Ludlow Amendment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Congressional opposition to U.S. wars and interventions  |
| 1812 North America House Federalists’ Address |
| 1935-1939 (General) Neutrality Acts |
| 1935-40 (General) Ludlow Amendment |
| 1970 Vietnam McGovern-Hatfield Amendment |
| 1970 Southeast Asia Cooper-Church Amendment |
| 1971 Vietnam Repeal of Tonkin Gulf Resolution |
| 1973 Southeast Asia Case-Church Amendment |
| 1973 (General) War Powers Resolution |
| 1974 Covert Ops (General) Hughes-Ryan Amendment |
| 1976 Angola Clark Amendment |
| 1982 Nicaragua Boland Amendment |
| 2007 Iraq House Concurrent Resolution 63 |
The Ludlow Amendment was a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States which called for a national referendum on any declaration of war by Congress, except in cases when the United States had been attacked first.[1][2] Representative Louis Ludlow (D-Indiana) introduced the amendment several times between 1935 and 1940. Supporters argued that ordinary people, who were called upon to fight and die during wartime, should have a direct vote on their country's involvement in military conflicts.[3][4]
Contents |
[edit] Background
[edit] History of concept
The idea of a national referendum on any declaration of war was first suggested in 1914, and was supported by such notable politicians as William Jennings Bryan and Robert M. La Follette, Sr.[5] In the 1924 election campaign, both the Democratic and Progressive party platforms endorsed the idea of a popular vote on war, "except in case of actual attack" (Democrats) or "except in case of actual invasion" (Progressives).[6]
[edit] Public support and opposition
Public support for the amendment was very robust through the 1930s, a period when isolationism was the prevailing mood in the United States, but began to erode as the situation in Europe deteriorated at the end of the decade. A Gallup survey in September 1935 showed that 75% of Americans supported the amendment; the approval rate was 71% in 1936, and 73% in 1937. In January 1938, when it was voted on in Congress, 68% of the US population still supported the amendment. But by March 1939, support had dropped to 61%; and six months later, following the German invasion of Poland, support for the amendment dropped to 51%. In addition, Good Housekeeping magazine, the National Council for Prevention of War, and Roger Nash Baldwin, president of the ACLU, endorsed the amendment.[4][7][8][9][10]
Others also opposed the amendment. Michigan Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg, who was normally an isolationist, argued that the amendment "would be as sensible to require a town meeting before permitting the fire department to face a blaze". Author Walter Lippmann argued that the amendment would make "preventive diplomacy" impossible and and would insure "that finally, when the provocation has become intolerable, there would be no remedy except total war fought when we were at the greatest possible disadvantage." Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr opposed the amendment stating that war was a policy area where pure democracy was most pernicious.[4][6][11][12]
[edit] Panay incident and 1938 congressional vote
Congressional debate on the amendment was prompted by the December 12, 1937 bombing of the USS Panay by Japanese warplanes. The Panay, a gunboat, was anchored in the Yangtze River near Nanjing, China and flying the American flag. President Franklin D. Roosevelt discussed with his cabinet and the military high command the possibility of economic or military retaliation against Japan. Roosevelt drew back, however, when he realized that there was no public outcry for retaliation, and that, in fact, peace sentiment in the country had actually strengthened. "We should learn that it is about time for us to mind our own business," Texas Democrat Maury Maverick declared in the House of Representatives. Two days after the Panay was sunk, Congress took up the Ludlow amendment.[11][13][14]
The Roosevelt administration attempted to keep the bill in the House Judiciary Committee, were it had been buried since Ludlow introduced the amendment in 1935; but at the end of 1937 the amendment got enough congressional support, including the signatures of nearly half the Democrats in the House, for a House vote on a discharge petition designed to permit debate on the proposed amendment.[6][15]
The amendment came closest to overcoming a discharge petition on January 10, 1938, when it was defeated in Congress by a vote of 209 to 188. This meant that the amendment was never debated in the House. Despite Roosevelt's fears, this vote was far short of the two-thirds majority required by both houses of Congress (290 in the House) for later passage of a consitutional amendment.[2][4][16]
Before the discharge petition vote, speaker of the House William B. Bankhead read a letter written by President Roosevelt:
| “ | I must frankly state that I consider that the proposed amendment would be impracticable in its application and incompatible with our representative form of government.
Our Government is conducted by the people through representatives of their own choosing. It was with singular unanimity that the founders of the Republic agreed upon such free and representative form of government as the only practical means of government by the people. Such an amendment to the Constitution as that proposed would cripple any President in his conduct of our foreign relations, and it would encourage other nations to believe that they could violate American rights with impunity.[2][7][17] |
” |
[edit] Text of proposed amendment
SEC. 1. Except in the event of an invasion of the United States or its Territorial possessions and attack upon its citizens residing therein, the authority of Congress to declare war shall not become effective until confirmed by a majority of all votes cast thereon in a Nation-wide referendum. Congress, when it deems a national crisis to exist, may by concurrent resolution refer the question of war or peace to the citizens of the States, the question to be voted on being, Shall the United States declare war on ________? Congress may otherwise by law provide for the enforcement of this section.[18]
[edit] Quotes
Congressman Ludlow:
| “ | [The amendment would do more to] keep American boys out of slaughter pens in foreign countries than any other measure that could be passed. It is based on the philosophy that those who have to suffer and, if need be, to die and to bear the awful burdens and griefs of war shall have something to say as to whether war shall be declared.[11] | ” |
| “ | If the United States had such an anti-war provision in its Constitution, other countries would follow our example, and I believe wars would be brought to an end.[19] | ” |
[edit] Notes
- ^ H.J. Res. 167, 74th Congress. Other peace resolutions included H.J. Res. 89 and H.J. Res. 158, 74th Congress.Goldman, Ralph M. (Summer 1950). "The Advisory Referendum in America". The Public Opinion Quarterly 14 (2): 303-315.
- ^ a b c Powaski, Ronald E. (1991). Toward an Entangling Alliance: American Isolationism, Internationalism and Europe, 1901-1950. Page 74
- ^ Sherry, Michael S. (1997). In the Shadow of War: The United States Since the 1930's. Yale University Press. ISBN 0300072635. Page 26
- ^ a b c d Rhodes, Benjamin D. (2001). United States Foreign Policy in the Interwar Period, 1918-1941: The Golden Age of American Diplomatic and Military Complacency. Praeger/Greenwood. ISBN 0275948250. Page 151
- ^ Wiebe, Robert H. (1995). Self-rule: Cultural History of American Democracy. University of Chicago. ISBN 0226895629. Page 208
- ^ a b c Schlesinger, Arthur Meier; Arthur Meier Schlesinger, Jr. (2004). The Imperial Presidency By ,. Houghton Mifflin Books. ISBN 0618420010. Page 97-98
- ^ a b Horowitz, David A. (1996). Beyond Left & Right: Insurgency and the Establishment. Page 168
- ^ Ole R., Holsti (2004). Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy By. University of Michigan. ISBN 0472030116. Page 17-18
- ^ Robert C., Cottrell. Roger Nash Baldwin and the American Civil Liberties Union. Page 236
- ^ Chatfield, Charles (May 1969). "Pacifists and Their Publics: The Politics of a Peace Movement". Midwest Journal of Political Science 13 (2): 298.
- ^ a b c Buchanan, Patrick J. (2002). A Republic, Not an Empire: Reclaiming America's Destiny. Regnery Publishing. ISBN 0895261596.
- ^ Bullert, Gary B. (March 22 2002). "Reinhold Niebuhr and the Christian century: World War II and the eclipse of the social gospel". Journal of Church and State 44 (2): 271. ISSN: 0021-969X.
- ^ Herring, George C.; John Martin Carroll (1996). Modern American Diplomacy. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 0842025553. Page 90
- ^ Kennedy, David M. (1999). Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195038347. Page 402
- ^ Parrish, Michael E. (1994). Anxious Decades: America in Prosperity and Depression 1920-1941. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0393311341. Page 457
- ^ (December 15 1937) "War Referendum Recalled To House; Petition to Relieve the Rules Committee Signed by 218 Members, One Now Dead Will Reach Floor Jan. 10 Administration Leaders Say Amendment Will Be Defeated When Vote Is Taken War Referendum Recalled To House Signers Of Referendum Members of House Who Forced Out the War Curb Bill". New York Times: 1.
- ^ (January 17 1938) "Roosevelt Week". Time Magazine.
- ^ Ludlow Amendment 1938. Retrieved on 2006-09-05.
- ^ (November 29 1936) "To Seek War Curb Again; Ludlow Will Reintroduce Plan Calling for Popular Vote". The New York Times.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
[edit] Further reading
- Bolt, Jr., Ernest C. (1977). Ballots before Bullets: The War Referendum Approach to Peace in America, 1914-1941. University of Virginia Press.
- Carnes, Mark C.; John A. Garraty, Patrick Williams (1996). Mapping America's Past: An Historical Atlas. Henry Holt and Co.. ISBN 0805049274. Offers voter patterns on the Ludlow Amendment.
- Koginos, Manny T. (1967). The Panay Incident: Prelude to War. Purdue University Studies.
- Smith, Kyle (1988). "War and the Ballot Box: The Debate Over the Ludlow Amendment". M.A. Thesis, Northwestern University.
