Taft Hartley Act

The 80th Congress (1947-1949) Vs. The 118th Congress (2023- )

admin Leave a comment

It has often been claimed that the 80th Congress (1947-1949) under President Harry Truman was unproductive, or as Truman claimed it in his 1948 Presidential campaign, a “Do Nothing” Congress.

While it is true that the Republican dominated 80th Congress worked against Democratic President Truman and his “Fair Deal” proposals, most notably passing the anti Labor Taft-Hartley Act over the President’s veto, in reality a lot was accomplished in that Congress.

The following actions were accomplished:

The Truman Doctrine
The Taft-Hartley Act
The Presidential Succession Act
The National Security Act–including the Defense Department at the Pentagon in Virginia, the National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, separate Department of the Air Force, and the Central Intelligence Agency
The Marshall Plan
22nd Amendment to the US Constitution

At the same time, NOTHING significant has been passed into law in the present first session of the 118th Congress, making it the least productive in modern times since the Great Depression 1931-1933 72nd Congress, split between a Democratic House of Representatives and Republican Senate under President Herbert Hoover!

Opposition Congresses Vs Split Congresses: Which Performs Better?

Ronald Leave a comment

America is about enter a new period of an opposition Congress in both houses, something that been quite common in the past 70 years since World War II.

Harry Truman had an opposition Congress in 1947-48, and despite his “do nothing Congress’ attack on them in 1948, they actually accomplished a lot, just not all that Truman preferred, an example being the anti labor Taft Hartley Act.

Dwight D. Eisenhower had an opposition Congress in 1955-1961, but a lot was accomplished, including two Civil Rights laws in 1957 and 1960, and the National Defense Education Act in 1958.

Richard Nixon had an opposition Congress in his time in office from 1969-1974, but despite conflict and Watergate, actually accomplished a lot in domestic affairs by cooperation, including the Environmental Protection Agency, Consumer Product Safety Commission, and Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Gerald Ford had an opposition Congress in his time in office from 1974-1977, and although no major legislation was passed, got along quite well with the opposition party.

Ronald Reagan had an opposition Congress in 1987-1989, and while his last two years were declining years of performance amidst the Iran Contra Scandal, he still got along quite well with the opposition party, including when the House of Representatives remained Democratic during his first six years, and Social Security was reformed by bipartisan agreement.

George H. W. Bush had an opposition Congress in his time in office from 1989-1993, but was able to move ahead on the Americans With Disabilities Act, and made a deal on a tax increase with the opposition party.

Bill Clinton had an opposition Congress in his time in office from 1995-2001, after the first two years having his party in control, and while there was plenty of turmoil and drama, they actually came to agreement on balancing the budget in his last years, and working together on welfare reform.

George W. Bush had an opposition Congress in his last two years in office from 2007-2009, and despite a lot of conflict, gained support on a bailout of banks and other financial institutions during the Great Recession.

One will notice most times that the Republicans were in the White House, and the Democrats were in control of Congress when we had opposition Congresses, and that they were a lot more cooperative in general. The point was that at least most things that had to be done, and some others as well, were accomplished!

The split Congress of 2011-2015 has seen just about total stalemate, gridlock, and failure to accomplish anything, with a GOP House and a Democratic Senate. The four other Congresses in this situation, had also much more difficulty to gain new legislation, but those five from 1911-1913 under William Howard Taft, 1931-1933 under Herbert Hoover, and 1981-1987 under Ronald Reagan still accomplished more, due to the fact that the House was Democratic, and the Senate was Republican, the opposite of the last four years.

So when we have a Democratic Congress, or a split Congress with a Democratic House, historically, things get done; while when we have a Republican Congress, or a split Congress with a Republican House, the ability to get things done is far worse!

So the prognosis for Democratic President Barack Obama and a Republican Congress, led by a party much further to the right than earlier Republicans, to accomplish much in 2015-2016, is gloomy

The Do Nothing 113th Congress Worse Than 112th Congress, And Far Worse Than Truman’s 80th Congress In 1947-1948!

Ronald 1 Comment

History tells us that President Harry Truman ran against the Republican controlled 80th Congress in his election campaign of 1948, calling it a “Do Nothing” Congress.

What he meant was that they were passing laws that he considered counterproductive, including the anti labor Taft Hartley Act, which he vetoed, but passed over his veto by a two thirds vote in both houses of Congress.

But in actuality, that 80th Congress passed over 900 laws, and cooperated with Truman on funding for the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan, and also agreed to creation of the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council and the Defense Department.

By comparison, the 112th Congress of 2011-2012 became the least productive Congress in history, passing fewer than 300 laws, but now the 113th Congress has passed fewer than 150 laws, making them half as accomplished as the previous Congress.

There is a total refusal of Republicans to cooperate at all with Barack Obama, and they have had the shortest work calendar of any Congress, including the previous one!

Now they are taking a five week break, despite so many crucial issues to deal with, and their public opinion rating is the lowest it has ever been!

But will the American people, with the reality of gerrymandering ruling the House of Representatives, be able to unite and give the Democrats back control of the House? Not likely, and the US Senate is also dangerously in play!

So two more years of stalemate and gridlock are likely!

History Of Major Social And Economic Change And Presidential Reelections

Ronald Leave a comment

When one examines American history, in times of major social and economic change, often very controversial, the American people have chosen every time to endorse those changes, no matter how divisive, by reelecting the President who brought about the reforms.

Witness Abraham Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation, followed by a reelection victory in the midst of the Civil War in 1864.

Witness Woodrow Wilson, and the passage of the Federal Reserve Act, Clayton Anti Trust Act, Federal Trade Commission Act, and several labor reforms, and being reelected in 1916.

Witness Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New Deal, and the passage of the National Labor Relations Act and Social Security Act, leading to reelection in 1936.

Witness Harry Truman vetoing the Taft Hartley Labor Act and promoting integration of the the military and Washington, DC, and then winning election in 1948.

Witness Lyndon B. Johnson promoting the Civil Rights Act in 1964, and then winning election to a full term the same year.

Witness Republican Richard Nixon, going along with Democrats, and signing into law the Environmental Protection Agency, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Occupational Safety And Health Administration, and Affirmative Action, and being reelected in 1972.

Now Barack Obama has accomplished major reform on health care, ObamaCare, something millions of Americans already benefit from, so to imagine the American people rejecting it this November, would defy American history, that when major change comes about, it becomes permanent!

A Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore And A Conservative Mount Rushmore: Who Would Be On Such Mount Rushmores?

Ronald 9 Comments

Last Friday, Joe Scarborough and MORNING JOE on MSNBC had distinguished historians assess which Presidents might be on a new, second Mount Rushmore, if such a monument were ever built.

This brought to mind the idea of who might be on a Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore, and who would be on a Conservative Mount Rushmore, if such were ever constructed anywhere in America.

This is mostly just interesting scholarly speculation, but here goes my suggestions for such honoring on both sides of the political spectrum.

LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Robert La Follette, Sr.–Republican Governor (1900-1906) and Senator (1906-1925) of Wisconsin–Mr. Progressive of the early 20th century and 1924 Progressive Party nominee for President.

George Norris–Republican Congressman (1902-1912) and Senator (1912-1942) of Nebraska–the most creative reform figure and longevity of the first half of the 20th century, a bridge between the Progressive Era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson and the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Hubert H. Humphrey–Democratic Mayor Of Minneapolis (1945-1949), Senator (1949-1964, 1970-1978) of Minnesota, and Vice President of the United States (1965-1969) and Democratic Presidential nominee in 1968, who had the most creative record of promoting reform in the years after World War II throughout the 1960s.

Ted Kennedy–Democratic Senator (1962-2009) of Massachusetts, the fourth longest serving US Senator in American history, and the most creative reformer in the years from the 1970s until his death in 2009.

A possible alternative would be Democratic Senator George McGovern of
South Dakota (1922-2012), who ran for President in 1972, and was a major critic of the Vietnam War, one of the most decent men ever in American politics, serving in the Senate from 1963-1981.

CONSERVATIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Arthur Vandenberg–Republican Senator (1928-1951) of Michigan, who opposed the New Deal and was an isolationist in foreign policy through World War II, but then became an internationalist in support of the United Nations and President Harry Truman’s Cold War policy against the Soviet Union after World War II, and potential Presidential candidate twice.

Robert Taft–Republican Senator (1939-1953) of Ohio, son of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft, promoted the anti labor union Taft-Hartley Act, promoted an isolationist foreign policy, and considered Mr. Conservative by his party, and a potential Presidential candidate numerous times.

Barry Goldwater–Senator (1952-1964, 1968-1986) of Arizona, succeeding Robert Taft as Mr. Conservative, and 1964 Republican nominee for President, becoming the hero of conservatives long term, and having an effect on President Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan–Republican Governor of California (1966-1974), and President of the United States (1981-1989), after a career as a movie actor, influenced by the principles and ideas of Barry Goldwater, who he publicly backed in a famous speech in 1964.

The author welcomes commentary on these selections!

Police Officers, Fire Fighters, And The “Divorce” From The Republican Party

Ronald Leave a comment

The Republican Party is involved in a nasty “divorce” proceeding from two groups that have been for a long time proud to be Republicans–police officers and firefighters, with the unions for both occupations regularly endorsing GOP candidates for President, Governor, Senator and other political offices. This “marriage” has been a good deal for the Republican Party, but no longer, thanks to GOP Governors across the country!

Other than the military, what other occupations are more respected as there to protect all of us in America than the police officers and firefighters, who like soldiers at war, sacrifice themselves daily and face dangers most of us have never experienced!

John Kasich, Governor of Ohio, who recently ridiculed a police officer for having the gall to stop him and give him a ticket for reckless driving, has now signed legislation taking away collective bargaining from these loyal unions. A referendum to repeal this legislation is proceeding, and police and fire unions across the nation are actively working to overcome the despicable actions of the Ohio Republican Party, and also to work work against all the other GOP governors who are mistreating those who are there for us every day, loyal to their communities!

Even Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin was smart enough to leave police and fire unions out of his legislation to to take away collective bargaining rights from teachers, nurses, and other public servants, because of his awareness of their endorsement of his candidacy last year. But many police and fire fighters marched and demonstrated at the state capitol in Madison to show their support for those public workers under attack, and made clear their opposition to such actions by the Republicans in the Wisconsin state legislature.

Chris Christie in New Jersey, Paul LePage in Maine, Rick Snyder in Michigan, and now Rick Scott in Florida have also declared war on police and fire fighters, and so this will become a major factor in the Presidential Election of 2012 and in Congressional races and state races next year.

As Rachel Maddow of MSNBC said tonight, this issue could insure that Barack Obama is elected to a second term as President, and that the Democrats could make major gains in the states and in Congress, as a result of the stupid, inane actions by Republican politicians, who will now pay a heavy price politically!

But remember, also, that the Republican Party has ALWAYS been anti labor since the era after Theodore Roosevelt one hundred years ago, and sponsored the anti labor union law, the Taft Hartley Act of 1947, which led to a half century of GOP minority status in Congress until 1994!

The Republican Party is a leopard that has never, and never will, change its spots! Once a enemy of working people, ALWAYS an enemy of working people!

When will working people finally understand and stop voting Republican?