AMERICA
: THE LAST BEST HOPE
CHAPTER 13
The Years the Locusts Ate
(1974-1981)
Presidential Terms
Gerald R. Ford
(1974-1977)
James Earl Carter
(1977-1981)
TEACHER
Gerald Ford became president upon the resignation of Richard Nixon. Ford
was the only president in American history not to have been elected by
voters as either president or vice president. Even though Nixon was gone,
Watergate still loomed over the nation. The prospect of a trial on criminal
charges and even imprisonment of the former president weighed heavily
on Ford. Considering the stress to the nation such a trial would bring,
Ford unconditionally pardoned Nixon in hopes of putting the divisions of
Watergate to rest. As Bennett notes, this very likely cost Ford any chance
of being elected on his own in 1976. Many people were outraged at Ford’s
decision at the time, but with the benefit of perspective, most historians now
acknowledge the wisdom of the pardon. What do students think? Did Ford
do the right thing? Would it indeed have been too stressful for our republic
to see a president tried and possibly sent to prison? Or, would a trial of
Nixon have been an important message that no one, not even a president, is
above the law?
Next, Ford faced the fall of South Vietnam, only two years after the U.S.
had signed the Paris Peace Accords and left the region hoping the small
nation could defend itself. A few voices, but very few, called for the U.S. to
return to Vietnam to support its ally for all of the years of the Vietnam War.
Congress and the American people would not consider this. Communist
North Vietnam overran South Vietnam and united the country under a
brutal dictatorship. Also tragically, Pol Pot and the communist Khmer
Rouge took control of Cambodia. The death toll there was unimaginable.
All the Ford administration could do was use the U.S. Navy to rescue “boat
people” escaping these regimes. Classes can discuss whether the U.S. should
have returned to Southeast Asia to support South Vietnam and Cambodia.
Comparisons with today are obvious. If indeed the U.S. leaves Iraq, will
it be possible politically to send military forces back to that nation if it
descends into civil war? Are there other parallels with Vietnam? Students
might find it interesting that George McGovern, a key proponent of leaving
Southeast Asia, called (unsuccessfully) for U.S. forces to return to Cambodia
in 1978 when news of the “killing fields” became widely known.
Communist brutality was not confined to Southeast Asia. Alexandr
Solzhenitsyn reminded Americans that the Soviet Union still oppressed its
people and crushed any of its citizens who spoke against its policies. His
voice struck an awkward chord at a time when the Ford administration was
AMERICA
: THE LAST BEST HOPE
TEACHER
pursuing détente with the Soviets. Students will be able to see connections
to that situation and efforts to have warm relations with communist
China today. How strongly should American leaders condemn Chinese
suppressions of freedom? What is the best way to bring change to a
totalitarian regime – confrontation or engagement?
THE EQUAL RIGHTS
AMENDMENT
Section 1. Equality of rights under the
law shall not be denied or abridged by
the United States or by any state on
account of sex.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the
power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall
take effect two years after the date of
ratification.
The year 1976 was both the nation’s bicentennial and the year of a
presidential election. President Ford faced a tough nomination battle with
former California governor Ronald Reagan. Reagan sought to take the
Republicans in a more conservative direction, speaking out against both
abortion and détente with the Soviets. Ford would defeat Reagan and secure
the nomination, but the tough battle left him weakened in the general
election. The Democrats had a wide-open field in choosing their nominee.
Former Georgia governor Jimmy Carter seemingly came out of nowhere
to head the Democratic ticket. His promise to “never lie” to the American
people resonated strongly in the wake of Watergate. His openness about
his “born again” evangelical Christian faith also struck a chord with a large
segment of the voting population that had often been largely ignored by
politicians. In the fall election, Carter edged Ford in a very close contest.
The fact that Ford nearly won, despite his poor speaking skills and his
weak performance in debates with Carter, was a testament to the fact that
the American people recognized him as a decent, honorable man who had
helped heal the nation’s wounds after Watergate.
Jimmy Carter entered the White House hoping to connect directly with the
American people. His walk down Pennsylvania Avenue and his dispensing
of ceremonial rituals symbolized his desire to move away from the “imperial
presidency.” He even made a point of being seen carrying his own luggage
off of Air Force One. Bennett notes that Jefferson had attempted similar
symbolism 175 years earlier. How do students feel about this? Do they
want a president who is “one of the people,” or do they believe that elaborate
ceremonies are important to maintain respect for the most important office
in the world and for the leader of the free world? How can presidents strike
a balance in this area?
In making much of coming to Washington D.C. as an “outsider,” Carter
did a great deal to alienate members of Congress (even fellow Democrats),
on whose support he depended. Carter also drove away many evangelical
Christians who had supported him in 1976 with his inconsistent positions
on abortion and the active support of he and his wife Rosalynn for the Equal
Rights Amendment (ERA). Resistance in these areas helped lead to the rise
of the “religious right” and the “pro-family movement” during the Carter
years, as seen in organizations such as the Moral Majority and Focus on
AMERICA
: THE LAST BEST HOPE
TEACHER
the Family. Classes might discuss the role of the nation’s “First Lady” (or
perhaps a future “First Gentleman”). Bennett adds later in the chapter that
Rosalynn Carter was a strong presence in the president’s high-level meetings.
Do students want the president’s spouse so actively involved in policy? Are
there problems with this? Students can also read the wording of the ill-fated
Equal Rights Amendment. Were critics like Phyllis Schlafly justified in their
critiques?
President Carter was a strong advocate of conservation in the midst of the
1970s energy crisis. He favored government controls and incentives to
decrease consumption of energy. He also told Americans to prepare for an
era of limits. Free-market critics of Carter favored letting capitalism solve
such problems. They pointed out that the billions of federal dollars spent
on the “War on Poverty” had not made an appreciable difference. Should
the government place limits on the right of people to consume energy? This
debate is particularly relevant in our own day, with dire warnings about the
dangers of global warming. Bennett uses this as an opening for a discussion
of evolving meanings of freedom. He also points out that some people in
the 1970s equated freedom to be the right to do anything that felt good –
as seen in the sexual revolution. What do students think? What are the
limits to freedom? Where is it appropriate for government to put a check on
people’s freedom?
The topic of freedom was at the heart of President Carter’s foreign policy.
Carter called into question the fact that the United States had long criticized
abuses of freedom in the totalitarian communist bloc, but had ignored such
abuses in so called authoritarian states, which although anti-communist and
friendly to U.S. interests, were still often brutally repressive to their own
people. But critics charged he moved too far in the direction of offending
our allies in the world and playing down Soviet tyranny when meeting with
Brezhnev, pursuing further détente, and signing the SALT II treaty (an
agreement on which critics were certain the Soviets would cheat). Classes
can be challenged to discuss whether a truly consistent foreign policy is
actually possible. In its national interest, does the nation have to, at times,
look away from the abuses of our allies? Or, as the world’s leader of freedom,
do our leaders have to speak out unequivocally against repression, to both
friend and foe?
Carter took other foreign policy initiatives in Panama and the Middle East.
The Panama Canal Treaty set up a timetable for the control of the canal
to be turned over to Panama. Bennett refers to “his” (Carter’s) Panama
Canal Treaty, but teachers will want to help students understand that the
groundwork for the treaty was laid by previous Republican administrations.
AMERICA
: THE LAST BEST HOPE
TEACHER
Students will also want to remember the origins of U.S. control of the
Canal Zone. They can refer Chapter 13 of Volume I of America: The Last
Best Hope. Can a treaty be fairly labeled a “giveaway” (as critics charged)
when one knows the very questionable means the United States used to
deprive Colombia of this land in the first place? In the Middle East, Carter
engineered his greatest diplomatic triumph in getting the leaders of Israel
and Egypt to negotiate. In doing so, Egypt became the first Arab nation
to recognize the existence of Israel. This step toward peace would later cost
Egyptian President Anwar Sadat his life at the hands of terrorists. Classes
can study the historic Camp David Accords in light of present circumstances
in the region.
To many critics of President Carter, the United States appeared progressively
weak across the globe. The Soviets expanded their influence in Africa and
communists were gaining strength Latin America. By the end of the Carter
administration, the Soviets would send their army to conquer Afghanistan.
These critics who accused Carter of weakness and blamed him for these
setbacks would come to call themselves neoconservatives.
Nowhere did the U.S. appear weaker or more helpless than in Iran where
radical students stormed the American embassy and took its diplomats
hostage in 1979. For more than 400 days, attempts to negotiate their
release appeared to go nowhere. A secret military attempt to rescue the
hostages ended in disaster in the Iranian desert. America as an entire nation
felt itself held hostage. What could be done about these crises? President
Carter’s answer to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was a boycott of the
1980 Olympics in Moscow and a refusal to sell U.S. grain to Russia. These
actions killed the dreams of America’s finest athletes and hurt American
farmers.
In the midst of these critical moments came the 1980 presidential election.
President Carter faced a stiff challenge within his own party from Ted
Kennedy. He overcame this challenge and won the nomination, but went
forth to the general election as a weakened candidate of a divided party,
just as Gerald Ford had done four years before. The Republicans turned
to Ronald Reagan, at the time the oldest man ever to run for the nation’s
highest office. Reagan captured the support of the rising religious right
and influential neoconservatives who wanted America to restore its strength
in the world. Because of the hostage crisis, Carter remained in the White
House dealing with that issue for much of the campaign, the so-called “Rose
Garden Strategy.”
In the fall lead up to the election, Reagan, the former actor and “Great
AMERICA
: THE LAST BEST HOPE
TEACHER
Communicator,” outperformed Carter in a televised debate. He also fended
off attacks claiming he was too reckless to be trusted as Commander in
Chief. Americans decided their answer was “no” to Reagan’s question,
“Are you better off than you were four years ago?” The challenger defeated
the incumbent in a landslide. The presence of third party candidate John
Anderson helped Reagan, taking key liberal votes away from Carter in
several key states. Reagan’s sweep also brought the Republicans to power
in the U.S. Senate for the first time in years and led to major Republican
gains in the House. The Reagan Revolution was about to begin. Students
will find the post-presidential career of Jimmy Carter to be of interest.
Some call him the greatest of all our ex-presidents. What have been his
accomplishments after his White House years? What factors account for his
greater success as an ex-president than as president?