8.26.2009

A Lion in a Senate Full of Them--Back in '63, That is

Chris Dodd joked today during an impromptu press conference that Ted Kennedy had “the burden of serving with me and my father” in the Senate. There's so much talk, rightly, about what happens now that Kennedy is gone: who can replace him, literally and spiritually; the bitter irony of him not being around to negotiate the final language for and vote upon President Obama's health care package.

But Dodd's quip got me to thinking about what the Senate looked like when Ted Kennedy arrived. Though Kennedy took office by special election in late 1962, his first full Congress was the 88th, seated soon thereafter in January 1963. Here’s a short list of some of the tall Senate names from that Congress:

Alabama’s John Sparkman; Arizona’s Barry Goldwater and Carl Hayden; Arkansas’ J. William Fulbright; Connecticut’s Abe Ribicoff and Thomas Dodd; Georgia’s Richard Russell; Idaho’s Frank F. Church; Illinois’ Everett Dirksen; Indiana’s Birch Bayh; Louisiana’s Russell Long; Maine’s Edmund Muskie and Margaret Chase Smith; Minnesota’s Hubert Humphrey and Eugene McCarthy (and later, Walter Mondale, who filled Humphrey’s seat at the end of that Congress); Mississippi’s John Stennis; Montana’s Michael J. Mansfield; Nebraska’s Roman Hruska; New York’s Jacob Javits; North Carolina’s Sam Ervin; Rhode Island’s Claiborne Pell; South Carolina’s Strom Thurmond; South Dakota’s George McGovern; Tennessee’s Al Gore Sr. and Estes Kefauver; Texas’ Ralph Yarborough and John Tower; Virginia’s Harry Byrd; Washington’s Scoop Jackson; West Virginia’s Robert Byrd; and Wisconsin’s William Proxmire.
Wow.

Not all are lions, but thate's a safari's worth of talent right there. The abbreviated list above includes titanic and long-serving senators (R. Byrd), including the man who has served in Congress longer than anyone else (Hayden); past and future presidential nominees and vice presidential nominees (Sparkman, Goldwater, Humphrey, McGovern, Thurmond, H. Byrd); leaders of key, historical congressional committees or commissions (Church, Ervin, Kefauver); memorable party leaders of the chamber (Mansfield); the first woman to ever serve in both the House and Senate (Chase Smith); not only Dodd's father, but a southern civil rights pioneer who fathered a certain vice president who later won the national popular vote in 2000 (Gore); and two senators whose surnames are synonymous with landmark education law (Fulbright, Pell).

Heck, two of the three Senate office buildings on Capitol Hill—Dirksen and Russell—are named for senators who were part of that 88th Congress. And this is just a rough sketch of what these senators accomplished. Surely I'm forgetting or am simply unaware of so much else.

Last night Ted Kennedy left the Senate for good as its liberal lion. But his point of arrival tells us a lot about him, too, for he was trained by, learned from and found great company among a group of pretty amazing senators in Washington when he arrived as a young cub on the scene almost 47 years ago.

45 comments

Michael said...

Thomas Dodd - Christopher's father - was not a lion. He was a crook. The apple didn't fall far from that tree.

Stephen said...

The mental midget Roman Hruska was more a hyena than a lion. About as distinguished and accomplished a senator as Jim Bunning, but nastier.

Pietr Hitzig said...

Amen, Stephen. Hruska's only famous quote defending the appointment of Nixon's Carswell to the supreme court:

"Even if he were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance? We can't have all Brandeises, Frankfurters and Cardozos."

Randy Cox said...

You missed one of those long-ago Senators who was also a Presidential candidate (and won electoral votes)--Strom Thurmond.

twodox said...

We used to play a poker game called 'Hruska' in which the most mediocre hand won. It led to lots of arguments, but was fun anyway.

I think the point is not necessarily that the '63 crew was brighter than the current crop (although they certainly were), but that they had more gravitas, mutual respect, and respect for the institution of the Senate. This current group is a joke.

Delorian said...

Not sure if I get the true point of this post. Is it that the '63 Senate was a collection of great talent that accomplished great things (like the '27 Yankees); or that they are a group of individuals who happened to be all in one place at one brief time, many of whom would end up with good or great accomlishments or careers even though that particular year was nothing special (like the '86 Cubs).

Scott said...

Any list like this is going to be flawed, but there are some weird names on here, senators who might have made it into the record books or who are known for a catchy phrase, but whose accomplishments aren't really all more impressive than some others (personally, I'd argue the likes of George Aiken, Clinton Anderson, and John Sherman Cooper should be on your list long before getting to some of the names mentioned). But what really stands out to me here are the Tennesseans. It really is remarkable that a Southern state had two such senators in the 1950s and 1960s.

Peach said...

Warren Magnuson was a much larger lion than Scoop "Neo-con" Jackson ever was. Quiet, and powerful porker. The senator from Boeing.

Jason_M said...

What I like about this list is that it is ideologically heterodox. These were legislators, people who knew how the process worked and worked it. Maybe it's nostalgia for me, for that Congress and the ones of the late '50s were during formative years. But who measures up today?

Sacto Joe said...

The Lion King is dead. Let us bury him with honor. And let all of those who speak ill of him receive the back of our hand.

Yes, Teddy had feet of clay. Who doesn't? The last perfect person lived over 2000 years ago, IMHO.

But we are the sum of our many years, not just a season or two. As The Man said: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Not that that's going to keep the rigthtwing dipshits that permeate the blogosphere from doing so anyway.

As I said on another thread, in Senator Kennedy's honor, I think it would be fitting for Democrats to now end their intraparty foodfight and get the best darned health care package passed that they can without any Republican votes.

Because of the lack of ability to overcome a filibuster, "Teddycare" may not be perfect, but it can be a good start. Later, when we've replaced a few of the Blue Dogs and some more of the Do Nothing GOPers, we can do the job right.

For Teddy.

markymark said...

I don't necesarily buy the argument (if its the argument Tom is trying to make) that the current Senate is necesarily of a lower quality than the 1963 congress. I think one could make a case for people like John McCain, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Russ Feingold make for a pretty decent bunch. And I am sure some newer members will add to that list as they gain a reputation.

Delorian said...

Wow, SC governor Sanford press conference now stating he's refusing to resign even as it becomes increasingly likely he'll be impeached when state legislature reconvenes.

I figured he'd be using today to announce his resignation on a day when it would get the lowest possible publicity, but no, he's digging in his heels.

John said...

"Congress longer than anyone else (Hayden); past and future presidential nominees and vice presidential nominees (Sparkman, Goldwater, Humphrey, McGovern, Thurmond, H. Byrd);"


Randy, Thurmond was mentioned in the post. Carry on!

ironrailsironweights said...

Also add George Aiken of Vermont, among the very first politicians to caution against American involvement in Vietnam.

As far as I can tell, the only surviving Senators from the 88th Congress are Daniel Inouye, Birch Bayh and Robery Byrd, not counting the later-appointed Walter Mondale.

Peter

LindaS said...

As a Nebraskan, I'm glad that Hruska's name got called out immediately here. Hruska was anything but a lion, and his "mediocre" statement is still a cause for embarrassment here.

Ardent Henry said...

Could you wonky baseball geeks do some research and compile a list of say, the Top 25 US Senators of all time. That would be really cool.

Delorian said...

Thanks ironrailsironweights.

I was wondering who would be the longest serving active senator once Kennedy and Byrd pass, looks like Inouye is the answer.

817Steve said...

You left out Phil Hart who was my US Senator when I grew up in Michigan and for whom the third Senate office building is named. Back then, liberals weren't afraid to fight for civil rights, education, health care, seniors, women, minorities, labor and the poor. Liberal was not a pejorative for the hateful and small to use as one of their tools to preserve the status quo as it has now become. I know that politics is "complicated" but respect and human decency are fundamental human values that ought to transcend politics. Let us honor the memories of Senator Kennedy and Phil Hart by continuing the good fight against those who place profit and power above humanity.

Nosimplehiway said...

Ted Kennedy was a great American and will be dearly missed.

Much has been made of his ability to reach across the aisle, and I wonder how much of that was his innate personality as a moderator and peacemaker, and how much was simple cultural background. The Senate in which he was the least senior Senator, had a whole different conception of political party and party system than today.

The parties then were less about ideological definition and more about simple convenience and inter-regional alliances.

The Democratic party included unreconstructed segregationists (Thurmond, Sparkman, Fulbright), establishment moderates (Muskie), socialist-liberals (Douglas, Pell, Clark) and labor union/ethnic machine politicians (Lausche).

Meanwhile, the GOP included western libertarians (Goldwater), moderate cloth coat traditionalists (Dirksen, Kuchel), true liberals, usually of the Eastern Establishment variety, (Javits, Saltonstall) and fervent anti-communists (Mundt).

Because both parties had such a wide range of opinions and ideologies, it was common practice to reach across the aisle. Dixiecrats would cut deals with western libertarians in support of state's rights. Leftist democrats would forge alliances with Rockefeller Republicans for new social programs. Dixiecrats could work with liberal dems, labor dems and cloth coat Republicans on issues like Pell Grants, Fulbright Scholarships and federal highways. Anti-communists and labor could come together on defense funding bills.

Since about 1964 when Goldwater broke the Rockefeller Republicans, and 1968 when Dixiecrats were brought into the GOP by Nixon, the GOP has slowly become more ideological and doctrinaire. The same trend has been at work in the Democratic party, though more by necessity, as conservatives went over to the GOP leaving liberals behind. Today, both parties are much more crisply defined by ideology, which makes bi-partisanship much more diffiicult.

Basically, when Kennedy learned how to be a Senator, political parties were more like a friendly pickup football game, where players (that is factions... there was strong discipline within factions) divide up differently for different games. Today, it's more like the NFL, with contracts and only rare, carefully negotiated player trades.

There are only two (Byrd and Inouye, both Democrats) left like him, who experienced that more free-form model of partisanship, having entered the Senate before Watergate. But, today, if either party doesn't have a high level of party discipline they will get steam-rollered by an opposition unwilling to compromise. (healthcare, judicial nominees, etc.)

I don't just miss Ted Kennedy. I miss when he was from.

JMNorris said...

@markymark
I think one could make a case for people like John McCain, John Kerry, Chris Dodd, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Russ Feingold make for a pretty decent bunch.

As a Californian, I don't think Barbara Boxer really belongs on that list. I find our other senator, Dianne Feinstein, to be weightier even though my my politics are closer to Boxer's.

Mule Rider said...

As a Californian, I don't think Barbara Boxer really belongs on that list. I find our other senator, Dianne Feinstein, to be weightier even though my my politics are closer to Boxer's.

You must be so far left that you can't even see straight then.

markymark said...

JMNorris, fair enough! I was just coming up with some names off the top of my head. I think California is pretty lucky with its representation in the Senate at the moment actually.

My bigger point was that its easy for history to look back and say things were better in the past. Politicians tend to have a growing reputation after they leave office and there are some decent people in the Senateat the moment, even if they are joined, as Kennedy et al were in '63, by some jerks as well.

N in Seattle said...

We all have our lists of heavyweights from the 88th Congress. I think you've missed quite a few, some (but not all) of whom have been mentioned in previous comments.

Here are my additions:

Ernest Gruening (D-AK)
Hiram Fong (R-HI)
Paul Douglas (D-IL)
Thruston B. Morton (R-KY)
John Sherman Cooper (R-KY)
Philip Hart (D-MI)
Stuart Symington (D-MO)
Norris Cotton (R-NH)
Clifford Case (R-NJ)
Kenneth Keating (R-NY)
Fred Harris (D-OK)
Wayne Morse (D-OR)
Hugh Scott (R-PA)
George Aiken (R-VT)
Gaylord Nelson (D-WI)

Note how many of them were Republicans. There were actual human beings on that side of the aisle back then.

TommyReport said...

Nobody wants to talk polling today?

Presidential Approval Usually Falls Below 50%; Timing Varies
Obama at 51% approval in eighth month in office
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122513/Presidential-Approval-Usually-Falls-Below-Timing-Varies.aspx?version=print

Barack Obama’s latest job approval rating is 51%, according to Aug. 23-25 Gallup Daily tracking. Should his rating continue its downward trend and fall below 50%, he would — like most post-World War II presidents — have less-than-majority approval at some point in his presidency. However, Obama, in his eighth month in office, could hit this mark in a shorter time than has typically been the case. If his rating falls below 50% before November, it would represent the third-fastest drop to below majority approval since World War II, behind the declines for Gerald Ford (in his third month as president) and Bill Clinton (in his fourth month).

Jeff said...

OK, I'm a conservative who can stomach the one-sided Kennedy coverage. He was a towering figure, and as many liberals tipped their cap to Ronald Reagan when he died, I'll do the same for Ted Kennedy.

But Robert Byrd? Are you people mad? His career has been a total malignancy. He'll be remembered for being the most famed KKK member in the US Senate, and its most effective generator of useless pork.

Nance said...

817Steve, you said exactly what I was going to say. I had the good fortune to meet Senator Hart, when I was a child, and he went to bat for a friend of mine who had testified in the Winter Soldier hearings. He was a great man, "The Conscience of the Senate" is what he was called. There's a reson one of the Senate office buildings bears his name.

rtc said...

Phil Hart had a building named after him due to the respect of the Senators for who he was and his legislative work on consumer protection, the environment, civil rights. In addition, he was considered a saint. Ted Kennedy said that Hart taught him you could be effective in the senate by always giving credit to others for the work you do.

NU'69 said...

@markymark
I could nitpick away at some of the names on your list of quality Senators, but there is one that clearly does not belong—BARBARA BOXER. She is one of the most disrespectful, hate-mongering people in the Senate. Are you a relative or something? As ultra-lib as the commenters on this site are, I can’t believe you’d get much support for Boxer as one of the best.

Bill R. said...

I came of age in that era. What I remember were Republican senators who had integrity. Who acted from a core of conscience and values. Joe Klein is right. The GOP of today are nihilists who will do or say anything, make anything up, to support the propaganda line of the moment or attack an adversary. They are all entirely predictable and entirely without any redemptive qualities. There is not one, not one GOP senator who comes close to Everett Dirksen, in character or intellect.

Scarce said...

Comparatively few of the current crop of Senators will be remembered for much, if anything in 40 years.

Em said...

If I remember correctly, shortly after the "mediocre" statement, Hruska was runner-up in an informal poll conducted by journalists (remember them?) on Capitol Hill, on the question "Who's the dumbest man on Capitol Hill?" (one said "man" in those days, appropriately or not). For numerous compelling reasons I won't go into here, the winner, hands down, was Sen. William Scott of Virginia (not the Sen. Scott of Pennsylvania). But even with his second-place finish, Hruska was dubbed "The Dumbest Roman of Them All".

Em said...

PS to previous comment:

Oh, yes, and Sen. Scott called a press conference to deny being the Dumbest Man on Capitol Hill.

Eli Blake said...

Another error:

Harry Byrd was never a candidate for President or Vice President.

His name did get placed on a couple of southern state ballots and he got some electoral votes in 1956 and 1960, but those came from segregationists who didn't trust Stevenson and Kennedy, and were also angry with the Eisenhower/Nixon administration for Ike's use of federal troops to forcibly desegregate a high school in Little Rock.

But Byrd himself never asked to be put on a ballot, never campaigned for President and never was on any kind of a ticket.

AtSwimTwoBirds said...

On nosimplehighway's point,
1. The issue dimensionality work by the guys from DW-NOMINATE captures exactly what you mean; there's been a real movement of the way Senators line up for votes, from a two-dimensional map to a one-dimensional map. There aren't all that many regional divides in America any more on which the parties haven't taken settled positions.
2. So in this new world, "party discipline" serves the same purpose that "bipartisanship" did then - it ensures the votes are there for legislation. It hasn't necessarily created rancour that didn't exist in the past. The way you guys and other left-wing act about Republicans, and the way right-wing blogs act about Democrats, is the way party members from one part of the country used to hold their colleagues from other parts of the country in disdain about "non-partisan" regional issues like civil rights.

Corbet C said...

Two from my neck of the woods not on the list: Wayne Morse, the long-time, independent-minded, anti-war senator from Oregon. And Washington's Warren Magnuson, a behind-the-scenes legislative craftsman like Kennedy.

nkpolitics1279 said...

Class of 1958- Byrd-WV.
Class of 1962- Inouye-HI
Class of 1974- Leahy-VT
Class of 1976- Lugar-IN
Hatch-UT
Class of 1978- Levin-MI
Cochran-MS
Baucus-MT
Class of 1980- Dodd-CT
Grassley-IA
Specter-PA
Class of 1982-Lautenberg(2002)
Bingaman-NM
Class of 1984- Harkin-IA
McConnell-KY
Kerry-MA
Rockefeller-WV.
Class of 1986- Shelby-AL
McCain-AZ
Mikulski-MD
Reid-NV
Conrad-ND
Class of 1988- Lieberman-CT
Kohl-WI
Class of 1990- Akaka-HI
Class of 1992- Feinstien-CA
Boxer-CA
Dorgan-ND
Bennet-UT
Murray-WA
Feingold-WI
Class of 1993- Hutchinson-TX
Class of 1994- Inhofe-OK
Kyl-AZ
Snowe-ME
Class of 1995- Wyden-OR
Class of 1996- Sessions-AL
Durbin-IL
Roberts-KS
Landrieu-LA
Collins-ME
Reed-RI
Johnson-SD
Enzi-WY
Class of 1998- Lincoln-AR
Crapo-ID
Bayh-IN
Schumer-NY
Class of 2000- Carper-DE
Nelson-FL
Stabenow-MI
Nelson-NE
Ensign-NV
Cantwell-WA
Class of 2002- Murkowski-AK
Pryor-AR
Chambliss-GA
Graham-SC
Alexander-TN
Cornyn-TX
Class of 2004- Isakson-GA
Vitter-LA
Burr-NC
Coburn-OK
DeMint-SC
Thune-SD
Class of 2005- Menendez-NJ
Class of 2006- Cardin-MD
Klobuchar-MN
McCaskill-MO
Tester-MT
Brown-OH
Casey-PA
Whitehouse-RI
Corker-TN
Sanders-VT
Webb-VA
Class of 2008- Wicker-MS
Barasso-WY
Begich-AK
Udall-CO
Risch-ID
Franken-MN
Johanns-NE
Shaheen-NH
Udall-NM
Hagan-NC
Merkley-OR
Warner-VA
Class of 2009- Bennett-CO
Massachusetts-Seat
Gillibrand-NY
Class of 2010-Biden-DE
Crist-FL
Giannoulias-IL
Moran-KS
Grayson-KY
Carnahan-MO
Hodes-NH
Fisher-OH

max said...

Someone else already dinged you on this; let me also plead the case of Phil Hart, known as "The Conscience of the Senate". He was a few cuts above many you named here.

James said...

I'm showing my age, but I grew up with the "Ev and Jerry Show". I remember the epic cooperation of Dirksen and LBJ that passed the landmark civil rights acts of 1964 and 1965, probably the most unlikely legislation to pass in U S history.

Your list had some great men, but Ted Kennedy belonged to the select group of titans with LBJ and Ev Dirksen who accomplished impossible things

Judge C. Crater said...

What this august class of Senators had is the ability to act as "behind-the-scenes legislative craftsmen" that Corbet refers to. Given the propensity of R Senators to shoot off at the mouth without thinking (yes, Senator Grassley, I'm talking about you) one gathers that no one values that any more. To the great detriment of the Union.

Don't Tase Me, Bro! said...

Great piece, Mr. Schaller.

I just like to point out that amongst that group of Senators, even the most liberal of legislators knew that the only way to work together was to work with the other side. That's how the Senate remained such a collegal body for so many years.

We are hearing today from your liberal friends in the media and the blogosphere about how, with a formerly filibuster proof majority, that they should just ram stuff through and ignore the Republicans. I sincerely doubt that men like John Stennis or even Phil Hart would have even conceived of such an idea in their day.

As annoying and disturbingly troubling the GOP Senators may be, they are duly elected legislators of the American people. The way they chose to express the views of their voters may not be to the liking of academically intuned minds like yourself, but they are expressing honest opinions out there.

The irony of the outpouring of the celebration of the life of Ted Kennedy from the liberal left, was that he was the ultimate consensus builder, a one of a kind original from a time long gone. What the left proposes today is completely opposite of what Kennedy would have done.

KAP said...

In your list of Presidential nominees from the 88th, you omitted Walter Mondale.

Eli Blake said...

Also,

I realize that a lot of people still don't think New Mexico is a state, but one of the Senators Kennedy served with was Clinton P. Anderson (D-NM), who is given credit for shepherding the space program through the Senate, culminating in the moon shot. No Anderson, then no Armstrong.

In fact, in 1968, Anderson was talked about as a potential Presidential candidate as an elder statesman who had supported the Vietnam war but was willing to talk peace with the north, a Senator who kept open lines of communication throughout the senate, and a man who nobody in the party really disliked. He declined because of his age, but given the way that tumultuous year unfolded in hindsight Anderson might have been the best hope for Democrats to beat the Nixonites.

kelly said...

放鬆心情自由自在的來一趟花蓮旅遊,可以感受花蓮民宿各種不同的風味,所以來花蓮一定要住花蓮民宿哦!因為可從花蓮民宿主人那裡分享到不一樣的花蓮旅遊的經驗以及品嚐花蓮美食道地的花蓮小吃,所以來花蓮旅遊不一定就要享受花蓮高級餐廳的花蓮美食也可以多試試道地古早味的花蓮美味哦!來花蓮民宿可以放鬆整個心情,來花蓮電腦住宿也可以放空自已,來花蓮也可以了解在地的文化哦!住民宿其實是很輕鬆的,住花蓮民宿其實是很容易,還有就是現在是高油價的時代,還自行開車來花蓮嗎?來花蓮租車會比較輕鬆哦!來花蓮房屋租車會比較省錢哦!或是可以請花蓮計程車帶您包車旅遊喔!!歡迎來住住美麗的花蓮民宿囉!!一定要讓您來花蓮旅遊並且讓您愛上花蓮民宿,還有團購美食好吃的蜂蜜蛋糕、養顏美容的蜂王乳以及花蓮美食喔!!

Nosimplehiway said...

@ Don't Tase Me

I agree that John Stennis would not understand the idea of "ramming" legislation through the senate today. When he joined the filibusters of the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1968, the rules for filibuster allowed Senators unlimited debate, meaning they had to actually maintain debate to hold up legislation. They would give speeches that lasted for hours and hours and hours, stretching the legislative day out for weeks. They would sometimes read from the phone book or recite recipes. Strom Thurmond gave a filibuster speech that lasted over 24 hours straight. He wore diapers to get through it and the rest of the senate camped out in cots in the senate cloakroom, so they were available in case anyone tried to end debate with a cloture vote.

But, eventually filibusters would end, either with the majority deciding they were tired of camping out and were unwilling to hold up the rest of the business of the senate, or by either the minority's dwindling physical capacity to give long, long, long speeches or when they ran out of senators to speak (each senator was allowed only 2 speeches). Filibusters were a contest of wills between the minority and the majority.

Today filibusters are purely procedural and nothing more than an end run around the whole idea of majority rules, in which any 40 senators say they don't like legislation and the majority shrugs and gives in. Both parties have abused the new filibuster rules at various times, mostly over judicial nominations... the GOP when they stalled 55 of Clinton's nominations until there was a Republican Senate, then the Democrats when they tried to stall Bush's nominations to fill those seats that had opened up under Clinton but were being filled under Bush.

The rules of filibuster are fairly easy to change with some parliamentary arcane-ness, pretty much at the will of the Majority Leader Harry Reid and without the opposition of the Chair of the Senate, VP Joe Biden.

If the current filibuster rules were in effect in the 60's, we would have never had civil rights legislation. The purely procedural filibuster is a disaster when either party is in power and needs to go.

tariely said...

центрифугат зеленый лазер шабазит
Электронная почта без регистрации