Thursday, December 21, 2017

Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and the Progressive Era

By Douglas V. Gibbs
Author, Speaker, Instructor, Radio Host

Excerpt from my upcoming book: 7 Worst Constitutional Liars

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson

The Progressive Era was a grave threat to the United States Constitution.  Defenders of the Progressive Era explain that the time period from around the 1890s until the end of the Woodrow Wilson presidency in 1921 was designed to overthrow corruption in politics, and that the way to accomplish the deed was to initiate a system of government more in line with direct democracy.  Along the way the progressives strengthened the role of the President of the United States (largely through the use of executive orders and self-proclaimed “war powers”), established the Federal Reserve, enacted the 16th and 17th Amendments, established legislation targeting “political machines” and “large corporations”, and initiated a litany of programs that allowed government to intrude upon local issues through “social programs” and “social reform.”

The early emergence of the progressive political movement is largely associated with political leaders such as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.  In truth, the cast of characters was vast, and contrary to academic opinion the political beliefs of those players leaned more towards the teachings of Karl Marx, than the foundation of principles laid out by the delegates of the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

The turn of the century was promising industrial change and technological advances that convinced the progressives that the old world order must be swept away.  Only a new world order would be able to survive the coming changes.  Resolutions for the old problems, and the capacity for managing a rapidly growing congregation of new ones, from the point of view of the progressives, required government intervention to be activated at every level so as to be actively involved in all of the allegedly necessary reforms.  The Constitution, according to the progressives, was outdated, and a dynamic system of direct democracy based on a living and breathing constitution that evolves with the developing wave of social change was the instrument needed to lead the charge into the new century.

The plans of the progressives, however, were at direct odds with the American System as it was established through the U.S. Constitution.  The original intent of the United States Constitution demands that the federal government’s authorities are expressly enumerated, and that the three branches of government are separate and distinct.  The States, as the authors of the Constitution (through their delegates at the convention in Philadelphia, and through their debates during the State ratification conventions), were originally the parents over the federal government.  The central government in Washington, D.C., was established to serve the States and We the People, not the other way around.  To guard against corruption, a series of checks and balances were established, not only in an effort to limit the power of any one person or segment of government, but also to ensure that the excesses of pure democracy did not engulf the republic.  As with politicians with too much power, the people, as well, with too much democratic power, could not be trusted to keep the system limited and true to its original established functions.  The Founding Fathers both feared and despised the destructive nature of pure democracy, and utopianism (progressivism by another name), and specifically wrote the Constitution in the manner that they did so that it may stand the test of time, and resist statist concepts such as the General Will, Jabobism, and the impending assault by progressivism.

The Progressive Era, appearing scarcely more than 100 years after the ratification of the United States Constitution, sought to challenge the thinking of the Founding Fathers, endeavoring to replace the concept of laissez faire with the more modern scheme of collectivism through government schemes (policies championed by supporters of Marxism, and Fabianism).

James Madison wrote in Federalist #45 that “The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal government are few and defined.”

Thomas Jefferson, while not a participant in the Constitutional Convention, was highly influential in the delegation, corresponding daily with a number of the participants, including James Madison.  During his presidency, Jefferson sought to put into practice the limiting principles of government embedded in America’s founding documents.

Legislative accomplishments during the Jefferson Presidency were few and far between, not because it was a failed presidency or because America had a do-nothing Congress, but because the men of that era understood the importance of keeping federal legislation within the scope of the authorities granted by the U.S. Constitution.  Jefferson called good government a “noiseless course.”  No new laws were needed, according to Jefferson, and the laws that were put into play should not be complicated or fit into some kind of long agenda that politicians believe to be necessary in order to justify their existence.

Thomas Jefferson stated, “Laws are made for men of ordinary understand, and should therefore be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense.  Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which make anything mean everything or nothing, at pleasure.”

Jefferson challenged the British Parliament, condemning the legislature across the Atlantic Ocean of writing acts that were “tautologous,” involved, and parenthetical jargon.”  From Jefferson’s point of view, British statutes were “barbarous, uncouth, and unintelligible.”

While presidents like James Madison revealed how important it was that the President of the United States served as a check against unconstitutional legislation with his veto of the “Bonus Bill” in 1817, which would have unconstitutionally earmarked federal funding for internal improvements (an obligation that was considered to belong to the individual States), it was never intended for the President to serve as a check against Congress once the law was in place.  Article II specifies that the President “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

President Theodore Roosevelt over a century later used executive orders (1,006 of them) to take “independent action.”  He believed a “strong President” may use executive orders to do anything not specifically prohibited by the Constitution.

In slightly over 100 years, the view of the Constitution had evolved from the doctrine of enumerated powers, which said the federal government could do nothing except what the Constitution authorized, to Roosevelt’s progressivism, which said it was the “duty” of the president to do “anything that the needs of the Nation demanded unless such action was forbidden by the Constitution or by Law.”  Roosevelt later admitted, “I did greatly broaden the use of Executive power.”

Woodrow Wilson took office in 1913 after an election during which Theodore Roosevelt (a former Republican) ran as the “Bull Moose Progressive Party” candidate with a specific intent to split the Republican vote.  Incumbent Republican President William Howard Taft rejected the idea of a central bank run by international bankers in charge of America’s currency, therefore, he refused to support the new Federal Reserve proposal.  Democrat Woodrow Wilson vowed to sign the act (among others) and was given the presidency through Roosevelt’s interference.

In 1913, Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act, and the States ratified the 16th Amendment (enabling direct taxation against the people) and the 17th Amendment (changing the appointment of U.S. Senators by the State legislatures to a popular vote).  The following year, war broke out in Europe.  While the United States did not declare war until April of 1917, America was involved in many ways in the War in Europe from the very beginning.

During the First World War, President Wilson used “war powers” to impose his progressive will against the United States at all levels of American life.  Wilson’s “implied authority” led him to lead the charge in economic and industrial change, using executive orders and administrative regulations to dismantle Article I, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution.

Article I, Section 1, declares that “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”

During the Nineteenth Century Chief Justice John Marshall had established the practice of judges legislating from the bench through the unconstitutional concept of judicial review, and during the early years of the Twentieth Century Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson perfected the practice of legislating through executive fiat – while, all along, claiming they were not usurping the U.S. Constitution.

The War to End All Wars (World War I) did not accomplish its aim of ending all wars.  It did, however, create an opportunity for socialism to take a major leap forward.  Woodrow Wilson took advantage of the opportunity created by The Great War to implement his own idealistic proposals for global governance, as well.  Progressive efforts in the United States expanded to a series of new collective efforts aimed at addressing worldwide problems that were believed to be beyond the capacity of individual nation-states to solve.  While supporters of internationalism, such as Woodrow Wilson, claimed that the right of nations to self-determination would remain to be respected, the ultimate goal of many of those who sought a New World Order was a global governance system.  They claimed that the loss of individual sovereignty of the various countries was for the purpose of the “global good”.  The early proposals led to the formation of international organizations such as the League of Nations, the United Nations, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).  Other international organizations, such as the Bretton Woods system (1944-1971) and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, 1947-1994) also emerged as a result of their collective drive for globalism.

Progressives and socialists (the differences between the two are few and far between) embraced these new international organizations and regimes in the aftermath of the two World Wars, and worked to expand their scope of power in the hopes of spreading the political principles of collectivism worldwide. 

Woodrow Wilson suffered a severe stroke October 2, 1919.  Without Wilson’s support, the League of Nations was never ratified by Congress.  Wilson served his remaining time in the presidency as an invalid, relinquishing the Office of the Presidency to William Harding March 4, 1921.  Wilson died only a few years later.

The end of the Wilson presidency also brought to a conclusion the Progressive Era.  President Harding, a Republican, campaigned on a motto of a “return to normalcy.”  His successor, Calvin Coolidge, a strict constitutionalist, would lead America away from federal intrusion into the States, and into the most economically prosperous decade of her short history.  The progressives, however, would return just in time to send the world into a Great Depression.  A manipulation of the currency by the federal reserve, ill-timed protectionist trade laws, and a return to federal intrusion into the States (largely through new social programs and public works programs) through the presidency of Herbert Hoover, and then through nearly four terms of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Teddy’s fifth-cousin), made sure the return to normalcy was short-lived.

Theodore Roosevelt passed away January 6, 1919.  After cheating death his entire life, he died in his sleep at his Long Island estate.  He was 60 years old, and had been undone by a coronary embolism.  Rumors have always swirled that say something along the line that Teddy Roosevelt verbalized regret for his progressive ways while on his death bed.  The rumors have never been confirmed, and while the gesture would be a welcomed one, if it existed it came too late.  Roosevelt, and his fellow progressives, had already done their damage.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

No comments: