EMAIL DETAILS
SUBJECT:
Re: Research Paper
PRI: NORMAL
FROM:
M
mmuldoon@rosemontseneca.com
DATE:
2011-04-15 17:25:20
MSG_ID:
<BANLkTinZaj01DdOQcU+XK1eu1NZnVBENMw@mail.gmail.com>
RECIPIENTS:
TO:
H
Hunter Biden
<hbiden@rosemontseneca.com>
CC:
E
Eric Schwerin
<eschwerin@senecaga.com>
CONTENT:
TEXT: YES |
HTML: NO
PROCESSED
Do you normally just make edits or track changes? On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Hunter Biden <hbiden@rosemontseneca.com> wrote: > > > R. Hunter Biden > Rosemont Seneca Partners > 202-333-1880 > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Naomi Biden" <NBiden12@sidwell.edu> > Date: April 15, 2011 11:58:18 AM CDT > To: "Hunter Biden" <hbiden@rosemontseneca.com> > Subject: Research Paper > > > > Watergate's effect on the 1974 Congressional Elections > > Naomi Biden > > "In their minds, their scandal will always and forever be bigger than anyone > else's; and never again will living be quite so important."[1] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn1> > > The quote above refers to the absolute sense of responsibility > the newly elected senators and representatives felt to the nation. There is > no denying that Watergate and the exposed corruption and abuse of power in > the Nixon administration shook America's confidence in democracy. As the > scandal was publicized American faith in the men and women that were > representing and supposedly protecting their interest in congress was > dwindling. Although there is sufficient evidence that even prior to > Watergate being exposed there was a growing distrust in the federal > government, as the scandal progressed and the American public became > increasingly aware whatever doubts they were having were only magnified. The > most significant effects of Watergate were therefore short-term. Watergate > had both a direct and indirect effect on the Democratic sweep of the 1974 > congressional elections, in that although Watergate was not the only > determining factor in the outcome of the elections, its effect on almost of > the factors that contributed to voter turn out and party affiliation is > undeniable. The 4 democratic senators and 49 Democratic representatives > elected to congress in this year have been especially keen about their > responsibility to be honest and recognize the laws and regulations put in > place so that there is not an abuse in power on the scale of that of the > Nixon administration. Often referred to as the 'Watergate Class' the > senators and representatives elected in the year 1974 that continue to serve > today because they were often elected on promises that they would limit > federal corruption have not forgotten the dangers of an executive office > with no reigns. > > The break in at the Democratic National Committee offices in the > Watergate Hotel, was a only a small part of the enormous abuse of power on > the behalf of the Nixon administration during his 5 and half years in > office. When the break in was first reported there was almost no speculation > that any high-ranking government officials could have been involved, let > alone the President himself. As reporters, most well known being Bob > Woodward and Carl Bernstein of the Washington Post, uncovered more and more > complex connections between the break in and the government it became clear > that the corruption was on a scale that know one could have imagined. The > Nixon administration had undoubtedly violated the trust of their political > constituents and the entire Nation. The amount of people familiar with what > happened and what the Watergate scandal really was sky rocketed from > fifty-two percent of Americans in 1972 to ninety-eight percent in 1973[2] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn2> > . Although as Nixon resigned he claimed that he was not a crook and that > anything he did while in office he believed to be in the "best interest of > the nation", people no longer trusted President Nixon[3] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn3> > . The highly public trials and nationally covered scandal brought corruption > in the federal government to the forefront of voters concerns. > > The economic state of the nation in 1974 and public discontent > with their economic status can't be ignored when considering the reasons > that contributed to the outcome of both the house and senate elections. The > Yom Kippur war caused a brief but serious oil price shock. The result of > that was an inflation level of about 11 percent and an unemployment rate > close to 5 percent. Inflation became a forefront concern of the American > people. A poll taken prior to elections that year gathered that 50.2 percent > of Americans believed that inflation was the most significant economic > issue. The decline in disposable income was the largest decline since 1946, > when there was a shift in majority from democrats to republicans comparable > to that of republicans to democrats in 1974[4] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn4> > . Therefore the most common debates occurring between candidates running for > election or re-election around the country focused on two main issues: > corruption and the economy. Even the Republican National Committee chairman > at the time, Mary Louise Smith admitted, "Watergate and the economy have > combined to influence voters". What she did not say but was inferred is that > these to issues were primarily influencing voters to not vote for republican > candidates, particularly conservative ones running for re-election. > Republican leaders also downplayed Watergate and lack of trust in the > government as a leading issue. A poll taken prior to the election asking > "What do you think will be the most important national issues in the coming > congressional elections" reported that 71 percent of Republican chairmen > cited inflation and high cost of living, 65 percent named fuel shortages and > the energy crises, and only 32 percent mentioned Watergate and honesty in > government[5] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn5> > . In contrast a survey by the Republican National Committee by Market > Opinion Research of Detroit showed that 73 percent of the voters did in fact > think that Watergate was the number one issue[6] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn6> > . However as obvious as the correlation between economic discontent and > election outcome may seem surveys and polls have time and time again failed > to find any connection between the two[7] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn7> > . However numbers and data are not nearly as powerful as having the benefit > of looking over our shoulder as opposed to straining our eyes in an attempt > to look ahead. With that in mind, conventional wisdom seems to toward > believing that the economy lead to even more bitterness on the behalf of > voters towards Nixon and the Nixon administration which made voting > Republican in the 1974 elections even less appealing. > > A less obvious but equally as important question to ask is > whether the Democratic candidates running for election in the year following > Nixon's resignation were simply stronger running mates than those the > Republican's serving faced in 1972 or if the Watergate scandal allowed for a > stronger class of Democratic candidates. A correlation between a party with > a worse outlook, to weak candidates and therefore fewer funds has time and > time again been drawn clearly[8] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn8> > . Nixon's administration cast a dark cloud over the heads of the Republican > Party. A notable number of Republican retirements can be attributed to > recognition of probable defeat due to this 'cloud' and furthermore an > awareness that Republican's will remain the minority party and therefore not > have the opportunity to become committee chairmen[9] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn9> > . Age and an improved pension may also be factors, but that does not explain > why the Republican retirement rate was twice that of the Democrat's[10] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn10> > . Although people were selective in whom they punished for the corruption in > the early 1970's, conservative or loyal republicans did not have an easy > time facing their democratic opponent's in 1974[11] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn11> > . The party's being in trouble was no secret and it could be argued that for > that reason stronger democrats faced weaker republican causing the upturn in > republican dominancy in congress. If this were to be true, Watergate would > indirectly be the reason for the comparative lack of power behind Republican > Party incumbents. > > Voter turnout at the 1974 congressional elections was low, while > it had been steadily decreasing over the years prior Watergate was a factor > in the lack of enthusiasm in electing officials. The youth vote in > particular was dwindling as the publics respect in the 'system' reached an > all time low. The scandal and corruption undermined voter respect for > anybody participating in government affairs. 62 percent of the electorate > did not vote during the midterm elections. Many of who claim it was not a > disinterest in politics but rather a legitimate form of protest. Furthermore > voters were becoming increasingly cynical about the democratic process > claiming, "One vote doesn't make any difference"[12] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn12> > . Cynical and frustrated voters are just so because of economic despair and > a widely criticized dishonest government. > > Watergate contributed to the elevated number of 'switch voters' > or voters who are affiliated with one party but vote for another, recorded > in the 1974 midterm elections. Furthermore independents that voted in those > elections primarily voted democratically. Nixon made running as a democrat > an advantage in that he momentarily harmed or hurt his own party's > reputation. The majority of 'switchers' found themselves partial to > Democratic candidates and platforms because of both economic and Watergate > grievances directed towards Republican candidates.[13] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn13> > Often times votes swinging to the degree in which the halls of congress are > overturned occurs during midterm elections as it did in 1946 1958 1966 and > than 1974[14] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn14> > . That's not to say that it was not because of Watergate, rather that > midterm elections made it even more possible. It was because in changes at > the margin by voters. > > Another tool useful in determining the Watergate scandals effect > on the congressional midterm elections in 1974 is the campaign strategies > used by the candidates that won and the dilemmas the candidates that lost > faced. When Democrats won a difficult victory in Grand Rapid Michigan it > became evident to reporters and candidates alike, the failures of the Nixon > Administration was the "most powerful current in American Politics"[15] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn15> > . Republicans did not have difficult speaking their disapproval of the > Watergate Scandal but rather of their President. While a growing majority of > the population was discontent with Richard Nixon the person and the Nixon > administration as a whole, as Wisconsin Republican representative William A > Steiger best put it "Republican's can't be flatly anti Nixon and survive". > [16] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn16> > The delicacy with which Republicans faced their predicament was one that > could be easily seen through by voters. As Republican candidates resentment > towards the president was evident, while their fear of speaking out against > him remained. The dilemma Republicans faced in 1974 was one with no clear > solution, it was "precarious to be associated" with the President, but > "suicidal to speak against him."[17] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn17> > Democratic opponents used their knowledge of the difficult situation > Republican's were in to their advantage. Even Vice President Ford admitted > that in private talks with the President "He recognized, as I did, that it > could be the way the Democrats skillfully used the issue" the issue being > Watergate.[18] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn18> > In fact in the opinion of the President and Vice President alike, the > Democrats exploited Watergate, blowing it entirely out of proportion to win > votes. Blown out of proportions or not, in hindsight not, the Democrats did > win votes because of Watergate.[19] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn19> > > > The newly elected senators and representatives in the year 1974 > are called the Watergate babies for more reasons than one. They were > referred to as 'Babies' not only because they were new to the Senate and > House but also because they were so young. Six of them were under thirty and > as a group the brought the average age of House Members down to under fifty > for the first time since World War II[20] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn20> > . A vast amount of the winning candidates were substantially younger than > the officials they ran against. The new congressman and senators elected > were like any other new group of electees fresh and excited to demand change > from their older more experienced constituents. What made them unique > however was their large size, which gave them the unique ability to actually > instate the changes. As Rep. John LaFalce put it "Smaller classes can have > the same missionary zeal, but not have the same impact we had by our force > of numbers"[21] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn21> > . As soon as they came to office long time committee chairmen were replaced > and their voices were heard, their missions, make Washington more > accountable to the ordinary, tax-paying citizens of the United States[22] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn22> > . They were able to overthrow old party power partly because the majority of > them owed little to party bosses. Remembers Sam M. Gibbons (D-Fla.) ``we > didn't expect a lot of the Watergate class to win, we just put them on the > ballot to have a Democratic name there.''[23] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn23> > They largely fought against war and corruption and pushed environmental and > economic reform. > > Although some argue that like so many public officials before and after them > they were jaded by money and dirty politics their work while in office > proves quite the opposite. They are the biggest proof that Watergate > influenced who ran in the 1974 elections and why. To an extent they have > all kept the careful balance of power and accountability and transparency in > all government affairs close to heart as they served their terms. > > Even though President Richard Nixon's name was not on the ballot > during the 1974-midterm elections he was on the minds of the voters[24] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn24> > . Republicans were often equated with Nixon and in turn with Watergate and > all of the corruption that is associated with the break in. The Democrats > that year won a 2/3 majority in the house and a 3/5 majority in the > senate[25] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn25> > . There is no question that the voters sent a clear message: the current > administration was not acceptable. They wanted change. They wanted economic > security and an honest government. There lack of faith in the Republican > Party to do so stems from Watergate and the corruption and scandal it > represented and continues to represent. The democratic sweep brought a > younger, reformist, eager, class of freshman senators and congressman alike. > In a nation wide poll at the time Watergate was ranked the worst scandal in > American history by 57 percent of the population[26] > <http://webmail.sidwell.edu/exchange/NBiden12/Inbox/Drafts/RE:-12.EML/1_text.htm#_ftn26> > . To say it had little or no effect on the 1974 elections would be > ludicrous. > > > ________________________________ > > From: Hunter Biden [mailto:hbiden@rosemontseneca.com] > Sent: Mon 4/11/2011 4:05 PM > To: Naomi Biden > Subject: > > > > > > > -- Mike Muldoon Rosemont Seneca Partners, LLC 1010 Wisconsin Ave., NW Suite 705 Washington, DC 20007 (202) 333-1880 mmuldoon@rosemontseneca.com
METADATA:
THREAD:
INDEX:
Adhho2Ro/4ESbqpaRsyeV/M4rK4jxQ==
REFERENCES:
REPLY_TO:
<7E66EA8B-F5CA-4C27-8F22-BBB36F9A6D52@rosemontseneca.com>
REFS:
<7E66EA8B-F5CA-4C27-8F22-BBB36F9A6D52@rosemontseneca.com>
<B3E01780F8C8C444845C59D4135AA96B036074FC@mx2.sfsnet.org>