Saturday, September 6, 2008

Senators Who Almost Weren't

A One-Vote Oddity
Two One Vote Senators (cont. from page 34)

In 1844, the State Senators of Indiana, as in most states until the 17th Amendment,8 had the task of selecting the United States Senators. The Indiana Democrats in the state senate, thanks to the one vote victory of Daniel Kelso (see earlier post) held a one-vote majority and went into caucus to determine who to select as their next United States Senator. It gradually developed that the majority of the delegates favored a man who opposed the annexation of Texas.

Kelso, however was a long time supporter of the nation’s 6th President, Andrew Jackson. President Jackson favored Texas’ annexation, and as a Jackson man, Kelso would have no part in electing a U.S. Senator who would be an obstacle in “Old Hickory’s” plan for statehood for Texas. The democratic caucus was deadlocked between the Democratic and Whig candidates.

Things really got heated when Kelso began to threaten to vote with the Whigs and their candidate. Finally, Kelso offered a deal. He put forward the name of Edward A. Hannigan, as an alternative and then spiced up the offer with a promise: Accept Hannigan or he would vote with the Whigs. Exhausted with the deadlock, the democratic caucus accepted the bargain; Kelso voted with the Democrats and Hannigan became the U.S Senator by one vote—Daniel Kelso’s.

Hannigan went on and played a significant role on the national scene of the time wielding powerful influence over a host of issues related to the westward expansion of the nation. He had a distinguished career serving in the nation’s capitol. It was a career made possible by a one vote margin—twice. By one vote—Freeman Clark’s—Kelso had become a state senator. By one vote—Kelso’s—Hannigan had become a U.S. Senator.

Whose career might be started or ended in this year’s election because you took the time to go to the polls and vote your conscience? Go out and be a part of starting or ending someone’s career. It is both your privilege and your responsibility.

No comments: