campaign trail: from the initial decision to run to crafting a strategy, shaking hands, kissing babies, and everything in between.

Over the next few weeks we'll give you updates on the gallery -- showing pictures of the installation and some sneak peeks of the Hargrett and Brown archives gallery spaces as well.

Jan Levinson, Outreach Archivist, Russell Library

The Bradley Effect

After correctly projecting winners of gubernatorial, U.S. Senate, and presidential elections in California in 76 out of 80 statewide contests since 1948, the Field Poll is widely considered the state’s most accurate pollster. Indeed, the last Field Poll survey of a general election often tracks the actual election margin within one or two percentage points, and the last survey to predict the wrong winner in a polled contest came in 1982. At the time, Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley, the Democratic nominee for governor, was shown leading Republican state Attorney General George Deukmejian by a convincing margin of eight points. As potentially the first elected African-American governor in history, Bradley’s candidacy had generated considerable excitement. On Election Night, exit polls indicated a Bradley victory. But once the votes were tallied, Deukmejian won the election by about 100,000 votes and 1.2% of the total 7.5 million votes cast. Ever since his unexpected triumph pollsters have spoken of a supposed Bradley effect that plagues black candidates. This theory suggests that voters often tell pollsters they are either undecided or will support the black candidate in an election, but will actually stay home or vote for a white candidate on Election Day. Whether or not a Bradley effect exists—and a former Deukmejian pollster denies that it did even in that 1982 contest—its causes are hotly disputed.

Deukmejian won popularity during his governorship as a fiscal conservative following President Reagan’s mold of slashing allegedly wasteful domestic programs. He defeated Bradley once more in 1986, this time by a lopsided margin of 61-37. Ultimately, the first elected black governor in American history would arrive in 1989 when Democrat Doug Wilder won the governorship of Virginia. Again, observers noted a “Bradley effect” in that Wilder’s margin was close enough to warrant a statewide recount after polls had shown him leading Coleman by four to 15 points and even the Election Night exit poll had predicted a 10-point Wilder win. The same night, David Dinkins, also a Democrat, became New York City’s first African-American mayor, defeating Republican nominee Rudy Giuliani by some two percentage points after leading him by 18 and 14 points, respectively, in the two final polls of the race. A similar outcome had occurred in the Chicago mayoral election of 1983.

Wilder and Dinkins both left office after elections in 1993—Wilder was limited to one term in office and Dinkins lost another close race to Giuliani. The later 1990s and early 2000s proved a fairly poor era for black candidates, with no African-American governors elected and the only black U.S. Senator (Carol Moseley Braun) defeated for reelection in 1998. After the election of another black governor, Deval Patrick of Massachusetts, in 2006, and Sen. Barack Obama’s 2007 presidential announcement, the Bradley effect received considerable scrutiny regarding its continued applicability in an age of purportedly higher racial tolerance.

Throughout the 2008 primary campaign, pundits speculated whether Obama’s poll numbers would significantly overstate his on-the-ground support. However, with the single exception of a campaign-resuscitating come-from-behind win for Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, Obama’s numbers largely matched or exceeded the polls when votes were tallied. In Southern states particularly, he was known to surpass his polled support. In South Carolina, the poll aggregator website RealClearPolitics showed an Obama lead of 12 points, but he won by 29. He similarly over-performed in Democratic primaries in Georgia, Virginia, Wisconsin, and North Carolina. During the general election campaign, with “Bradley effect” talk again in full swing as Obama maintained consistent polling leads over Republican Sen. John McCain, popular analyst Nate Silver wrote in Newsweek that “there is no reason to conclude that the polls are systematically overestimating Obama’s support.” Indeed, RealClearPolitics’ final poll average on November 3 showed an Obama popular vote lead of 7.6%, an almost perfect match for the eventual 7.3% outcome. RealClearPolitics also projected that Obama would win 338 electoral votes to McCain’s 200. The final result was 365-173.

Whether or not the Bradley effect existed in the 1980s, most agree that there is little evidence for it in closely watched, competitive elections today.

Fond Farewell

As we returned to work this week at the Russell Library, we were sad to learn of the passing of Ed Jenkins, who represented Georgia's 9th Congressional District in the U.S. Congress from 1977 until 1993. Our staff would like to extend heartfelt condolences to his friends and family.

Edgar Lanier "Ed" Jenkins was born in Young Harris, Georgia on January 4, 1933. From 1952 to 1955, he served in the Coast Guard. He attended both Young Harris College and Emory University, and graduated from the University of Georgia Law School in 1959. After graduation, he served as an administrative assistant to Congressman Phillip M. Landrum from 1959 to 1962. He practiced law in Jasper, Georgia, and served as an assistant United States attorney in Atlanta. He was elected to the U.S. Congress as a Democrat in 1976. While in congress, he was active in the Ways and Means Committee, passing and supporting bills involving taxes, trade and land and mountain preservation. He also served as chairman of the Textile Caucus and as a deputy whip in the House. After 16 years in congress, a large mountain tract in North Georgia was designated the "Ed Jenkins National Recreation Area." Jenkins was a member of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and a partner in the firm of Winburn & Jenkins in Washington, D.C.

Mr. Jenkins was interviewed as part of the Reflections on Georgia Politics (ROGP) oral history series in 2006 and again in 2008. You can stream these interviews using the links below:

Ed Jenkins Interview, Part 1: http://podcaster.gcsu.edu/podcastdata/UGA/Channel_2630/podcast_27204/27204.mov

Ed Jenkins Interview, Part 2: http://podcaster.gcsu.edu/podcastdata/UGA/Channel_2630/podcast_22036/22036.mov


From left to right: Ed Jenkins, Bob Short, Cathy Cox, and Zell Miller at the Reflections on Georgia Politics luncheon, May 2010.

We're Back

The Russell Library is now open for research in its new space in the Special Collections Library Building at 300 South Hull Street. Hours for research access are Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 p.m. For more information, please check out the "Visit" page on the Russell Library website, or contact Russell staff at russlib@uga.edu.

The Russell exhibit galleries will open in mid-February after the building dedication on February 17, 2012.

Work with Us!

We're happy to announce we have two new openings for part-time student workers at the Russell Library, to begin in January 2012! A quick description of each position appears below; for more information on what we're looking for, or to apply, visit UGA's Dawglink website: https://uga-csm.symplicity.com/students/index.php

TITLE: Digital Access Student Assistant

JOB DESCRIPTION
The Digital Access Student Assistant will assist in the processing of digital born and digitized archival materials.He/she will also aid in providing online access to such materials via Russell Library's finding aids database, digital repository, online exhibit builder, and departmental web site. This position will be supervised by Russell Library's Access and Electronic Records Archivist.

QUALIFICATIONS

• Experience with web design
• Fluency in HTML
• Familiarity with library/archives collections, tools, and services
• Self-motivated, dependable, and enthusiastic
• Strong interpersonal and communication skills
• Ability to work both as a member of a team and independently
• Accuracy and attention to detail
• Background in some area of computer technology preferred but not required

Please submit a cover letter, resume, and references via e-mail to Abby R. Adams at adamsabi@uga.edu.


TITLE: Graphic and Web Design Student Assistant

JOB DESCRIPTION
This position assists the Access and Outreach unit of the Russell Library by: providing graphic design for print and online environments, assisting with maintenance and special projects for the Russell Library website, assisting with exhibit design, fabrication, and installation.

The ideal candidate for this position will be equally at home designing for Web and print environments and will have both technical proficiencies in both arenas, as well as a thorough grounding in graphic design principles and standards.

QUALIFICATIONS

• A minimum of 1 year of experience in website design which may include course work and/or on-the-job experience, a combination of both or ability to demonstrate proficiency through examples of independent work
• Strong awareness of graphic design principles and approaches for print and online contexts through experience, examples of independent work, or coursework Fluency in Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, HTML, AND CSS
• Ability to work independently and as part of team
• Strong problem solving skills
• Demonstrated strong work ethic
• Flexibility and interest in working in project-based environment

Please submit a cover letter, resume, and references via e-mail to Jan Levinson at jlevinso@uga.edu

The Fourth Estate

The news media is sometimes referred to as the Fourth Estate of politics. Nineteenth century writers attributed this usage to British parliamentarian Edmund Burke, who used it in a 1787 debate over whether or not to allow press attendance at House of Commons proceedings. In Burke’s reckoning, the other three estates were members of Parliament—Lords Temporal, Lords Spiritual, and Commons—and this framework itself referenced medieval Europe’s “three estates” of clergy, nobles, and commoners. Today, the news media plays a vital role in shaping popular perceptions of events, history, and candidates for public office. Certain politicians have even used their own status as “media darlings” to their advantage when seeking office, while others play off the perceived media antagonism to their campaigns to gain public sympathy.

For an example of the latter, we need look no further than Richard Nixon. His resentful attitude about press coverage of his 1960 presidential race against John F. Kennedy (particularly their televised debates) significantly impacted the rest of his political career. After losing the California gubernatorial race in 1962 to Democratic incumbent Pat Brown he declared, “You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.” When seeking the White House again in 1968, Nixon urged the nation’s “Silent Majority” to stand against liberal elites in the press, the Capitol, and on college campuses. The famous “Enemies List” penned in 1971 included dozens of major media figures at nearly every high-circulation newspaper and magazine. Even while under siege during the Watergate investigation in 1973-74, a beleaguered Nixon continued to push back against mounting allegations with dismissive remarks about the popular press’s motivations, and behind the scenes (as revealed by his infamous white house tapes) he made derisive and sometimes obscene remarks about such personalities as Katharine Graham, editor of The Washington Post.

Another Republican presidential hopeful, John McCain, benefited greatly from media coverage in his 2000 primary campaign against George W. Bush. Running on a “maverick” platform that mixed traditional conservative stances on cultural issues and tax policy with reformist proposals on campaign finance reform and management of the federal budget surplus. McCain traveled in a bus dubbed the Straight Talk Express and was said to use every opportunity for positive publicity, including touring the Sunday talk show circuit throughout 1999 discussing the Kosovo conflict and his experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. McCain won a 49-to-30 percent victory over national frontrunner Bush in the New Hampshire primary, earning much of his support from moderate Republicans and crossover Independents. A further surge of press coverage ensued for McCain, whose supporters affectionately dubbed themselves “McCainiacs,” heading into the crucial GOP primary in South Carolina.

After a poll showed McCain leading Bush by five points in the conservative state, Bush allied himself on stage with a veteran’s activist, J. Thomas Burch, who accused McCain of “coming home from Vietnam and forgetting us.” The South Carolina campaign would go down in political history as among the most vicious in modern memory, as a still-unidentified party delivered mail and push polls claiming (variably) that McCain had fathered a child out of wedlock, was a “Manchurian candidate” psychologically broken from his days in Vietnam, or that his wife Cindy was a drug addict. Meanwhile, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh attacked McCain as a favorite of Democrats and the “liberal media.” Bush defeated McCain in the Palmetto State by 53 percent to 42 percent, and despite victories in Michigan and his home state of Arizona, along with continued sympathy in media circles, McCain’s campaign failed to recover. When he again sought the presidency in 2008, McCain found it difficult to revive his erstwhile press adoration with national newcomer Barack Obama in the race.

Many months (even years) into the campaign season for the 2012 presidential race, its interesting to think about how (of if) the press is shaping the way we see potential candidates. Is there a media darling in the Republican race already?