One of the oddities of history seems to be that each generation thinks current political events are new under the sun; nothing like the current firestorm has ever before occurred. George Santayana’s prophesy seems to be an unending truth: Having not learned the lessons of the past, we continue to make the same mistakes.
While there is much gnashing of teeth over the usurpation of individual and states’ rights in the passage of the health care reform bills, we have been through this many times in the past. It should be a source of optimism that we did not commit national suicide over equally thorny issues two centuries ago.
The parallels between the current arguments over the role of the federal government and those of the late 18th century are astounding. Joseph Ellis, in his excellent book, The Founding Brothers, illustrates it with eloquence. My good friend, Bert Spetzler and I have been reading it and he pointed out the similarity of our current dilemmas with those of the past.
In 1790 the United States, consisting of the original 13 colonies, was on the verge of dissolution over three thorny and seemingly irresolvable issues: How governmental debt would be handled, the location of a permanent national capital, and who would make that decision.
The debt of the individual states, incurred largely because of the Revolutionary war and owed to the Netherlands, had to be paid. Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury, strongly believed the United States would never gain a rightful place among the European nations unless the Federal government could be accounted as creditworthy. To do this, he proposed the Federal government assume the debt of the states.
James Madison, and a host of Virginia power-brokers, saw that as an unmitigated disaster. Owning your debt was a sign of independence; to hand that to the Federal government would assign the states to a permanent condition of fealty to a monarch-like system—just the thing for which the Revolutionary War had been fought. Virginia controlled one-third of the national economy and had one-fifth the population. Its borders ran from the Atlantic to the Mississippi and all the way to what is now the Great Lakes region. Rather than let the United States assume their debt, many Virginians thought secession and the forming of an independent country was the only proper course.
New York City was the temporary capital and, after a lot of wrangling, it was moved to Philadelphia until a permanent site could be located. The Pennsylvanians were sure, that once the seat of the government was there, it would never be moved. That decision became hopelessly embroiled in the interests of individual states.
The entire system was on the verge of falling apart over these issues until Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State, came to the rescue. He convened a dinner party at his New York dwelling for Alexander Hamilton and James Madison. To be sure, these problems didn’t get worked out over a couple of glasses of Madeira, but compromises were reached. The Assumption Bill would pass and oddly enough, the Virginians parlayed their support for that into having the capital permanently located in one-hundred square miles of Virginia, hard by the Potomac River. How this came to be was aided immeasurably by Hamilton and Madison agreeing to leave the choice of location up to—who else?—President Washington. No one was going to argue with his decision, not even the incensed Philadelphians.
The conflict of interest problem raised its head: George Washington’s estate, Mt Vernon, was just down the river and, even worse, the President had large holdings in the tract that would become the capital. He was concerned that it would seem self-serving to sell his swampy land to the Federal government. Notwithstanding that problem, he made the decision and no one, at least publicly, voiced objections about it.
Today, we could certainly take the pages from that history and realize several things. First, the Union could have come apart over the Assumption Bill. Second, each side was willing to recognize merits in the opposition’s argument. Third, all parties were willing to give up something for the central ideas found in the Constitution. Finally, having survived a potentially explosive political conflict, the nation was strengthened for the challenges that were to come.
Rather than bombastic threats and predictions of the Apocalypse that we are hearing on all sides, we, the people, should demand of our politicians the same wisdom that has guided America through so many crises. Jefferson, Madison, and Hamilton—we need to make them proud!
By Hayden Hollingsworth [email protected]