Maxine has been reflecting on the men and women who laid the foundation of our Republic and the prices that some of them paid for it. (Yes, women laid the foundation and paid a price, too. Someone had to mind the farm, raise the kids, run the household while the men were off fomenting rebellion and at least one woman did jail time for her husband’s role in that rebellion.)
While visiting Monticello a few years back, Maxine picked up a small book, “The Declaration of Independence with Short Biographies of Its Signers” published by Applewood Books in Bedford, MA. Here is a tally of the sacrifice of personal blood, sweat, and treasure by some of the signers and their families according to the book:
William Whipple (1730-1875, New Hampshire) who resigned the Continental Congress in 1777 to become Brigadier General of the New Hampshire militia. “He recruited, equipped, and led troops against Burgoyne,” i.e., he spent his own money.
William Ellery (1727-1820, Rhode Island) “A successful lawyer [who] so infuriated the British with his patriotic activities that they burned his home and destroyed most of his property when they took Newport.”
William Floyd (1734-1821, New York) “British Troops occupied his mansion and estate for seven years while he served in federal Congress and the state senate.”
Francis Lewis (1713-1803, New York) “A wealthy businessman...when the British captured Long Island, his property was destroyed and his wife taken prisoner and confined for several months.”
Richard Stockton (1730-1781, New Jersey) “Captured by the British, he was treated harshly for having signed the Declaration of Independence and lost his health as well as his wealth.”
John Hart (1714-1780, New Jersey) “A delegate to the General Congress in 1776, he lost everything when the British overran New Jersey.”
Abraham Clark (1726-1794, New Jersey) “His two sons were incarcerated by the British on the prison ship Jersey.”
Robert Morris (1733-1806, Pennsylvania) ‘When the United States could not obtain credit, he personally secured the financing necessary to continue and complete the Revolutionary War,” i.e., he used his own money to pay Washington’s troops.
Thomas Nelson, Jr. (1738-1789, Virginia) “The first to propose a state militia to defend the rights of the people...he used his own resources to recruit troops.”
Edward Rutledge (1749-1800, South Carolina) “...returned to SC to help defend the state and was taken prisoner in 1780 during the siege of Charleston and shipped to St. Augustine (where) he was exchanged after a year.”
Thomas Heyward, Jr. (1746-1809, South Carolina) “Commissioned during the Revolutionary War, he as wounded, then later captured and sent to St. Augustine for a year.”
Arthur Middleton (1743-1788, South Carolina) “He joined in the defense of South Carolina, had his estate ravaged by the British in 1779, was taken prisoner in 1780, and sent to St. Augustine for a year.”
Lyman Hall (1721-1784, Georgia) “The British confiscated his property...”
George Walton (1740-1804, Georgia) “Walton remained in Congress until 1778 when he returned home to help defend the state as colonel of a regiment. [He was] wounded and captured in the war.”
The point being that the individual’s price of doing the right thing for a nation can be quite high even if the individual expects to benefit, too. Moreover, the above list does not include the time and money costs for all members of Congress of the many tortuous hours spent on horseback and in carriages on bad roads traveling to and from Philadelphia at their own expense or the many months or years spent away from home, hearth and kin.
Maxine draws two conclusions from the above: 1) Don’t live near the coast if you’re going to become openly and publicly involved in a rebellion with a major naval power and 2) the current price of principle is too low. (Thanks and credit to Scriptamus for making the latter so clear.)
Is it too much to ask that modern day politicians pay some price for obstructing or advancing major legislation? Imagine watching Frank Capra’s film, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, only to find that when push comes to shove Mr. Smith can’t be bothered to incur the inconvenience and unpleasantness of a filibuster.
Maxine is no political scientist, but as far as she can tell, filibusters no longer require the kind of conviction and dedication to principle that would make standing and holding the floor and one’s bladder for 24 hours a small price to pay. When Maxine thinks of lawmakers she admires, Senator Strom Thurmond never comes to mind, but she has some respect for his willingness to be inconvenienced for the sake of his misguided principles.
In their truest form, filibusters impose costs on the filibusterer and on the majority party which must maintain a quorum in order to wear down the filibusterer. The costs should in some measure reflect the strength of conviction of both majority and minority. To have a real filibuster, senators have to sleep at the Capitol building; they have to give up campaign fund raising; they have to give up trips home to see their families. In short, they have to inconvenience themselves in direct proportion to their conviction and commitment to principle in order to produce laws over strong minority opposition.
Ten percent of the population is experiencing the “inconvenience” of unemployment; 52 million Americans are expected to experience the “inconvenience” of not having health insurance in 2010; 2.8 million US homeowners experienced the “inconvenience” of foreclosure in 2009 with a higher number possible in 2010. These are the real prices of unprincipled stalemate and obstruction.
The Democrats have the opportunity and the votes to deliver the rudiments of health reform, something that once in place can be modified more easily than the initial hurdle of getting it in place. If the Republicans want to block it, then MAKE THEM FILIBUSTER. Please make them pay the same high price for obstruction that many of us are paying for the resulting inaction.
There would be no United States of America if the signers of the Declaration of Independence and the framers of the Constitution had shared our current legislators’ preferences for convenience at any price. It’s hard to imagine our lawmakers paying out of their own pockets for a bumpy 10 day carriage ride to DC or writing checks on their own accounts to keep the Republic intact or risking incarceration and the loss of property to birth a nation. Is it asking too much that they occasionally inconvenience themselves, that they gladly pay a higher price in time, inconvenience and foregone campaign contributions, when they hold a majority, have a bill, and know that the right thing to do is to make it law?
Wonderful post!
Our politicians all have seriously disabling cases of 'electile disfunction'. (I just made that up - aren't I clever?)
They gulp handfulls of Viagra made of whatever will get them re-elected.
Which made the President's statement that he'd rather be a good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president, well, shoot. Maybe that is what caused the Earthquake in Haiti!
Of note, in considering the peculiarities of human nature, is the fact that most - if not all - of those southern patriots who sacrificed so much for their country's freedom and independence were, in fact, slave owners.
Ish.
Posted by: Patience-please | 01/31/2010 at 09:50 AM
"Electile Dysfunction". I have to remember that. :-) You're right that BHO's statement was rather earth shaking for a politician (if he means it).
And, yes, they botched the slavery issue. But, it is still remarkable that they fomented a revolution and then provided a Constitution that transferred so much economic and political power away from the top of the economic pyramid and to the lower and middle. I'm sure some were motivated by self-interest, but I have to believe that some, especially those who paid the highest prices, were also motivated by commitment to a principle or ideal.
Posted by: Maxine Udall (girl economist) | 02/01/2010 at 08:21 AM