MAKING AMERICA SAFE FOR DEMOCRACY
What John Adams and Andrew Johnson teach us in the age of Donald Trump
Is there a history lesson that we can use to understand the profoundly disturbing and embarrassing invasion of the U.S. Capitol last Wednesday? Two past presidents offer lessons, good and bad: the second president, John Adams, and the 17th, Andrew Johnson. The two men could not have been more different: Adams respected the law, Johnson, didn’t.
John Adams was at the center of the controversial election of 1800. He was a leading constitutional thinker, having published a four-volume study of republics and democracies. He popularized the familiar adage, “We are a nation of laws, not of men.” No one was a stronger champion for the separation of power among the three branches of government, a principle Adams associated with his political model, the Roman orator Cicero.
He accepted his defeat to Thomas Jefferson and refused to publicly criticize his successor. When he returned home to Quincy, Mass., he sent Jefferson a brief note, wishing him “a quiet and prosperous Administration.”
Though he had lost reelection, the election of 1800 was still not concluded. Nor was it the smooth transition Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse claimed on the floor on Wednesday in his rhapsodic rendering. A small group of Federalists in Congress had decided to subvert the intended order and to promote Aaron Burr over Thomas Jefferson — because in 1800, each elector cast two separate ballots for president and vice president, and Jefferson and Burr inadvertently tied.
So, who would be president and who vice president? While the House of Representatives met to resolve the tie, Adams remained silent.
Burr was Republican, yet Federalists convinced themselves he would be more amenable to their policies. It took 36 votes before the House finally awarded Jefferson the presidency. This was hardly a moment of national glory.
The election tie generated conspiracy theories. Pennsylvania’s Republican governor threatened to send in his state’s 20,000man militia if Burr became president. Other prominent officials proposed hair-brained solutions, such as making Jefferson and Burr co-presidents, or elevating the Chief Justice John Marshall as temporary executive, or even returning Adams to office for four more years, to be followed by Jefferson.
James Madison proposed that Jefferson and Burr issue a join resolution calling for the new Congress to assemble (which would give Republicans the majority) and allowing them to end the tie. All of these plans were scotched.
How was this constitutional crisis resolved? First, the House agreed to rules for voting, requiring concessions on both sides. Next, Burr made any coup impossible by refusing to go along. The leader of House Federalists wrote to Alexander Hamilton that they “had the means to elect Burr but they required his cooperation.” Congress passed the 12th Amendment in 1804, ratified by the states, which recognized party tickets so as to avoid another such disaster. At no point did John Adams exploit the chaos or support any disruptive Federalist effort.
Andrew Johnson presents a very different lesson. Unlike Adams, who studied history and was a skilled practicing attorney, Johnson, a tailor before turning to politics, possessed the arrogance that he knew the law better than anyone else. When his plan failed to peacefully restore the seceding states to the Union, he tried to subvert congressionally-led Reconstruction legislation from within the executive branch.
Furious over the extension of the Freedmen’s Bureau (which provided aid to freed slaves and white war refugees), he turned his veto message into an intemperate harangue. Lashing out at Congress, he dared to contend that the president had greater authority than Congress, because he was “chosen by the people of all the states.” It was a ludicrous power grab, prompting one critic to mock Johnson’s “modesty” by reminding him that he wasn’t elected by anyone. Of course, he assumed the presidency upon the assassination of President
Abraham Lincoln.
Johnson went on a one-man crusade against the government. He publicly whined about his mistreatment. In a self-pitying speech given on Washington’s birthday, he mentioned himself more than 200 times while accusing Republicans in Congress of being traitors. He basically contended that Congress, in carrying out its regular business, was no different than Confederates engaging in treason.
This was Johnson’s “There are bad people on both sides” moment. When his veto of the Freedman’s Bureau bill was overturned, as was his veto of the Civil Rights Act, he actively worked to undermine the military’s role in Reconstruction. He openly called for the former Confederate states to defy Congress. He gave legitimacy to secret, subversive organizations like the Klu Klux Klan. Johnson imagined he was a law unto himself.
And so he, like the similarly predisposed
Trump, was impeached. He came within one vote of being removed from office. He was shamed and forced to back down. Impeachment alone kept Johnson from further subverting the rule of law and abusing his power. Later, the caption of one cartoon portrayed him as an ex-president cast into “oblivion.”
Twice, then, extra-constitutional solutions, military intervention and violence were all rejected. Compromise and constitutional reform saved the day.
In 1806, ex-President Adams presented a critique of political aggression to a fellow signer of the Declaration of Independence, Dr. Benjamin Rush, emphasizing the absurdity of obtaining advantage through violent means. “People arm themselves against each other, only to support the mad pretensions and to cherish the Stupid Pride of an handful of Despots, Nobles and Priests,” he wrote, anticipating the dictum of his near-contemporary Carl Von Clausewitz
other means. More than 200 years after the contested election of 1800 was rationally resolved, many Republicans are refusing to play along with Trump’s conspiracy. By defanging the farcical performances of their fellow Sens. Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley on Wednesday, Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney helped to short-circuit the 2021 coup. But far too many, led by the unhinged president himself, stoked the fire rather than putting it out. Seeing the Capitol overrun with rioters made a mockery of our republic. Political and constitutional deliberation, understanding and respect for the rule of law, are the mainstays of our political history that President Trump has long dismissed as irrelevant. Vice President Mike Pence is just the latest national figure whom he has flattered for as long as he remained servile, and tried to threaten with political exile when he demonstrated a will of his own. The president did the one thing he’s good at, in turning the Capitol into a primetime reality TV circus for his viewing pleasure. Just as he dismissed the rulings of the courts, Trump’s entire behavior reveals his extra-constitutional impulses. He doesn’t care about institutions, laws or debate, which is why his actions are not only outrageous but antidemocratic. For his entire presidency, he ceded the work of governing to others, while focusing almost exclusively on collecting a club of adoring fans. A good many of the nation’s founders belonged to learned societies, organized “for the Promotion of Useful Knowledge.” This helped make the framers of the Constitution humane in their understanding. It is high time all presidential candidates take a citizenship test — minimally — so that voters can discover what basic civic knowledge they possess, before the first vote is cast. The authority of the Constitution rests on respect for the rule of law, and punishing any who endanger the republic. The framers were the “law and order party,” which mantle today’s Republican Party has hijacked, very selectively adhering to its principles. In the aftermath of Wednesday’s debacle, it makes more sense than ever for Congress to reject the much-touted legal interpretation, lacking any constitutional sanction, that a president cannot be prosecuted while in office. Similarly, let us also revive thenSen. Walter Mondale’s 1974 proposal that would have authorized the Senate to override a presidential clemency act that lacks any legal merit. Congress should make it a legal requirement that all future presidential candidates release their tax returns and divest themselves from all private business holdings that could create a conflict of interest. And they should not shy from censuring or expelling a member of the House or Senate who violates his or her oath of office to uphold the Constitution. When the Constitution is under attack, and new laws are needed to redress new problems, Congress has a duty to find a remedy. That is what Congress did after the election of 1800 and it is why it impeached Andrew Johnson. If we have learned anything from the past four years, it is that governing can never again be allowed to become a carnival sideshow or a platform for craven grandstanding. Seditious rants and indulgence of the cult of personality have done more damage to the executive than occasion a loss of dignity. John Adams wasn’t kidding when he looked at historical examples, and warned: “There never was a Democracy yet that did not commit suicide.”