Latest news with #MargaretChaseSmith
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Read excerpts from Margaret Chase Smith's Declaration of Conscience speech
Jun. 1—Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, R-Maine, delivered her famous Declaration of Conscience speech on June 1, 1950, on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Here are some excerpts: ------ Mr. President, I would like to speak briefly and simply about a serious national condition. It is a national feeling of fear and frustration that could result in national suicide and the end of everything that we Americans hold dear. It is a condition that comes from the lack of effective leadership either in the legislative branch or the executive branch of our government. ... I speak as briefly as possible because too much harm has already been done with irresponsible words of bitterness and selfish political opportunism. I speak as simply as possible because the issue is too great to be obscured by eloquence. I speak simply and briefly in the hope that my words will be taken to heart. Mr. President, I speak as a Republican. I speak as a woman. I speak as a United States senator. I speak as an American. ... I think that it is high time for the United States Senate and its members to do some real soul searching and to weigh our consciences as to the manner in which we are performing our duty to the people of America and the manner in which we are using or abusing our individual powers and privileges. I think that it is high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think that it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation. ... As a Republican, I say to my colleagues on this side of the aisle that the Republican Party faces a challenge today that is not unlike the challenge which it faced back in Lincoln's day. The Republican Party so successfully met that challenge that it emerged from the Civil War as the champion of a united nation — in addition to being a party which unrelentingly fought loose spending and loose programs. Today our country is being psychologically divided by the confusion and the suspicions that are bred in the United States Senate to spread like cancerous tentacles of "know nothing, suspect everything" attitudes. ... The nation sorely needs a Republican victory. But I do not want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny: Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear. ... Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism: — The right to criticize. — The right to hold unpopular beliefs. — The right to protest. — The right of independent thought. The exercise of these rights should not cost one single American citizen his reputation or his right to a livelihood nor should he be in danger of losing his reputation or livelihood merely because he happens to know someone who holds unpopular beliefs. Who of us does not? Otherwise none of us could call our souls our own. Otherwise thought control would have set in. ... Copy the Story Link
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Excerpts from Margaret Chase Smith's Declaration of Conscience speech
Jun. 1—Sen. Margaret Chase Smith, R-Maine, delivered her famous Declaration of Conscience speech on June 1, 1950, on the floor of the U.S. Senate. Here are some excerpts: Mr. President, I would like to speak briefly and simply about a serious national condition. It is a national feeling of fear and frustration that could result in national suicide and the end of everything that we Americans hold dear. It is a condition that comes from the lack of effective leadership either in the legislative branch or the executive branch of our government.... I speak as briefly as possible because too much harm has already been done with irresponsible words of bitterness and selfish political opportunism. I speak as simply as possible because the issue is too great to be obscured by eloquence. I speak simply and briefly in the hope that my words will be taken to heart. Mr. President, I speak as a Republican. I speak as a woman. I speak as a United States senator. I speak as an American.... I think that it is high time for the United States Senate and its members to do some real soul searching and to weigh our consciences as to the manner in which we are performing our duty to the people of America and the manner in which we are using or abusing our individual powers and privileges. I think that it is high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think that it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation.... As a Republican, I say to my colleagues on this side of the aisle that the Republican party faces a challenge today that is not unlike the challenge which it faced back in Lincoln's day. The Republican party so successfully met that challenge that it emerged from the Civil War as the champion of a united nation — in addition to being a party which unrelentingly fought loose spending and loose programs. Today our country is being psychologically divided by the confusion and the suspicions that are bred in the United States Senate to spread like cancerous tentacles of "know nothing, suspect everything" attitudes.... The nation sorely needs a Republican victory. But I do not want to see the Republican party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny: Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear.... Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism: — The right to criticize. — The right to hold unpopular beliefs. — The right to protest. — The right of independent thought. The exercise of these rights should not cost one single American citizen his reputation or his right to a livelihood nor should he be in danger of losing his reputation or livelihood merely because he happens to know someone who holds unpopular beliefs. Who of us does not? Otherwise none of us could call our souls our own. Otherwise thought control would have set in.... Copy the Story Link
Yahoo
7 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Remembering an Act of Conscience and Courage
TODAY MARKS THE 30TH ANNIVERSARY of the death, at 97, of Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine. And in three days comes another important date for Smith: June 1 is the 75th anniversary of her 'Declaration of Conscience' speech denouncing her colleague Senator Joseph McCarthy's hunt for alleged Communists in the U.S. government—an extraordinary act of political bravery, and one that came at considerable cost. Smith entered public office under unhappy circumstances. A lifelong Republican, she was married to Clyde Smith, a representative from Maine twenty-one years her senior, from 1930 until his death on April 8, 1940. According to public accounts at the time, Clyde died from a heart attack. His actual cause of death was advanced syphilis, which had been diagnosed in 1938. As Margaret's biographer Patricia Schmidt writes, it's unclear whether she was ever aware of her husband's diagnosis. But she once told a historian that Clyde 'loved the ladies and they loved him.' Margaret was her husband's secretary and knew his congressional district as well as he did. At the age of 42, she was elected to serve out the remainder of his term; she then won four full terms in her own right. During her near-decade in the House, Margaret Chase Smith built a reputation as an independent thinker. As Schmidt relates, Smith supported President Franklin Roosevelt's Lend-Lease program to help Britain defend itself against dictatorship—the only member of Maine's House delegation to do so, which set her against the stance of the Republican party's isolationist wing. She also took a stand counter to most of her Republican colleagues to support a bill to allow merchant ships to be armed and permitted in combat zones. Share With these votes and others, she became a champion of national defense and a strong foreign policy. Though rooted in principle and independent judgment, these stances ultimately proved politically savvy as well: Maine was the home to several military installations and defense contractor facilities, such as the Bath Iron Works shipyard. While Smith maintained the persona of a 'traditional' mid-twentieth-century American woman, she was a strong advocate for women's equality. She was especially attentive to the needs of mothers who worked during the war as civilians and women who joined the military as nurses and other noncombatants. She fought for increased funding for childcare in war-time factories and for improved status of women serving their country in uniform. On various occasions between 1945 to 1972, she cosponsored and voted for the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution. In 1948, she ran for the Senate. Maine was solidly Republican in those days, and after roundly defeating her primary opposition (which included both the sitting governor and a former governor), she won the general election with an impressive 71 percent of the vote. She had ruffled a lot of Republican feathers, and she was not the favorite of the party establishment, but her independence and attention to her constituents helped secure her victory. Senator Smith was the first woman to serve in both the House and the Senate, and from 1949 to 1954, she was the only female senator. With the Senate as a more prominent platform, she immediately went to work to raise her stature. Smith was selected to temporarily act as Senate minority leader in March. She was more than once named the Associated Press's 'Political Woman of the Year.' She was mentioned as a potential contender for the vice presidential slot in the 1952 election. Many Republicans believed her moderate voting record and her gender could be useful in balancing the 1952 ticket. Join now EVENTS OF 1950 WOULD ALTER the course of her political career. It was in February of that year that Senator McCarthy began his long cynical campaign of fearmongering and exaggeration—starting with claims that he possessed a list of Communist Party members working at the State Department. McCarthy promised to release details supporting his assertions, but few particulars and no complete list of names was ever revealed. The Senate established the Subcommittee on the Investigation of Loyalty of State Department Employees—the 'Tydings Committee' (for its Democratic chairman, Millard Tydings of Maryland)—to investigate McCarthy's claims. Nine State Department employees were investigated but were cleared. The Tydings Committee determined that McCarthy's list was 'a fraud and a hoax.' Most Republicans joined McCarthy in rejecting the committee's conclusion as partisan. Margaret Chase Smith was a committed anti-Communist and took seriously the threats presented during the Cold War. However, she had serious objections to McCarthy's methods and doubts about the veracity of McCarthy's claims. Troubled by McCarthyism, she was determined to speak against it. Smith hoped that speaking out would position her as a forceful and courageous advocate for the truth, but she knew it could be a political landmine. In 1950, at the start of McCarthy's campaign to root out Communist subversives, many Republicans viewed this new Red Scare as a great opportunity to score points against the Truman administration, in advance of that year's midterms and the 1952 presidential election. Certainly at first, more Republicans were with McCarthy than against him. Although she knew she would face criticism from her own party, Smith chose to act on her principles. On June 1, 1950, she delivered the speech—her first in the Senate—for which she would be most remembered. Smith's ringing 'Declaration of Conscience' criticized both Republicans and Democrats. She accused the Truman administration of complacency regarding Communist influence and espionage, but she also reproached Republican politicians who alleged that certain Americans presented domestic threats. Her words from 1950 resonate today: Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism— The right to criticize. The right to hold unpopular beliefs. The right to protest. The right of independent thought. She went on to critique 'the present ineffective Democratic administration' but nevertheless cautioned about giving power to a reckless Republican party. Yet to displace it with a Republican regime embracing a philosophy that lacks political integrity or intellectual honesty would prove equally disastrous to the nation. The nation sorely needs a Republican victory. But I do not want to see the Republican party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny—Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear. Smith persuaded six other moderate to liberal Republicans to join her in a statement issued concurrent with her speech. The statement closed with this: It is high time that we stopped thinking politically as Republicans and Democrats about elections and started thinking patriotically as Americans about national security based on individual freedom. It is high time that we all stopped being tools and victims of totalitarian techniques—techniques that, if continued here unchecked, will surely end what we have come to cherish as the American way of life. She didn't name McCarthy directly—but she didn't have to: The target of her attack was obvious. She later recalled having run into McCarthy on their way to the Capitol. McCarthy asked if she was heading there to make a speech; she replied: 'Yes, and you will not like it.' He sat two rows behind her during her speech. Share SMITH EVENTUALLY PAID a steep political cost for her political courage. Immediate reaction within the Senate was mixed. Many senators remained fully aligned with McCarthy at that early stage in his effort. Some of her colleagues praised and congratulated her.1 Others, including those who agreed with her, were reticent—they didn't want to appear soft on communism, especially not once the Korean War ignited a few weeks later. Even most of her Declaration of Conscience cosigners eventually abandoned her, the exception being Sen. Wayne Morse of Oregon, who left the Republican party, becoming an independent in 1953 and a Democrat in 1955. The Republican party establishment punished Smith. She was removed from the Permanent Investigating Subcommittee of the Senate Expenditures Committee by McCarthy, who was the ranking Republican on the committee. She was removed from the Republican Policy Committee. She was left off the list of speakers at the annual Lincoln Day rally and was scheduled for only two speaking engagements at Maine Republican rallies in the leadup to the 1950 election—a snub for a sitting senator. Perhaps more notably, talk of her as a potential vice presidential candidate dried up. A small grassroots effort at the 1952 convention to put her name in nomination fell apart. Eisenhower stated his preference for Richard Nixon, and Senator Smith opted out of attending the convention to be with her dying mother back in Maine. While Smith's standing in the party fell, McCarthy's rose, if only for a short time. He spoke at the 1952 convention, and with Republicans capturing the Senate that year, McCarthy became chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI). He used the PSI as his platform to continue pursuit of alleged Communists. (He was assisted by an aggressive young prosecutor named Roy Cohn, who later became a mentor to a certain New York real estate developer.) Share The Bulwark Ultimately, though, Smith was vindicated. McCarthy's clout declined beginning in 1953 as more of the Washington establishment, including Republican officials, came out against his extremism. On December 2, 1954, the Senate voted 67–22 to censure McCarthy. Republicans split evenly, 22–22. While he continued his anti-communism campaign, his stature and credibility were irreparably diminished. McCarthy died in 1957. Senator Smith continued to display her independence and courage in the Senate for another eighteen years following McCarthy's downfall. She defied Eisenhower and Nixon on several occasions. Her voting record included support for education, civil rights, voting rights, the War on Poverty, and consumer protection. She declined to fight against the closure of an outdated Air Force Base in her own state ('this would simply be playing politics with our national security'). Smith launched a dark horse candidacy for president in 1964. While she failed to win a primary (Illinois was her best showing with 25 percent of the vote), she stayed in the race to the convention and denied Senator Barry Goldwater a unanimous delegate vote for the nomination. She was the first woman to have her name placed in nomination for the presidency at a major party convention. Her luck ended with her 1972 Senate re-election bid. She received 47 percent of the vote in a state where Nixon received 65 percent. At 74, she was returning to private life after 32 years. Share THE POLITICS OF 2025 would likely not be a good fit for Senator Smith. Maine Republicans might consider her too independent. After all, the most recent Republican governor was Paul LePage, who said in 2016, 'I was Donald Trump before Donald Trump became popular.' And she would probably find today's Senate strange. What would she say about the motivations of senators who, at one moment (say, after an insurrection) are harshly critical of Trump, only later to turn shamelessly obsequious toward him? What would she think of Ted Cruz (a modern-day McCarthy figure if ever there were one), Mike Lee, Tommy Tuberville, and Lindsey Graham? Would she make another Declaration of Conscience to compare Trump and his sycophants to McCarthy? Would anyone even listen to her? It's possible that Senator Smith would find common ground with at least one fearless group: the Republican women who oppose Trump, who became especially prominent in 2024. The list is long and includes Liz Cheney, Barbara Comstock, Nancy Kassebaum, Christine Todd Whitman, Alyssa Farah Griffin, Cassidy Hutchinson, Sarah Matthews, Stephanie Grisham, and Olivia Troye. All were former elected officials or served in Republican administrations, and all endorsed Kamala Harris. Smith might also have a pleasant conversation with the woman who holds her Senate seat, Susan Collins, who voted to convict Trump in 2021, did not endorse Trump in 2024, voted against the Hegseth and Patel nominations, voted to block Trump's tariffs, and raised objections to some of Trump's budget proposals. Collins, an admirer of Senator Smith, could put to good use Smith's counsel from June 1, 1950, and warn fellow Republicans to not 'ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny—Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear.' Perhaps Smith would advise Collins to make a new declaration—one that fully rejects Trumpism. Collins's Maine colleague, Senator Angus King—an independent who caucuses with Democrats—recently paid tribute to Smith in a Senate speech. He warned of President Trump exceeding his constitutional powers. King is sending the right message, but we need Republicans to make their own contemporary 'Declaration of Conscience.' The time has come once again to directly challenge a radical movement. Whenever you're ready, Senator Collins. . . Share The Bulwark 1 One notable instance of praise for Smith came a year after the speech when Hubert Humphrey told Smith she was doing 'a whale of a job.' According to biographer Patricia Schmidt, Smith replied, 'Hubert, if you think I'm doing such a good job, why don't you join me?' To which Humphrey said, 'Oh my God, that would be political suicide.'
Fox News
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
SEN. ANGUS KING: A 'Declaration of Conscience' on Donald Trump's 100th day
Almost 75 years ago, the junior Republican Senator from Maine, Margaret Chase Smith, delivered a speech from her heart about a crisis then facing our country: a crisis not arising from a foreign adversary, but from within. A crisis that threatened the values and ideals at the base of the American democratic experiment. Her 'Declaration of Conscience' turned out to be one of the most important speeches of the 20th Century and defined Smith as a person of extraordinary courage and principle. Reflecting back on the speech, she later told me that she was so nervous about the speech—this was the height of the Red Scare of the early fifties—that she told her chief aide, Bill Lewis, not to hand out the copies of the text to the press until she actually started talking on the floor, because she was afraid she might lose her nerve. But she went through with it, and the rest is, literally, history. Here is how she began that speech: "Mr. President, I would like to speak briefly and simply about a serious national condition. It is a national feeling of fear and frustration that could result in national suicide and the end of everything that we Americans hold dear. It is a condition that comes from the lack of effective leadership either in the legislative branch or the executive branch of our government." She continued, "I think that it is high time for the United States Senate and its members to do some real soul searching and to weigh our consciences as to the manner in which we are performing our duty to the people of America and the manner in which we are using or abusing our individual powers and privileges." Later in the speech, Smith concluded, "It is high time that we stopped thinking politically as Republicans and Democrats about elections and started thinking patriotically as Americans about national security based on individual freedom. It is high time that we all stopped being tools and victims of totalitarian techniques – techniques that, if continued here unchecked, will surely end what we have come to cherish as the American way of life." I fear that we are at a similar moment. Echoing Senator Smith, the 'serious national condition' we are facing today should not be viewed as a partisan issue; it's about the idea of America and the system of government that has sustained us for more than two centuries. It's not about the president's agenda (and yes, I disagree with most of it), but it's about the manner in which he is pursuing it. This roughshod non-process endangers all of us, his detractors and supporters alike. Although many of my colleagues seem determined to ignore it, this president is engaged in the most direct assault on the Constitution in our history, and we in this body, at least thus far, are inert. And therefore complicit. It's worth pausing for a moment to look at the terms of Article II, which outline the powers and responsibilities of the president: the power to issue pardons and the role of commander-in-chief of the armed forces in wartime. But even this latter power is constrained by the reservation to the Congress of the power to declare war in the first place. The principal responsibility of the president, however, is spelled out explicitly: the chief executive "shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed." The job of the president is simply to execute the laws passed by Congress, without exception—a responsibility this president is spectacularly failing to meet. The administration has also taken a series of apparently unconnected actions which, taken together, spell out our rapid path toward one-man rule. While this is the most serious breach, the administration has also taken a series of apparently unconnected actions which, taken together, spell out our rapid path toward one-man rule. Here's a partial list: This is not a complete list, but it does present a disturbing pattern—that this president is attempting to govern unbound by law or Constitutional restraint. To those who like the policies of the president and are therefore willing to ignore the unconstitutional means of effectuating them, I (and history) can only say: watch out. Today, the target may be federal workers, but tomorrow (perhaps under a different president), it could be you. So what can we do? The first guardrail is the Congress itself. But unfortunately, the majority in Congress has wholly abdicated these fundamental responsibilities. The second guardrail is the courts, which are generally holding up their end of the constitutional bargain. As easy as it may be to rely entirely on the courts, that's a cop-out; reclaiming power must be a joint project. The final guardrail is the people, who more and more are speaking up—in rallies, in correspondence, in town halls, and in conversations at the grocery store. We can't escape the responsibility of our oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;" [and that we would] "bear true faith and allegiance to the same." So, with thanks to Margaret Chase Smith for her example and inspiration, this is my 'Declaration of Conscience.' I don't relish this moment, but feel I have no choice but to call out the clear implications and dangers of President Donald Trump's first 100 days. Many years ago, President Abraham Lincoln came to the Congress at a time when our forebears—like us—were reluctant to face the responsibilities that had been thrust upon them. At that critical moment, this is what he said, "Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this Administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor to the latest generation." I deeply hope that amid our fiery trial, we will choose honor—and the Constitution.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Red flag law citizen initiative officially valid to appear on November ballot
A portrait of Margaret Chase Smith in the background as proponents of gun safety rally in the halls of the State House on Jan. 3, 2024. (Jim Neuger/Maine Morning Star) A citizen-led initiative to strengthen Maine's gun safety laws is headed to the ballot this November, after the Secretary of State's Office confirmed Friday that enough valid signatures had been collected. Maine could join 21 other states that have passed red flag laws, officially called an Extreme Risk Protection Order, which would make it easier to temporarily confiscate one's guns if they are deemed to be a threat by law enforcement or their family members. Both gun safety advocates and owners in Maine have emphasized the need for such a law, according to Nacole Palmer, executive director of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition, which spearheaded the initiative. Red flag laws have been proven effective in reducing incidents of suicide – the leading cause of firearm death in Maine, especially among men. Maine is currently the only state to have a yellow flag law, a weaker provision that allows law enforcement officials to take away guns from someone considered a safety risk to themselves or others after an evaluation from a mental health professional. The red flag law, if passed, would authorize family members to directly petition courts to take someone's guns away if they pose a threat. After a failed legislative attempt to pass the red flag law last year, the coalition collected more than 80,000 signatures in about two months in support of passing the initiative. Of those, 74,888 were found to be valid, according to a release by the Secretary of State's Office, still exceeding the number required for a valid petition (which is 67,822, or 10% of the total votes cast in the most recent gubernatorial election). The initiative will now go to the Legislature for consideration, and lawmakers can choose to enact the bill as written or refer it to a statewide vote in November 2025. In her State of the Budget address in late January, Gov. Janet Mills defended Maine's yellow flag law, which she helped craft in 2020. Use of the yellow flag law has increased since the deadly Lewiston mass shooting in 2023, although some law enforcement agencies rely on it more than others. The independent commission tasked with investigating the events that led to the shooting determined, among other things, that the Sagadahoc County Sheriff's Office had sufficient cause to take the shooter into protective custody under Maine's Yellow Flag Law, but failed to do so. In a press statement, Palmer said that with the Secretary of State's validation, the coalition can start its campaign. 'This was the final hurdle in a process that began in the aftermath of Lewiston, as people across Maine and family members of those lost asked how we prevent this from ever happening again,' she said. 'This is a proven, commonsense tool for families that's been effective in many other states in saving countless lives and preventing tragedies like Lewiston.' Palmer said the gun lobby has already started 'spreading misinformation and scare tactics' about red flag laws, which have been upheld as constitutional and proven effective in states where they've passed. 'Maine is a strong gun rights state, where many of us hunt and shoot recreationally, but we're also a state that believes in gun responsibility,' said David McCrea, former state legislator and retired educator from Fort Fairfield and a volunteer for the Maine Gun Safety Coalition in a statement. 'As a gun owner myself, I'm proud to support this commonsense measure that will give family members tools to get help for their loved ones when they're in need, before a crisis becomes a preventable tragedy.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
