DOES IT MATTER?

By Edwin Cooney

A few weeks ago, a reader of these weekly musings asked me to stipulate in a column why it matters whom we elect to serve as America’s 45th president next November.  There are numerous ways of looking at the inquiry. However, there’s only one constructive answer to that question. Before offering it, let’s briefly examine the overall nature and historic conduct of the presidency.

The president’s ultimate powers lie in the meaning and scope of his command and executive or administrative authorities.  Between the presidencies of George Washington and Theodore Roosevelt, the powers of the presidency were executed either in reaction to a circumstance (such as war or a rebellion) or to a condition such as a need to respond to possible foreign encroachment (as in the case of the Monroe Doctrine).  The constitution outlines the president’s administrative duties rather than his or her socio/political options.  Eighteenth and nineteenth century presidents weren’t expected to solve social crises which is why issues such as the legitimacy, existence and the possible advancement of slavery went wanting only to be settled by civil war.  Then it all began to change with the dawn of the turbulent 20th century -- for along came Teddy Roosevelt.

Upon the death of William McKinley, TR went into action after becoming President just as he had as Civil Service Commissioner under President Benjamin Harrison, as Police Commissioner of New York City, as Assistant Secretary of the Navy under President McKinley and as Governor of New York State. In his first annual message to Congress in December 1901, he asserted that even with all the good that private enterprise had done for the nation, for the health of the free market, and for the protection of consumers, big business needed to be regulated. In October 1902 during the Anthracite Coal Strike, Roosevelt forced management to meet with labor to settle the dispute.  If management had refused even to meet with union representatives, it was likely that TR’s northeastern GOP constituents would freeze and thus turn into Democrats by Election Day.  Thus, the young bombastic Teddy Roosevelt took charge of the negotiations personally presiding over the meeting from a wheelchair since he had suffered a leg injury in a recent carriage accident.  While the result wasn’t recognition of the right to unionize as Teddy had hoped, a temporary settlement was reached which lasted through the winters of 1902 and 1903.  Hence, the new, young, energetic, idealistic, and determined president rescued his party while preserving his political prestige. Next, TR went on to shepherd passage of The Conservation Act of 1902 which set aside public lands primarily in the west for the preservation of wildlife and our national resources.  Passage in 1906 of the Meat Inspection and Pure Food and Drug Acts protected the health of consumers in the wake of decades of shoddy food and drug preparation practices.  Thus between 1901 and 1909 TR began involving the government in a way that affected the lives of the people more directly and continuously than ever before.  By broadening the scope of presidential responsibilities, early, mid and late progressive or liberal presidencies have brought about an expectation that government is a legitimate tool for protecting the livelihoods of the people.

This is in contrast to the conservative or more traditional outlook toward government which holds that the only legitimate responsibility of the federal government is to protect us from foreign threat or invasion.  As conservatives see it, your health, education, safety, and prosperity under the constitution are not the responsibility of the federal government.  Therefore, presidents and congresses pass laws and appoint judges they conclude are most likely to adhere to their distinct ideals of governing.

From time to time, such as in the 1950s and 1960s, the two major political parties tended to be somewhat alike in their socio/political outlook.  Southern Conservatives hated federal encroachment in civil rights but more than welcomed the federal government when it appropriated money for badly needed federal projects or, if you prefer, federal jobs.  Northern liberals were suspicious of the military industrial establishment when it justified the Vietnam War, but like their Conservative Southern cousins, they accepted the employment it offered.

There are those who will tell you that America is lately controlled by certain powerful families or banks or international ideological entities rather than by the collective will of its people. If you buy such conclusions, you surrender to a reality that doesn’t exist.  Change, however small it often seems to be, is inevitable. History demonstrates that fundamental change takes place when a significant percentage of the American people consent to strong executive and legislative leadership as they did in 1933 under FDR and in 1981 under Ronald Reagan.  Otherwise, even inevitable change occurs at a glacial pace. There are too many corporations, causes, and politicians competing for your allegiance for what you believe in not to matter.  If you believe you don’t make a difference, you may relieve yourself from the heady demands of citizenship, but by so doing you starve America of its most valuable natural resource.

That resource is spelled Y O U!  

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

EDWIN COONEY