Transcripts For CSPAN3 Marc 20240705

Little bit about mark c johnson. Hes the author books and a u. S. Senate history and a frequent commentator on american and political history. Mr. Johnson is also a fellow, the Mansfield Center for the university, montana. His work has appeared the new york times, the Washington Post, the bulwark, california journal, politics and public policy. Montana. The magazine of western history and the indiana magazine of history. He is a columnist for the lewiston tribune. Idaho, and writes regularly on the blog many things considered. His previous books for the university of Oklahoma Press are tuesday massacre for Senate Elections and the radicalization of the republican party, a study of how independent campaigns upended american politics after 1980 and political hellraiser a biography of montana new deal era senator Burton K Wheeler and that is a spur Award Finalist by the western writers of johnson served as a press as the press secretary and chief of staff to idahos longest serving governor, cecil d andrus, and is a graduate of south dakota state university. He lives in oregon. Please help me welcome mark c johnson. Thank you. Thank you, suzanne. Appreciate the lewis and clark library. This event tonight. Its good to see you and thanks to my friends from the local independent bookstore, Montana Book Company for being here tonight, weve been on a whirlwind tour across montana and its been great. What a privilege it is to visit the state that sent Mike Mansfield to the United States senate four different times. If you know anything about books, you know that its a Community Event requires many different people contributing the scholars and historians whose work you rely upon to try to get the straight, the people who are willing to talk to you about the subject, the archivists and the librarians help you find the records. And in my case, my editor in chief, my marketing director, my Vice President , dr. Trish johnson. Now, thats hard for me to believe, that tomorrow she will have stuck with me for 38 years. Were celebrating our wedding anniversary tomorrow by listening to me give a speech. So there you are. In all seriousness. Tricia is operated photocopy being machines from missoula to atlanta. The Carter Library from the the fdr library in hyde park, new york, to the state archives in phenix, arizona. She knows her way around these libraries and has found some wonderful that has found its way into my books books. The first line of my book, mansfield and dirksen, giants of the senate is pretty simple. It says this is a story, a United States senate that no longer exists. I set out write this book because i really did want to write about Mike Mansfield even that don opendoor for a really great reporter for the Washington Post for many years had written an open door for sadly to say is no longer with us. But don wrote the definitive biography of Mike Mansfield there was nothing could do that would improve upon that. He had an opportunity to spend hours and hours with the senator doing interviews and you know really probing mansfields personality and substance. So i to find a different angle to approach mansfields story and it was sort of by serendipity that i came upon the relationship that exists between mansfield and his republican counterpart in senate, Everett Dirksen from illinois. So the book really focuses the period from early in 1961 when Mike Mansfield becomes the senate leader, replacing Lyndon Johnson and all the way through the sixties until death in 1969. Few montanans know that Mike Mansfield remains the longest serving leader in the senates history a truly phenomenal public. Another great. Washington post reporter and columnist broder said, was the greatest american he had ever met. And its pretty high praise coming from a guy who covered every president from eisenhower to barack obama. So i what i set out to try to write a new interpretation, if you will, of mansfield, its importance to the senate as an institution and his absolute embrace of the idea of civility, comedy, a willingness to work across the political divide, mutual respect, and a word that he two words that he often used selfrestraint, political selfrestraint. How do you exercise the power you have and not abuse it . How do you make the institution of the senate function correctly . One of the theories that i brought to the book and i hope the book proves the theory that both of these guys were what i call Senate Institute analysts, meaning that they really, in the institution of the senate. Mansfield was often quoted saying he had three great loves. His wife, maureen montana, and the senate. So these guys really had respect for this institution. And admittedly a very quirky institute, even if i were to say United States senate to you today, what words would normally first come to mind. Aquaman. Dysfunction, maybe hyper partizanship, getting nothing done. Frequent common in the press about the senate just not working very well. I was struck reading a piece in the atlantic magazine recently by mckay coppins, who is produced a new book on utah senator mitt romney. And romney kind of unburdened himself over the course of many months, talking the atlantic reporter about his life in the senate and how really unsavory it was in so many respects in essence, romney said, you know, most of what happens in the senate is just posturing to, get on tv to create 12 or 15. Second soundbite that winds up on a twitter feed somewhere and that the greatest deliberative body in the world hardly ever deliberates. The speeches on the senate floor are usually given to an empty chamber and often focus on a piece of legislation that everyone knows is not going to pass. So thats the senate that unfortunately has come to bin the 21st century. You to realize this is the most institution perhaps anywhere in a western with the possible exception of the british house of lords. Every state has, two representatives in the Senate Without regard to population as James Madison wrote in the federalist paper 62. There no disarray of each state having two senators had no basis democratic theory, but was merely an expedient to get the small states to originally embrace the constitution and come into the union. So as a result, wyoming. Has 585,000 residents. Have the same number of senators as. 39 million resident. But thats the way the senate is structured. Thats in the constitution. There are quirky rules in senate. The unlimited debate rule requiring a supermajority vote of 60 votes. Now to cut off debate, to move to almost any decision the senate often operates on consent, which is difficult to get as you can tell by a former auburn football coach who is now happens to be a senator from alabama who is holding up literally 300 or more top military appointments because hes put a hold on them over a dispute with the biden administration. So all of these quirky rules and the fact that the worlds deliberative body, as its been called, no longer really deliberates is the senate that we have now. Mansfield and dirksen understood rules. They understood the limits notions that are built into the constitu version and somehow they figured out how to make the senate work in that period when. They shared leadership in the 1960s. And can tell by the demographic in the room that of you are old enough to remember the decade of the sixties. It was not the beatles or, the summer of love or sending a man to the moon and returning safely to earth. It was a very tumultuous time in our country. Civil rights protests in the south. Across the country. Church bombings in birmingham that claimed the lives four young africanamerican girls college. Literally murdered. Four going to the south to simply to help black americans get registered to vote. There were Great International tensions. The cuban missile crisis. The bay of pigs at the beginning of the kennedy administration. And you know, really the the beginning, if you will of a really intense period of cold war between the united and the soviet union. So by historical standards it wasnt a pleasant time at all. Yet somehow during the that period when mansfield dirksen were in leadership, they accomplished some amazing feats of legislative some major legislative accomplishments that if we look at them, with the hindsight of today, really, truly, truly do seem remarkable. Let me talk just a little bit about these two guys utterly personalities. Dirksen was flamboyant an actor as, a young man. He really wanted to be an actor. He wrote about 100 plays as a young man. None of which were published. But he really enjoyed the limelight. He wanted to be on the stage. Finally, his mother convinced him that he could not make a living doing that. It wasnt an honorable profession. So he went into politics. Show business by other means, perhaps. But he he cultivated a certain persona as a senator, as a politician, a political figure that makes him think unlike anybody in our politic today, he had an unruly mop of white hair that almost always needed a comb run through it. His suit jackets typically were two or three sizes too big, so he looked kind of schlumpy most of the time. But he had a great voice. One reporter dubbed him the wizard of ooze, and that that stuck. Others referred to his honey tonsils. He could one heck of a political speech, perhaps the most distinctive voice at the time, with the exception of John Kennedys boston twang or, a boston brogue or Lyndon Johnsons hill country twang. He was a superb orator. Never one to use ten words when a hundred would work better. The photo shows in one of his favorite poses. He would actually climb up on top of desk in his office for his Weekly News Conference with capitol reporters, set their buddha like crosslegged, smoking a cigaret, taking questions from reporters. As i said, mansfield the polar opposite shy, quiet, ramrod straight. Perhaps a function of marine corps training. A College History professor. The university of montana. Before politics an expert in asian history and remarkably, seemingly devoid of all ego and the need for publicity. Once on the abc program issues and answers in space of a 30 minute interview, Mike Mansfield answered 62 separate questions. Many with a simple yap or nope. An with i havent the faintest. Reporters loved him. And unlike virtually every other politician then and now, he was generally genuinely publicity shy. I have a story in the book about an interview that mansfield did with neal mcneil, who was a Time Magazine correspondent many years on capitol hill and he tells the story of pulling mansfield off the senate floor at one point to tell him that the editors of time had decided, put as he put it, mansfield mansfields face on mount rushmore. They were going to put him on the cover of Time Magazine. And mansfield said, well thats awful. How can we stop that . He did not literally did not want the publicity, but he did wind up on the cover of Time Magazine. This was in 1964. If you can see the banner in the upper corner of the photo of the cover, it asks the question democrats control a democratic senate. This was a period in which the senate was launching into what would become the extended debate over the Civil Rights Act of 64 . Dirksen contrast loved the press attention and. I would argue that mansfield understood the importance of dirksens public and made the most of it in terms of giving him the opportunity to be the Senate Spokesman on issues like civil rights and Voting Rights. Again, this is this is from the book. Dirksen became so skillful and so comfortable in his often spontaneous dealings with washington reporters that he would often climb on top of a desk. Cbs correspond note roger mudd, who covered the epic filibuster against the Civil Rights Act in 1964, watched dirksen during the day after day. During momentous period. As he put it, maneuver, wheedle. Dissent cajole. Bargain. Beg and borrow. And admitted. And roger mudd admitted. The senator developed an intimacy that at times came close to crossing the line that ought to separate the press from a politicians, from a. On one occasion, dirksen joked with reporters and i quote, ive decided to become dull, morose and boring these press meetings. Its the only course you give me no choice. I tell the joke and you convert it into an international incident. I coin a whimsical term and you make appear that im at odds with the president. I indulge in some polite banter, and you interpret it as a split in the party. I engage in bit of twaddle and it becomes a crisis. I inject a bit of flap doodle into our pleasant relationship. And i get on the front page. You have an unsafe breed. From now on, i shall become the consummate bore. I shall be insufferably dull and blase. I shall turn aside questions with a shrug or a grunt or a profound or a no comment. You only have yourselves to blame. Of course, he couldnt keep the pledge. So. So too. Just go further into the mansfield and dirksen relations. Nothing exemplifies ability of these guys to Work Together on a bipartisan in a bipartisan. Then the senates historic passage in 1964 of the civil rights, an act that for the First Time Since the war tempted to legislate out of our system. Segregation to make it possible for all americans to have to be treated equally in terms of accommodate in public spaces and not to be discriminated against. It was hugely controversial. But consistent with the belief that dirksen had to be not only seen as influencing the civil rights if he was indeed going to be able to support it. Mansfield had to bully believe that dirksen had a obligation to. His republican colleagues to be not just appear to be a leader, but to be a real leader of the senate on this. So right from the beginning of the debate over civil in 1964, just to put this in a little context, president john dies in november of 1963, having introduced somewhat belatedly and that in the sense of many historians a civil rights. Lyndon johnson up that bill and pledges to carry on with kennedys and johnson being a master political realizes that the moment is right to really try to push this legislation forward. But enormous obstacles stand in his way not the least being the reluctance the unwillingness in fact, the the absolute opposition of southern segregationist democrat to the legislation, a major constituency of, Lyndon Johnsons democratic party. So in order for civil rights bill to pass in 1964 and later the Voting Rights act to pass in 1965, it was absolutely imperative that Mike Mansfield be able to work across the aisle and get republican votes that that Everett Dirksen can deliver. Ironically, as one historian has pointed out, mans field actually accumulated more political power in this by giving it away. Dirksen. He was held in higher regard across. The political aisle. His approach to civility modesty, fairness, candor. Even earned him more respect from the partizan across the partizan divide and his influence grew as gave responsibility for leadership to his republican colleague. This picture is emblematic of dirksens role in that period. So hes meeting with many the top leaders of the Civil Rights Movement in 1964, dr. Martin luther king james farmer thats walter ruther, the president of the united auto workers, a major benefactor. The Civil Rights Movement. And, of course, right in front of, dirksen is a very young john lewis, a future congressman from georgia. So dirksens in the middle of the picture now. Mansfield was meeting with these folks, too. But youll wont find a picture of him doing so. He believed it was absolutely imperative that the republican leader be seen across country speaking to the American Public on the benefits of civil rights. So mansfield gave dirksen the opportunity to maneuver within the republican caucus, knowing that he had to be seen as influencing the legislation, had to be seen as the person who was negotiating with president johnson in some cases had to be seen as the the person who was really leading the senate forward on this important issue. Now, i argue mansfield, had established the strategy. He knew how to get the piece of legislation passed, but the important and critical part of the strategy was to be able to ensure that there were votes enough to get it passed and ultimately dirksen lived up to his side of the in a grand way. He produced 27 of the 33 republicans in the senate at that time in favor of the civil rights bill. Interesting enough not barry goldwater, who was going to be everyone figured would be the republican president ial nomination in november. He would be the president ial candidate in 1964 against johnson. Dirksen was quoted in his speech kind of bringing the Civil Rights Act to a climax. The debate to a climax. He quoted victor as stronger than. All the armies is an idea. Has an idea whose time has come. Now people have gone back and tried. Find that exact quote from victor hugo. And he didnt really say it that way. But one one historian has argued that dirksen actually improved on victor hugo. Note of all the democratic no votes, as i mentioned earlier or alluded to earlier, came from the states of the old confederacy, prompting Lyndon Johnson to famously say to bill moyers that democrats had lost the for a generation. A prediction in that has turned out to be decidedly optimistic. Now dirksen deserves great credit for the legislation passing senate at a time when as i said there was great turmoil in the country about this legislation. And he got some pushback in montana. There are letters, the file people say, constituents saying, why are you pushing, pushing so hard on the civil rights issue . Its not a big issue in montana. Its not something we need to do, be concerned about. Yet he did it. He knew it was important to the country. He knew it was important to the institution of, the senate, to be able to deal with such an important issue and ultimately he knew it was important to his own party to be seen as advancing civil rights. So dirksen deserves lot of credit for rounding up those republican votes and for being an eloquent spokesman for civil as a republican, mansfield said simply, yup, i was after the votes, not the publicity, and we got them. Heres another photo of dirksen. Not an atypical pose. Interestingly enough, the most famous attributed to Everett Dirksen. A billion here, a billion there. And soon youre talking real money. He never said that. The folks at the Dirksen Congressional Center in pekin illinois have done extensive trying to find that quote and. It doesnt exist. It sounds like something would have said, but as a matter of fact, he did not actually say that. This is my favorite photo, the book. Again, dirksen in the middle of the picture and to of dirksen hes admiring his own portrait. Well, mansfield kind of peeks around the corner, over his shoulder. Youll notice in the background, the portrait is a little bust of Abraham Lincoln dirksen, very proud of the fact that he came from central illinois, a portion of the state that lincoln had represented in congress in the 1840s. So youll notice in the lapel of mansfields jacket is his marine corps emblem, which he wore proudly, virtually every day of his public service. As far as we can tell. Mike mansfield, the only member of congress ever to serve in three different branches of the u. S. Military. He lied his way into the navy at age 16 by falsifying his birth certificate in order to be able to enlist. Served in the navy during world war, later served in the army, and then eventually in the marine, including a short period of time in china. And then came back to montana after his military service. And like so many young men of that period, without prospects a high school dropout. He went to work in the mines butte in the worst possible. Being a mucker, the guy shovels the war into the into the underground carts so they can be taken out of the mine. Dirty, backbreaking, hot. Really not very good way to think about spending rest of your life. He was fortunate in that period that he met maureen and maureen hayes, who was a teacher in butte, and she convinced him that in order to fulfill his potential, he really had to complete his education. So she said, i will work and put you through school while you can have an opportunity to go to college. And so mansfield essentially earned his High School Equivalency degree, pursuing his bachelors degree at the university of montana. He ultimately got a a match masters degree in history and focused on primarily on asian history. He taught at the university. Dirksens background in some respect quite similar, came from a really hardscrabble. Grew up on a farm and central illinois. Served in world war one also saw combat in france came back to illinois and as i said, gave up his theatrical ambitions to go into politics, elected to a local city council and ultimately elected to congress. 1932. In the Franklin Roosevelt landslide, which was no, no mean accomplishment for a republican to a brand new freshman republican to be elected in a landslide that democrats captured control of the congress in overwhelming fashion. So quite an example of two politicians who kind of came from less than edmund pages backgrounds and rose to the pinnacle of political power in the sixties. And in mansfields case, all the way through the seventies, until his retirement. In 1977. So another favorite picture of took place outside the white house in 1962. All of the democratic leadership had gone to meet with president kennedy. So this is after the meeting. The press conferences breaking up in the driveway of. The white house. Lyndon johnson, the Vice President. Then in the middle. Speaking to House Speaker mccormick. A future speaker. Carl at the far edge of the frame. And hale boggs, louisiana, who was the House Majority whip at the time. On the other side of the frame, George Smathers from florida, who was the conference chairman on the democrat side, and Hubert Humphrey was the majority whip. And mansfields got his back to. The camera, hes leaving. John kennedy was so taken with this photo of mansfield that he had a copy made and inscribed it to mansfield. He said to mike, who when to stay and when to. At that mansfield and kennedy had a particularly personal and political relationship. I would venture to say no majority leader in the history of the senate has had a closer relationship with the president than mansfield had with john kennedy. They came to the senate in the same election in 1952. They sat next to each other in the back row of the senate during their freshman time, freshman term. Irish catholics, admittedly, kennedy, a little different from upbringing. A young man, the mansfield, but nonetheless they became very close almost like a an uncle mansfield being a little older, like an uncle and a nephew or, a father and a son, almost very, very close relationship. When Lyndon Johnson became John Kennedys Vice President and moved on from being the senates powerful majority leader, there was, discussion in the white house about who should replace johnson in the senate. And kennedy said, well, its got to be my i want somebody up there that i can trust. And he that person. So they a very close relationship. This picture was taken september 25th, 1963, in billings at the Yellowstone County fairgrounds. Thanks to my friends at the Billings Gazette for letting me use the photo in the book. The occasion was a trip across many western states by kennedy that that fall in preparation. Hes thinking about the 1964 reelection. So he made a stop in billings and a stop in several other states in the west ostensibly to talk about conserve. We didnt use the word environmental in those days but to talk about conserve nation issues. But by one account, he sort of tired of the message by the time he got to billings and he really wanted to talk about the limited Nuclear Ban Treaty that had just passed the senate the day before arrived in billings. So begins his speech with fulsome praise of Mike Mansfield. And then he praises Everett Dirksen for. The bipartisan leadership that they displayed in getting that fundamental important Nuclear Treaty in place in 1963. The foundational treaty for every subsequent effort control nuclear arms a sense that period. Kennedy considered the Nuclear Test Ban the singular important policy accomplishment of his administration. And he credited mansfield and dirksen with getting it done in the senate. That treaty passed with yes votes 19 opposed. Many of the opposition votes came from those southern who would later buck kennedy and johnson on rights. One more quick story about mansfield and kennedy. When the president is assassinated, less two months after this photograph was made, november second, 1963, in dallas, Jackie Kennedy said she wanted mansfield to present the eulogy at the Memorial Service for the president in the Capitol Rotunda. And was later told, well, you know dictates that really someone from the house should speak well and perhaps the supreme court. So she ultimately acquiesced to that speaker mccormick spoke at the memorial, as did justice earl warren. But the only speech thats remembered is mansfields speech. I want to read just a of it. The speech that the was somewhat controversial in some circles at the time, because i dont think people understood what mansfield was trying to do. Its almost a poem as opposed to a speech. And he had seen a newspaper article over that between kennedys on friday and the Memorial Service a couple of days later that made reference to mrs. Kennedy jackie taking wedding ring from her hand and placing it in the president s hand in the casket before, you know, the and before the Memorial Service. And he used that imagery of the first lady taking the ring her finger, and putting it in his hand to kind of try gather his eulogy. So he said there was a sound of laughter and in a moment it was no. And so she took a ring from her finger and placed it in his hand. There was a wit in. A man neither young nor, old, but a wit full of an old wisdom and a childs. And then in a moment was no more. And so took a ring from her finger and placed it in his hand. I shall never forget Mike Mansfields speech. Lady bird johnson. Later in her diary, he the most precise and, restrained of men, repeated and over the phrase. And she took a ring from her finger and placed in his hand. William manchester wrote the famous book the death of a president about events in dallas leading up to and after kennedys murder. And he wrote of the eulogy only jacqueline could judge Mike Mansfield and she couldnt believe what she was hearing. She excuse me, she didnt know a eulogy be this magnificent. Up into his suffering eyes and his gaunt mountain man face. She thought his profile was a 16th century el greco. To her, the speech was eloquent as a greek oration, or lincolns letter to. The mother, who had lost five sons in battle. It didnt turn aside from ghastly reality of what had happened. It was mrs. Kennedy thought. The one thing that was said that reflected what had happened. So ten years later and a poignant note in archive in missoula of Jackie Kennedy writing a personal, handwritten note to mansfield thanking him for this eulogy. After he completed his talk, he walked to cross to where she was seated in the Capitol Rotunda and presented a copy of eulogy to her. And she said, did you know that i wanted that. So very close relationship. Ten years later, one of the networks conducted a memorial. Ten years after the kennedy assassination, john and mrs. Kennedy watched it and prompted her to write mansfield note again, very poignant that exists in his to this day. So quite a profound relationship he was. Mansfield was definitely a very impacted in a very dramatic way by kennedys death and by the death of Robert Kennedy as well, prompting him to support very controversial in montana in 1968, the gun control act that passed the congress that year. Lee metcalf, colleague in the senate, said mansfield is the only democrat in the west who could vote for gun control and get away. It. So a remarkable relationship between these two guys that in many respects transcended the partizan politics of the jobs they held, they would write, you know, really poignant, touching, friendly letters to other not the kind of letters that you think of politicians writing sort of out of sense of duty to another politician and to having having to be nice to eac other but genuine heartfelt cinema expressed in their correspondence. On one occasion, mansfield was in butte and went by the famous shepherds candy shop. There and bought a huge box of chocolates and mailed it to everett and luella. And dirksen wrote him a cute little note back saying. You know, im not on my diet, but weve been these after dinner every night. On another occasion, he sent just out of the blue, would send bouquets of flowers to office and. In 1967. I think it was. And when that effort was underway to create the Mansfield Center at the university of montana, dirksen actually wrote to many of his political contributors soliciting contributions to the mansfield project. He got one particularly nasty response from a fellow who turned out to have been a founder of the john society who said, whats happened to you, senator dirksen, your supporting this liberal and dirksen says, well, on things Mike Mansfield and i disagree, but hes a Great American and happened to you, by the way, so pointed retort. So a relationship. But know in politics what you done for me lately. Whats the record . Well, heres a partial record of what was in this period. So the foundational Nuclear Arms Limitation treaty, the civil and Voting Rights act, 1964 and 65, first time that congress had ever fundamentally and systematically addressed Financial Support to elementary and secondary education a major Immigration Reform act passed during the johnson administra. The wilderness act goes on, on and on. Medicare. Not that any of us in this room would care about that. The gun control act that i mentioned a moment ago, land and Water Conservation fund was created. Food stamps, Fair Housing Act passed during close to the end of dirksens life with his support, every single of these pieces of legislation passed on a bipartisan basis. There were a significant of republican senators in supporting the agenda of a democratic president and a democratic senate. Every single one was interesting for me in researching the history of a number. These pieces of law to learn that several of them passed not they werent controversial. They were in many cases. They passed on a voice in the senate, which kind of relates to mansfields notion selfrestraint. I mean, can filibuster anything as the Current Senate often proves. But in this period, the filibuster was relatively rarely used and, not on pieces of legislation that opponents to that legislation knew was ultimately going to pass. So a lot of this legislation passed literally on a voice vote, quite a extensive of legislative record, perhaps with the exception of, Franklin Roosevelts new deal in 1933 and the socalled second new deal in 1935, the greatest of legislative accomplishment, the senate in the history of the country. And it happened because in no small part because the relationship between Mike Mansfield and Everett Dirksen, its been said properly. I think that we live in Lyndon Johnsons world. When you look at this legislation, so much of which remains so to american and society today. But if thats true that we live Lyndon Johnsons world, we also live in the world of Mike Mansfield and Everett Dirksen. So ill it at that and be happy to try to respond to any questions you might have. And while youre thinking about it, question, i will read you quick section from the book. Mansfield approach to political. I dont know whether its right to say its unprecedented. It sure as heck is unusual. I was unusual. Was unusual. The time. Again, remembering he had followed Lyndon Johnson into this role. Johnson be a very domineering, aggressive, arm twisting, overbearing son of a gun in a lot of cases. But he really exercised the full power of being majority, so much so that his biographer, famous biographer robert calls him the master of the senate. Well, i would argue that in terms of just sheer legislative accomplishment, Mike Mansfield is every bit as much master of the senate as Lyndon Johnson was, but a totally, totally style. Early on and mansfields as majority leader, his approach was somewhat controversial with some of his own democratic party. They didnt think he was up to the job that he wasnt tough enough. He wasnt willing crack the whip to cause things to happen. He was too deferential to committee chairmen. So he prepared a speech. Finally, after this criticism that he was scheduled to deliver on friday afternoon, november 22nd, 1963, the day of kennedys assassination. He never gave the speech. He had it entered into the congressional record . I daresay every member of the senate read that speech, but he never delivered it until many years later when he was invited back by the then Senate Majority leader, trent lott of mississippi. He and the minority leader, tom of south dakota, for the express purpose of giving this speech about his views on senate leadership. Heres part of what he said. I do my best. Be courteous, decent and understa of others. And sometimes i fail at it. But is for the senate to decide whether characteristics are incompatible with leadership. I have tried to treat others as i would like to be treated and almost invariably have been, and it is for senate to decide to whether that character is incompatible. Senate leadership. And within this body, i believe every member ought to be equal. In fact, not less than in theory that they have a primary responsibility to the people whom they represent to face the legislative issues of the nation. And to this extent that the senate may be in adequate in this connection. The remedy lies in not seeking some shortcut, not in the cracking of nonexistent, nor in wheeling dealing, but in an honest of the situation and a resolution of it by the senate itself. If by accommodation by respect for one another, by mutual and as necessary adjustments in the procedures of this body. So he was really embracing a politics of the golden rule treat other people you expect to be treated. Lay all your cards on the table. Dont try a bunch tricks. Treat everybody fairly. Treat everybody equally. One of his aides, francis said of mansfield that he operated the senate in a gandhi like fashion, sort of political, if you will, another aide, chuck ferris, compared mansfield to the great french wartime leader charles de gaulle, who later became, of course, president to france. Ferris said was not a man of the left or, the right. He was a man above above so happy to answer questions if you have some. Yes, sir. You brought up the name of that senator one first one, senator, being able to put a hold on these appointments. Right. Just wondering is is i never could understand the rationale for the longer one senator may have that much authority in power. Where did that come . Its a function of Senate Tradition that has existed for a long long time. The notion that an individual senator can a hold on a nomination from white house from the president. Now the senate could end like that with a, you know, a vote. But the general feeling, i think, is that nobody wants to give up that power. They want to preserve the right to use that kind of a of a trick, if you will, a mechanism in order to have that in their back pocket when they need it, to have some leverage with the white house. So, again, its just one of the quirky realities, the senate. But you rarely saw those kinds of tactics employed in the mansfield dirksen era. Not exclusively so, but very, very rarely. I quote in the book, one senator, a republican saying of mansfield, he, you know, we would never try to pull some on mansfield. He said we used to go down when lyndon was the majority leader just to beat him just to, you know, try to the bear because he could be so overbearing and so difficult to get along with. We would never try that with mansfield. We respected too much. So as i said, i think its the almost the politics, the golden rule. He tried to model a certain kind of Political Behavior that seems so foreign today as to be, you know, almost. But he success did it for a long period of time. 16 years as majority leader. You could tell at the end of his tenure, the in the middle seventies, he. He forecast, in fact, a speech in 1974 or five where the senate was going he said were having way too many issues that would never be filibustered. Back in the days of russell, the famous segregationist from georgia are now being filibustered on a regular basis. And he said thats not good for the institution. Thats not good for the senate. He never he never advocated doing away with the filibuster, but he was increasingly becoming concerned that it was reflecting really badly the institution and both because it was being misused. So again, the idea of selfrestraint, you have the power, but you have to be careful how you use it, how employ it. Yes, sir. In my previous career, one of the things that we always had to do was prepare obituaries by the famous people. And i volunteered foolishly to. This is a former ap reporter or editor. Yes. Montana editor. The ap and i john mcardle on the duty of trying to put together Mike Mansfield obituary. And you get to a where every kind of starts. Senator Mike Mansfield who . Right. And then theres to be a clause that they can help us as his life. I failed miserably. I think i stared at that for hours. Im curious if you that kind of a situation. What what what sticks out to you as the most important thing about his life, his career that you make the lead of an obituary like that . Well, thats a great question. I think if i was forced to choose, it would not be one of the legislative accomplishments, but it would be more his attitude how to provide Political Leadership. The notion of, you know, civility that youre going to treat everybody fairly, that youre going to model by your own behavior or the behavior you hope to see in your colleagues. That seems to me, to be the thing that really differentiates mansfield. Now, i put up the list of all that. I mean, a partial list of the legislation that passed in that period. Just as an illustration, the fact that, you know, it wasnt just, you know, good guys backslapping each other. This was a real period accomplishment where real things on important issues passed the congress. So youd be hard pressed. Not i. Mansfield thought that the Voting Rights act in 65 was one of the most significant things that the congress did in this period. In fact, he he gave a speech, unlike Lyndon Johnson, he did not use the Democratic Caucus as a place to essentially outline democratic agenda for the senate. He often used it almost exclusive. He used it on the rare occasions when it met as a way to remind senators of their responsible parties to the institution. So he says in 1965, for example, in the Democratic Caucus, we have to understand the country has gone through a difficult period here with the election of 1964, barry goldwater, youre, you know, a very, very conservative, essentially losing a landslide to Lyndon Johnson. Republican party really of discredited across the board. And goldwater in goldwaters defeat mansfield says we need to lift republicans up we to find a way to make them relevant again in the senate and in the country. So later on, when the debate is raging, the Voting Rights act, again, a filibuster by southern democrats to oppose the Voting Rights act. All the meetings are taking place in dirksens office. Hes the one thats on tv every night. Hes the one thats responding to reporters questions. He has the daily updates on how the negotiations are going on the legislation. One of mansfields aides comes to him and says, boss the natives are getting restless meaning. The Democratic Caucus is restless that dirksens getting all of this attention. Mansfield says no, were not going to. He said, could we at least once in a while have a meeting in . The Majority Leaders Office . Mansfield says, no, were not going to do that. Its really important to the country to see a republican leader talking about Voting Rights. And were going to, you know, keep right out, keep him right out there on the on the cutting edge of this debate in the country. And, you know, smart psychology had played to dirksens desire to be the center of things, but it also gave dirksen the opportunity to be the legislative wizard that i think in many respects he became, which was to influence the legislation at the margins, convincing oftentimes his republican colleagues he was really in there, you know, pitching them, when in fact, he was just using that opportunity to round up republican votes. So the back to the question ask what would be the accomplishment . I just think its the approach to leadership and maybe its impossible to conceive of that of leadership working again. Maybe the circumstances were so one off. Mansfield himself said, you get a partnership with a guy like and it happens once in a century. So maybe it was just a quirk of history that these two guys came together at the place at the same time with all of these big issues to deal with. But its an interesting thought process. I thought puzzle to wonder if a different approach to civility, inclusiveness our politics might not repair some of the damage that has been done over the last many years. Yes. Well we can all talk about the elephant in the room, but maybe we should send a copy to senator. And require him to pay for it. And the media buy it . Yeah, well, somebody the other night when that same suggestion made, i think in great falls, that maybe the book got a wind, find its way into the hands of every. And someone said, well, somebody may have to read it to some of them. Im not i agree with that. No, you know, its i was motivated, as i said at the outset, to write something about. Mansfield and his contribution to country, to the senate as an institution. But at the end of the day, and i say this with all modesty no one book is going to have any great impact on our politic these days. But i hope maybe some small way, a few younger people read this story and see that there was at one time a different kind of Political Leadership that really accomplish things in the country and maybe motivate a handful of younger people to carry on the torch. And i you know, i to keep the legacy of these guys alive because they deserve to be remembered. We have few enough political these days. Mike mansfield sure deserves that. That description of being a political hero and Everett Dirksen does too, i think. So i hope in some small way contributes to a few people. Understand that things could be done differently. One thing it is kind of upsetting. I hear boston universitys college is wanting to do away with that humanities and to focus on really other areas. And you know, i remember how important it was for to have civics and government classes, history classes throughout, the elementary and, the middle school and High School Years to get the interest and knowledge about that. And i dont know how much of that is Still Available and what whether the lack of that is kind of some of our problem, too. Well, i think you make an excellent as somebody spent a lot of years serving on a state Humanities Council and chairing the board of the federation of state Humanities Councils for a time i completely with the importance of humanities education in history literature. The study how long comes to be civic education. Absolutely. Some of that has been diminished or reduced as a result, an emphasis on socalled Stem Education and, nothing against science, math and technology. But there has to be a balance. Scientists need to be informed by history. Mathema need to be informed by literature. So we need all of that and we need to reemphasize it at. This particular point, which think is a fraught point in our democracy. Its a fraught moment where things go badly off the rail. We think theyre not so great right now . They could get a lot worse. So we have to be redoubling our effort to make sure that people understand history, that they study it, that they grasp importance of understanding how things happen and, where they you know, where these quirky rules of the senate came. Thats really really important to a democracy and its kind of inconceivable that the democracy functions. If you dont have that level of Information Available very broadly among the american people. So im all for reemphasizing history and, i think actually montana has been a leader, certainly in the west, maybe in the nation in emphasizing this, the States History fabulous, New Historical society, a museum going up here in. Wonderful wonderful archive. Mansfields at the university of montana have scarcely been in terms of their importance to the latter of the 20th century in american politics. I mean, he went on to be ambassador to japan for 12 years after he left the senate, serving republican and democratic president. So one good thing about mike, many good things about but he was a history professor, so he kept everything. The archive enormous. I mean, theres just just unbelievable the amount of material thats available and says something about the guys selfconfidence sense and selfawareness that he could commit to his files, the kind of material that is in that archive this day. So yeah, critically important that study history and understand its lessons. It doesnt exactly repeat but it does rhyme as. Mark twain supposedly said. Well, thank you so much. I really appreciate opportunity to visit