Presidents’ Day, a federal holiday celebrated on the third Monday in February, falls on the 18th this year. However, what is called that is actually designated at Washington’s Birthday to be celebrated. Many assume that it honors George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, and lately it has become fashionable to honor all 44 of the men who have held that high office.
Actually four men who became President were born in February. On February 6, 1911, Ronald Reagan was born in Illinois. In 1773, William Henry Harrison was born in Virginia. Abraham Lincoln, as any school child knows, made his appearance in a log cabin in Kentucky on February 12, 1809. And of course, George Washington was born in Virginia in 1732.
This holiday coming up on Monday was part of other celebrations affected by an act of Congress in 1968, when a law was passed which made for a three-day federal holiday. Others include Martin Luther King, Jr. Day in January. Next in line was Memorial Day, which for years was celebrated on May 30, first called Decoration Day. Now it is the last Monday in May of each year. October 12 was the date to celebrate Columbus Day, but now it is on the second Monday of October.
Trivia about Presidents’ Day include the date of Washington’s birth. Although many nations of Europe had changed from the Julian Calendar to the Gregorian Calendar by the beginning of the 16th century, English speaking places did not. This included England and America. A small error, compounded each year, eventually grew to an eleven-day gap between the two calendars. In 1752, Great Britain and its American colonies finally adopted the Gregorian Calendars. So Washington always felt his birthday was on February 11, 1732, and so celebrated it. Some people were superstitious to the point they thought that they lost eleven days of their life!
Another trivial aspect of the day is that only two of our federal holidays honor individual Americans. As you can guess by the above, MKL, Jr. and Washington are the two, though most do not realize that Presidents’ Day is officially designated to honor our first chief executive.
When we honor all who have held this office, it is good to remember that all of the Presidents were not equal. Historians periodically rank the lot from good to bad or indifferent. Any subjective review of our Presidential history will show some to be not so good, some definitely bad, while others have attained the status of greatness. Mostly, they were men elevated to an office for which they were not really suited and so merit a rating of mediocre or average.
First, who (in my humble opinion), were the five worst Presidents? I taught history and government for 38 years, and from my study and reading I gleaned these five. James Buchanan is routinely ranked last or next to last. His presidency, from 1857 to 1861, was marked by depression, increasing friction between north and south and his inability to mitigate the gathering storm of civil war. Although not of his doing, he was chief executive when one of the worst decisions of the Supreme Court was handed down, the Dred Scott decision of 1857. Hailed by the south, reviled by the north, Buchanan was the unfortunate man in the White House during that time. Buchanan was not without experience in government, called “Old Functionary” because of the many offices he held during previous administrations, but he could not call on that background to slow the advance toward war. He also holds the distinction of being the only bachelor to serve as President.
John Quincy Adams also rates near the bottom, but was the victim of circumstances not entirely under his control. He served from 1825-1829, but won the office after trailing his main rival, Andrew Jackson, in both the Electoral vote and the popular vote. Because there were four candidates who earned votes in the Electoral College, Jackson did not win a majority, so the election was decided by the House of Representatives. When Henry Clay threw his support to Adams, the die was cast. Little of Adams’ program was passed, and he was routinely reviled by many.
Only one two term President makes my list of poor occupants of the White House. This was U. S. Grant, who served from 1869 to 1877. All know of his stellar record as the leading general of the Union Armies, leading them to victory over the forces led by Robert E. Lee. But success on the battlefield did not translate to success in the political arena. His biggest failing was selection of people to work for him, as several participated in some of the most damaging scandals ever to engulf the White House, although Grant himself was never personally implicated in them. In addition, a crippling depression in 1873 helped ruin any chance of achieving any lasting greatness as President.
One twentieth century President makes my list, Jimmy Carter. He was the beneficiary of the Watergate Scandal, which brought down Richard Nixon. Serving from 1977-1981, only one significant achievement can be recorded, his brokering of the Israeli-Egyptian peace accord. Other than that, his administration was marked by the weakness of the President in getting programs passed, the Iranian hostage crisis, an economy wracked by inflation at 12.5 % by the time he left office, and a country, in his own words, caught in a “national malaise”. A botched attempt to rescue U. S. hostages in Tehran emphasized to many his weakness as a leader.
Although it is tempting to include in this list those who did not serve a full term as President, from an historical standpoint that is unfair. Those who fit that category would be Zachary Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Chester Arthur, and Warren Harding. So that leaves me with a choice of John Tyler, Martin Van Buren, and Franklin Pierce. Perhaps Tyler can be excused because of the unique circumstances of his elevation to the office. He ran as vice president in the 1840 election with William Henry Harrison. Harrison, a Whig, died one month into his term, and the “renegade” Democrat, Tyler, put on the ticket to defeat the incumbent, Martin Van Buren became President. Still a Democrat at heart, Tyler was opposed by the majority Whigs, causing all but one of his Cabinet to resign at the same time. Van Buren was beset by a devastating depression caused by the monetary policy of his predecessor, Andrew Jackson.
We are left, then, with Franklin Pierce. A Northern Democrat with Southern inclinations, the accidental death of his son about the time of his becoming President left him personally wounded. But more than that, his administration, like his successor Buchanan, was beset by the gathering storm of civil war. He also was unable to do much to mitigate the growing animosity between South and North, nor able to find common ground to avoid the conflict. During his time as President, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which exacerbated the slavery issue and brought on Bleeding Kansas and the violence of men like John Brown, was passed. After the Compromise of 1850, which delayed the civil war for a decade, Pierce’s time in office (1853-1857) did little to help.
On the other side of the ledger, I will now manage to irritate dedicated Democrats and rabid Republicans by not including in either the worst or best Barack Obama or Donald Trump. One of the “unspoken rules” of ranking, at least in the past, is that it takes 25 years at a minimum to be able to assess the competence or incompetence of Presidents. That has been shortened by the advent of quick access to public records, but it is unfair to officially rank high or low those last two Oval Office occupants. However, in my opinion, history will rank Barack Obama among the worst president for his Iran deal, the Uranium sale to Russia, the worsened race relations in the country, the failing Affordable Care Act, and the widening split between liberals and conservatives. And though you can not judge a president on only two years in office, Donald Trump has accomplished more for the good of this country in those two years than any of his predecessors in the same period of time, keeping nearly all of his campaign promises.
Great Presidents are rare. To select five will be difficult after the first two, but there are some indications of some rising to the top. My ranking would be that the first two are tied at the pinnacle — George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Washington is there because he was the first, and many of his practices and policies set the tone for his successors. He refused to serve more than two terms and turned down the opportunity to found a dynasty in the United States. His dignity and bearing have been the pattern for most of the future Presidents. Truly, he, in the words of a contemporary at his death, was “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen”.
Without Lincoln, the Union would not have survived. It took a man of unequaled resolution to withstand the opposition he had to keep the nation united. In the dark days of the Civil War, with thousands killed and maimed, Lincoln kept the course. He turned the war into a war for freeing the slaves. A United States would not look like it does without the leadership of Abraham Lincoln. When he died, one of his cabinet members summed up his life in these simple words: “Now he belongs to the ages.”
Three more would find themselves in my “near great” category. Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) restored fiscal stability, elevated the Presidency above partisan acrimony, and ended the Cold War with the Soviet Union. Underestimated at the time of his incumbency, his stature has grown, especially when compared to those men who followed him into the White House. His rhetoric was at time uplifting; who can forget the tribute to the astronauts who died on the Challenger, who in Reagan’s unforgettable phrase, “touched the face of God”. In foreign affairs, the words in Berlin will last as long as the nation does, “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”
For simply changing the direction of the Presidency, Theodore Roosevelt deserves recognition as a near great. He was the first “progressive” to sit in the Oval Office, and he became a great conservationist, helping to create several national parks and preserves. His regulatory agencies still exist to this day, helping to ensure the purity of our drugs and food. With his energetic work and bully pulpit, Teddy Roosevelt helped shape the modern Presidency.
A dark horse for near greatness will cause many to scratch their heads, but I would posit that James K. Polk (1845-1849) merits mention. The first openly expansionist President, he campaigned on a slogan of “Fifty-four forty or fight”, referring to disputed territory in the Northwest. His sending troops to the Rio Grande in 1846 sparked the Mexican War, after which a treaty added, in part or whole, the states of Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona and California. That alone impacted, even today, our national history.
Others would argue for Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809), but his only true lasting monument was the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Franklin Roosevelt (1933-1945) would deserve some mention for his longevity, the Great Depression and World War 2, the last two which unfairly burnishes his legacy.
So what are we to do with Presidents’ Day? Perhaps we should take a minute or two to remember the first President, whose day it is officially. But since this holiday occurs in February, to remember the three born in this month who achieved greatness or close to it. Many now see this time to give homage to all those who sought and realized the dream of leading our nation. For good or bad, they have affected our national life and brought us to what we are today.