Biden's withdrawal: Presidential character in action

The possibilities of the Office of the Presidency, the Framers of the Constitution knew, would depend in large measure on the character of its occupant. The Presidency was constrained by the terms of the Constitution and the doctrine of checks and balances, designed to temper the vaulting ambition of future chief executives who might imitate those in European countries that aggrandized power for their own interests. But the presidency was also empowered to perform the responsibilities of the Office, which possessed the bandwidth to inspire the nation to pursue worthy policies and goals, in both domestic and foreign affairs. The success of future presidents hinged on their ability to employ what President Lyndon B. Johnson characterized as the “moral force” of the Office.

Johnson, as complicated as anyone who has ever held the presidency, observed: “I knew that, as President and as a man, I would use every ounce of strength I possessed to gain justice for the black American. My strength as President then was tenuous – I had no strong mandate from the people; I had not been elected to that office. But I recognized that the moral force of the Presidency is often stronger than the political force. I knew that a President can appeal to the best in our people or the worst; he can call for action or live with inaction.”

As LBJ expected, the Democratic Party paid a high price for his leadership in championing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other measures to ensure Black Americans enjoyed the full rights and privileges of citizenship. Democrats lost the “solid South” and the American political landscape changed, dramatically. Johnson placed country over party, and the American people over self-interest. At that moment, he revealed the best side of his character. Undeterred by political and personal costs, Johnson answered his critics by asking, “What the hell is the presidency for?”

Presidential sacrifice is made even more remarkable by the fact that those who hold power, as James Madison wrote, often desire more power. To engage in acts of leadership, including the promotion of great causes that are not immediately popular, and which may undercut the interests of one’s constituents, seems politically counterintuitive, and is comprehensible only when viewed through a prism of duty to the nation.

George Washington is revered for many reasons, including his sterling character. After the Revolutionary War, Washington, viewed as a great patriot and conquering hero, enjoyed the adulation of his countrymen. He might have claimed sweeping authority but, like Cincinnatus, the Roman statesman, Washington voluntarily surrendered the reins of power in service to the Republic. At the end of his second term as president, beseeched by his fellow citizens to serve four more years, Washington, at the pinnacle of authority, declined and facilitated the first peaceful transfer of power that became a hallmark of the presidency and American Democracy. He said, “An elective monarchy is not why we fought the Revolution.” For the founding generation, character could have been spelled W-A-S-H-I-N-G-T-O-N.

Across a vista of 2,500 years, in nations throughout the world, there are few examples of acts of self-abnegation by political leaders, and still fewer of leaders standing aside when they might hold the highest offices, with all the perks and privileges imaginable, leaving the stage to a successor in the name of the national interest. America’s founders were familiar with politicians animated by sweeping ambitions, aspiring to the peaks of power, and they structured a system to protect the nation from such men.

Power is a heady a brew. The willingness to surrender the biggest stage in American electoral politics – the presidency and its pursuit as a candidate for re-election – is why so many – friends, foes and critics alike – have praised President Joe Biden’s decision to withdraw from the 2024 presidential election, in deference to the nation’s best interests. Ever the optimistic political warrior, Biden, to the end of his run, believed he had the ability to defeat Donald Trump, but yielded to polling data that indicated otherwise. For Biden, the prospect of a Trump victory was greater than he could bear. Armed with confidence that Vice President Kamala Harris could beat Trump and preserve democracy, he withdrew from the pinnacle of power. In the end, Biden placed country over self- interest, and demonstrated that he is one of the rare leaders willing to do so.

Sponsored in part by Humanities North Dakota. http://www.HumanitiesND.org