How to Disagree (Without Being Disagreeable)
In reading Harlow Giles Unger's book The Last Founding Father: James Monroe and a Nation's Call to Greatness, I was surprised to learn that James Madison and James Monroe once ran against each other in an election for congress. It was in 1789, after the two had argued on opposite sides of a vote for Virginia to ratify the new Constitution.
Madison, not surprisingly, was for the new constitution, as was George Washington. Monroe and others like Patrick Henry opposed it. Monroe had five objections: (1) it gave the government the power to tax people without their consent; (2) it lacked a bill of rights; (3) it lacked term limits for the president; (4) it allowed for the possibility of collusion between the president and congress, and (5) treaty making powers might undermine the interests of a particular region. Conversely, Madison and Washington saw the need for a strong central government. Washington had just won a war with lukewarm financial support from the states. Madison was swayed somewhat by Monroe's argument and conceded that it probably should be amended to include a bill of rights. In the end Madison was on the winning side of the constitutional debate in Virginia, albeit by a slim margin. He also won the election for the seat in congress. What impressed me was how their political disagreements didn't become personal ones. Unger writes at pages 83-4:
"On February 2, 1789, Madison defeated Monroe in the election for a seat in the House of Representatives, 1,308 to 972. He joined nine other Virginians - five of them Henry Antifederalists - as the largest delegation in the house. But the Madison-Monroe election battle produced no rancor between the two friends; they often traveled together anpd shared the same room at inns and homes along the campaign trail. Irate Federalists however called Madison a turncoat for pledging to work for passage of a bill of rights and even some moderates thought him to be disingenuous. But those who knew him well - including Jefferson and Monroe- saw Madison's shift as a courageous political gesture aimed at reconciling legitimate differences between Americans."
Modern politicians could learn a lot from this example of principled leadership and about how to debate the issues without getting personal.
Trivia Quiz: Who was the only President to have two of his Vice-Presidents die in office during his term? (Not surprisingly, he did not select a third.)
Madison, not surprisingly, was for the new constitution, as was George Washington. Monroe and others like Patrick Henry opposed it. Monroe had five objections: (1) it gave the government the power to tax people without their consent; (2) it lacked a bill of rights; (3) it lacked term limits for the president; (4) it allowed for the possibility of collusion between the president and congress, and (5) treaty making powers might undermine the interests of a particular region. Conversely, Madison and Washington saw the need for a strong central government. Washington had just won a war with lukewarm financial support from the states. Madison was swayed somewhat by Monroe's argument and conceded that it probably should be amended to include a bill of rights. In the end Madison was on the winning side of the constitutional debate in Virginia, albeit by a slim margin. He also won the election for the seat in congress. What impressed me was how their political disagreements didn't become personal ones. Unger writes at pages 83-4:
"On February 2, 1789, Madison defeated Monroe in the election for a seat in the House of Representatives, 1,308 to 972. He joined nine other Virginians - five of them Henry Antifederalists - as the largest delegation in the house. But the Madison-Monroe election battle produced no rancor between the two friends; they often traveled together anpd shared the same room at inns and homes along the campaign trail. Irate Federalists however called Madison a turncoat for pledging to work for passage of a bill of rights and even some moderates thought him to be disingenuous. But those who knew him well - including Jefferson and Monroe- saw Madison's shift as a courageous political gesture aimed at reconciling legitimate differences between Americans."
Modern politicians could learn a lot from this example of principled leadership and about how to debate the issues without getting personal.
Trivia Quiz: Who was the only President to have two of his Vice-Presidents die in office during his term? (Not surprisingly, he did not select a third.)