An American Monarchy: A Parliamentary America TL by DKrol

[DKrol]

An American Monarchy:
A Parliamentary America TL by DKrol

Introduction

America was in a bad place in the summer of 1965. What began as a neighborhood clash in Los Angeles over the drunk-driving arrest of an African American man quickly swept the nation as whites clashed with blacks in every community. Law and order disappeared and the powers of government quickly fell apart. President Lyndon Johnson, after making campaign promises of passing the late-President Kennedy’s Civil Rights Act, quickly lost his support for the bill due to, what he called, “the violence of the Afro-Americans when confronted by the law”. As the situation imploded and the White House came under fire from rioters, President Johnson resigned. He told Americans that “the situation, that of the American racial relations, has reached a point that I can no longer claim to be able to manage”.

Vice President Hubert Humphrey, 54 years old, was sworn in as President on August 28, 1965. He was determined to solve the race relations issue, telling one aid “It is necessary to the continuation of this country that the white and the black be able to live side-by-side”. Against the advice of the Secret Service, who had lost President Kennedy only two years earlier, President Humphrey set out on a speaking tour to visit the sites of major clashes and talk to the American people directly. Unfortunately for President Humphrey, the American people did not want to hear him. On September 12, 1965 a series of shots rang out while the President was speaking to a crowd in Jersey City, New Jersey. Two bullets fired from a M1911 and one fired from a Smith & Wesson Model 10 tore into the President’s chest. A pursuing investigation found that three African American World War II veterans, angered over the President’s failure to “provide for all of America’s veterans”, used their service pistols to gun down the President.

With President Humphrey having only been in office a few weeks, the Vice Presidency was vacant. At this point, the Speaker of the House, John William McCormack, ascended to the presidency. It was not an office McCormack had ever wanted, especially not in the fall of 1965 after months of rioting, looting, and violence. President McCormack attempted to go through Congress to achieve a peaceful solution, calling on his former co-workers to push through “meaningful Civil Rights legislation”. Many of the Congressmen and Senators, however, had adopted the same feelings that former President Johnson had: If African Americans won’t follow the law now, why should we legislate them into equality? After months of failed negotiations and continuing violence, President McCormack sadly declared “The American system of government has failed to respond to the needs of the American people. When a government reaches this state, it has gone on too long. That is why I’m recommending a Constitutional Convention be held to determine the best course of action for the future of this country. These actions are necessary if America is to have a future.”

By March, the requisite number of states had agreed with President McCormack and selected their delegates to the Constitutional Convention, which was decided to be held in Kansas City, Missouri. The delegates to the Convention were 65% white and 35% black, 95% man and 5% woman. Early on in the process, many delegates wanted to establish a one-chamber legislature, to make passing legislation easier, and to hold a new presidential election. Others felt that these actions were not sufficient to fix the issues. The idea to establish a constitutional monarchy, to allow for continuity in government and to create a symbol of nation unity, was first brought forward by Emmanuel Celler, a delegate from New York, and was eventually endorsed by Martin Luther King, Jr., a delegate from Alabama, once provisions for a unicameral parliament, an independent judiciary, full voting rights for African Americans, and a plebiscite for the monarchy were added.

The Convention then turned their attention to whom to select for the new royal family. Knowing that the King would only be a figure head, some delegates wanted to offer the throne to former President Harry Truman. Truman was passed over due to his advanced age, his connections to the old constitution, and his lack of a male heir. Henry Cabot Lodge, from Massachusetts, was also considered but also rejected because of his family’s deep ties to the old way. Eventually, businessman Nelson Rockefeller was selected by the Convention because he represented “an openness to a new stage in America’s history”, he had many male heirs, and he was considered "elite enough to be a royal", as one delegate put it. Speaker of the Convention Robert F. Kennedy, another delegate from New York, announced the Convention’s recommendation of a constitutional monarchy with a unicameral House of Commons, elected by the full adult population of the United States, and a judiciary with the power to remove the monarch from office.

A plebiscite was held on September 17, 1966 and a strong majority voted “yes” to the new constitution. Many expected the vote to pass easily, as it was endorsed by Robert Kennedy, President McCormack, Martin Luther King, Jr., and SNCC leader Julian Bond. The vote triggered the start of a transition the likes of which had not been seen by the world. Nelson Rockefeller was declared “King-in-Waiting” by the Congress and President McCormack became “Chief Executive” while provisions were made for the Rockefellers to move to Washington and other provisions were made for the shift to a Westminster-style government with 650 members, roughly one for every 305,000 citizens. Another national election was held on May 4, 1967 to send the first Members of Parliament to the newly-redesigned Capital, now called the Hall of Parliament.

The campaign for the first Parliament was short and based mostly on the personalities and histories of the leaders of the new political parties, as the Democratic Party and the Republican Party had been forced to disband in the Constitution of 1966. The Conservative Party, a center right party, was made up of the former Business Wing of the Republican Party and was led by Robert Taft, Jr. The Independent Democrats, a center left party, comprised many Northern Democrats and a few Liberal Republicans and was led by Mike Mansfield. The American Independence Party, a far right party, was made up of many former Southern Democrats and those Republicans who had opposed Civil Rights actions and was led by Strom Thurmond. The Labor Party, a far left party, was made up of pro-union former Democrats and was led by Richard Daley. Several regional parties were also formed but were too niche to have an impact on the national decision. After all the ballots had been counted, it was clear that no party would receive a majority but that the Independent Democrats and Mike Mansfield would be the largest party. In a show of unity, to help heal the nation after the fall of the 1787 Constitution, Robert Taft agreed to join in a coalition with the Independent Democrats.

The makeup of the first Parliament was 255 Independent Democrats, 231 Conservatives, 75 members of the AIP, 44 Laborites, 21 Socialists, 17 Greens, and 7 Independents. Mike Mansfield was chosen as the first Prime Minister, with Robert Taft as the first Deputy Prime Minister, and he received his commission to form a government on May 8, 1967 by King Nelson. The new America was born.

[DKrol]

First Mansfield Government, May 1967
Prime Minister: The Rt. Hon. Mike J. Mansfield (InDem.)
- Leader of the Independent Democrats
Deputy Prime Minister: The Rt. Hon. Robert A. Taft, Jr. (Cons.)
- Leader of the Conservative Party

Minister of Foreign Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Joseph J. Sisco (InDem.)
Minister of Finance: The Rt. Hon. Russel B. Long (InDem.)
Minister of Defense: The Rt. Hon. John G. Tower (Cons.)
Minister of Justice: The Rt. Hon. Homer Thornberry (InDem.)
Minister of Interior Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Floyd V. Hicks (InDem.)
Minister of Trade, Industry, and Business: The Rt. Hon. Robert A. Taft, Jr. (Cons.)
Minister of Labor and Employment: The Rt. Hon. C.R. Smith (InDem.)
Minister of Health and Social Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Stephen M. Young (InDem.)
Minister of Education: The Rt. Hon. Charles H. Percy (Cons.)
Minister of Agriculture and the Environment: The Rt. Hon. George S. McGovern (InDem.)
Minister of Transportation: The Rt. Hon. John A. Volpe (Cons.)
Minister of Infrastructure and Housing: The Rt. Hon. Roger D. Branigin (InDem.)
Minister of Veterans Affairs: The Rt. Hon. James M. Gavin (Cons.)
Minister of Native Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Fred R. Harris (InDem.)
Minister of Sports, Media, and Culture: The Rt. Hon. Peter S.E. Lawford (InDem.)

Minister without Portfolio: The Rt. Hon. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Ind.)

Leader of the Government in the House of Commons: The Rt. Hon. Earle C. Clements (InDem.)
Chief Government Whip in the House of Commons: The Rt. Hon. Edward M. Kennedy (InDem.)

The First Government of Mike Mansfield did not get off to an easy start. Although nice on paper, the Grand Coalition between the Independent Democrats and the Conservatives became strained quickly. Mansfield was focused on healing the racial tensions that had literally destroyed the government only a year earlier, while Taft was more concerned with rebuilding America’s image and strengthening the economy. Taft was especially worried about the fate of the United States in the United Nations, as Soviet and Chinese representatives were discussing the possibility of removing the United States from the Permanent Five of the Security Council. Although in government together, Taft often led his party against Mansfield on votes in the Commons. Most government-sponsored bills were able pass thanks to the support the Independent Democrats had from Laborites, Socialites, and Greens.

After passing many administrative bills, codifying the new Constitution and building up the government, the Commons then took up the issue the High Court. The High Court was to the 1966 Constitution what the Bill of Rights was to the 1787 Constitution; many voters staked their support for the Constitution on the checks-and-balances established by the High Court. The Constitution left the number of justices on the High Court up to the Parliament to decide, which quickly became a major fight. The Conservatives wanted a small, elite court, made up of 2 Justices and a Chief Justice. Laborites and Socialists fought for a larger court, with anywhere between 9 and 21 Justices, depending on which proposal was looked at. Ultimately, the Prime Minister proposed an 11-member High Court in the High Court Governance Act. Labor leader Richard Daley and Socialist leader Tucker P. Smith endorsed the 11-member Court, giving the Independent Democrats enough votes to push the plan through over strong Conservative opposition, who worried that creating too many Justices would “Unnecessarily expand the size of government and make it harder for the High Court to complete its duties”.

Then came the issue of who to place on the High Court. The Constitution gives that power to the Prime Minister on the advice of the Cabinet, without any need for confirmation from the Commons. With 12 Independent Democrats in the Government and only 5 Conservatives, Prime Minister Mansfield had no trouble getting his first choices through. Mansfield wanted to make a statement with his choices, placing several women and minorities on the High Court. On September 9, 1967, the Prime Minister announced the first 11 members of the High Court of the United States of America.

Chief Justice: Thurgood Marshall
First Justice: A. Leon Higgenbotham, Jr.
Second Justice: Earl Warren
Third Justice: Lorna E. Lockwood
Fourth Justice: Edward T. Gignoux
Fifth Justice: William H. Hastie
Sixth Justice: Shirley A.M. Hufstedler
Seventh Justice: Charles S. Desmond
Eighth Justice: John B. Swainson
Ninth Justice: Elsijane Trimble Roy
Tenth Justice: Roy Wilkins

[DKrol]

President Johnson was preparing for a massive military offensive in Vietnam when the civil unrest began. Although Congress had passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, Johnson had had little time to act on the authorization before he was forced to turn his attention to the domestic crisis. Presidents Humphrey and McCormack were far too consumed by the collapsing government to pay any mind to the Nationalist-Communist fire that Johnson had stoked in Southeast Asia. With the government now stabilized, to some degree, the issue of Vietnam bubbled back to the surface.

Prime Minister Mansfield was firmly opposed to reengaging in the war, saying that he failed to see any “substantial American interest in the region”. Deputy Prime Minister Taft, like his famously isolationist father, called the Vietnam War “a quagmire we shall never escape from, should we even dip our toes in its murky waters”, although this position wasn’t supported by all Conservative MPs. Former General Curtis LeMay, now an AIP MP from California and Chief AIP Spokesman on Defense and Security, was the main voice calling for the United States to return to Vietnam under the new government. Speaking at a press conference with AIP leader Strom Thurmond, LeMay told reporters “Kennedy and Johnson made the decision to put our troops in Vietnam. I was over there; I saw the massive gains we were making before the revolution. We can win Vietnam but we have to act quickly, before the networks we spent years building fall apart”. LeMay found an ally in the battle to return to Vietnam in an unlikely place: Socialist leader Tucker Smith.

Smith and the normally anti-war Socialists wanted America to return to Vietnam, except on the other side. Smith and the Socialist Spokesmen put out a press release calling for America “to join our comrades in North Vietnam in the battle for the Great People’s Revolution”. With the combined 145 votes from AIP MPs, Socialists, a few Independents, and pro-intervention Conservatives and Independent Democrats, Thurmond and Smith were able to force the American Involvement in Vietnam Act to the floor of the Commons for debate.

The debate over the American Involvement in Vietnam Act has been regarded as one of the strangest hodge-podges of cross-bench support ever seen in a Parliamentary system. AIP MPs and Socialists stood side-by-side in support of passing the bill, which only called for America to re-deploy troops to the region and did not prescribe a specific goal or agenda, while Independent Democrats and Conservatives fought each other from the Government benches. At one point, Prime Minister Mansfield had to turn around and face the Government backbenchers to debate with Frank Church, a pro-interventionist Independent Democrat from Idaho. After four days of debate, the bill failed on the first vote, 498 to 153. LeMay pressured Thurmond to force a second vote but, after Thurmond met with Smith and other pro-intervention MPs, Thurmond told LeMay “The issue is dead. Communism will win in Vietnam”.

[DKrol]

On January 14, 1968, Bart Starr led the Green Bay Packers to a resounding 33 to 14 victory over the Oakland Raiders in the AFC-NFC World Championship game. This was Green Bay’s second straight victory in the Championship game, which drew a television audience of nearly 40 million on NBC. The game caught especially caught the attention of several MPs because of the unique ownership model of the Packers. For some Independent Democrats, Laborites, and Socialists, publically owned sports teamed looked like the modern example of nationalized economies.

Sports, Media, and Culture Minister Peter Lawford, an Independent Democrat from California, brought the idea of creating a publicly owned professional football team to the Prime Minister at a Cabinet meeting in the middle of February. Lawford’s original plan called for a single NFL-quality team to be formed, funded by American taxes, and compete in the National Football League. When Conservative Ministers questioned Lawford, he responded by saying “The interest in professional sports is immense. If we are to provide for the public good, a basic function of government, we must get involved in the field now.” Prime Minister Mansfield was unsure about the idea but scheduled a meeting with NFL Commissioner Pete Rozelle to talk over the idea.

Pete Rozelle, the former General Manager of the Los Angeles Rams and a friend of Lawford, was receptive to the idea. Rozelle told Mansfield that, because of the high rate of folding with professional football teams, having a publicly owned team would “help establish the credibility of the National Football League as an institution”. Rozelle, however, expressed concerns about the ability of such a team to compete at a NFL level. He was specifically worried about the management ladder that would exist in that organization, saying “Where does the buck stop? Are we going to bother the Prime Minister with every roster decision?” Mansfield thanked Rozelle for his insight and went to the Cabinet with a new plan.

What came out of the Mansfield-Rozelle meeting became the Public Sports Act. The bill called for the creation of the American Football Development League, a professional football minor league with 20 teams. Each team would be overseen by a government-appointed “Executive Manager”, who would hire the team’s General Manager and Coaching staff, and the league would be overseen by a government-appointed Board, made up of 6 Directors and a President. All income from the league, through ticket sales, merchandise sales, and endorsement deals, would go into the government coffers after paying the player and staff salaries. In each budget the Commons passes, a line-item would be set aside to fund the AFDL. Finance Minister Russel Long assured the Cabinet that, based on the success of the NFL, the AFDL would “be paying for itself out of the gate, after a small investment by the Government”.

The Conservative members of the Cabinet were appalled by the idea for many of the same reasons the Independent Democrats supported it. If the NFL is doing so well, Education Minister Charles Percy argued, why do we need the government to step in and stimulate it? Deputy Prime Minister Robert Taft was initially open to considering the idea, if the league was reduced to 10 teams and private sponsorship of teams was allowed, but threats of a leadership challenge forced Taft to oppose the bill. The Conservatives were united in their opposition to the Public Sports Act, as were the AIP MPs, placing the bill’s fate in question. Combined, the Conservatives and AIP MPs fell just short of a majority. It was the debate over the Public Sports Act that brought that fact to the forefront.

The Grand Coalition had been fragile since its start, with Taft first suggesting the idea as a show of good faith in the 1966 Constitution. Other Conservative leaders hoped that having the two main parties together would moderate the more extreme elements of both sides. Many Conservatives, however, saw Mansfield turn to Laborites, Socialists, and Greens for advice and votes. The first calls to leave the Grand Coalition came during the fight over the High Court but Taft was able to quiet them. When the Public Sports Act came to the floor of the Commons, Taft was forced to give in. On April 12, 1968, after year and a half in a fragile coalition, Conservative Party leader Robert Taft announced that his party would be leaving the Government. He and Deputy Conservative leader Jerry Ford immediately scheduled meetings with AIP leader Strom Thurmond and AIP Deputy leader George Wallace to discussing forming a minority coalition government.

[DKrol]

Glad so many people are liking this!

Any one have any questions, comments, or concerns so far?

[DKrol]

Glad so many people are liking this!

Any one have any questions, comments, or concerns so far?

Surely there'd be a lot opposed to the monarchy.

There's a fair amount. Most of the people who voted yes in the referendum did so as an expression of a desire for change, rather than a statement of support for the monarchy. Polling in late 1967 showed that about 47% of Americans were either opposed to the monarchy or have "serious reservations" about the monarchy.

[DKrol]

The alliance between the Conservatives and AIP MPs rebuilt the old Republican Party and brought in several former Southern Democrats. Media analysists called the new coalition “the definitive governing party” of the new nation. For Conservative leader Robert Taft, the new government meant having an actual say in the Commons. For AIP leader Strom Thurmond, the new government meant having a bigger pulpit. For Prime Minister Mike Mansfield, however, the alliance meant a big headache.

On April 15, Thurmond motioned for a vote of no confidence in the Commons. The motion was first seconded by Conservative Deputy leader Jerry Ford and then seconded again by independent MP Barry Goldwater. Speaker of the Commons Larry O’Brien, an independent in name but an Independent Democrat in practice, acted very slowly on the motion. He did not recognize the motion until April 18 and then scheduled the debate nearly a month after Thurmond made the original motion.

While O’Brien was stalling on the logistics of the motion of no confidence, Prime Minister Mansfield was scrambling to hold his government together. He and Taft met privately no less than six times in the month leading up to debate. Mansfield at first called the move a bluff on the part of the Conservatives, as an attempt to gain more influence in the cabinet. But when Taft held firm that he was serious about leaving the Government and join with Thurmond’s AIP, Mansfield crumbled. He offered everything to Taft to keep the Government together. An increase in the number of Cabinet Ministers, committee chairmanships, control over the Rules Committee. Mansfield offered to make Taft, in essence, Co-Prime Minister. Although Taft himself was receptive to Mansfield’s compromises, Conservative leadership, especially Conservative Party Chairman Richard Nixon, were adamant that the motion of no confidence must go through.

The final vote on the motion of no confidence was held on May 15, 1968, just over a year after the General Election that returned a hung parliament. The vote went largely as was expected, with Conservatives and AIP MPs voting No and Independent Democrats, Laborites, and Socialists voting Yes. The real surprise of the vote came from the Greens, who bucked Mansfield and voted No based on promises from Nixon that the next Conservative Manifesto would include several pro-Earth policies. The three independents who were Republicans under the 1787 Constitution also joined the No vote. Shortly after 1PM Speaker O’Brien called out the tally. 326 No to 324 Yes.

The victory of the Conservatives in the motion of no confidence set a series of events in motion. Although Conservative leader Robert Taft and AIP leader Strom Thurmond could have negotiated into a minority government, with the parliamentary support from the Greens, Conservative Central Office Chairman Thruston Morton advised otherwise. Morton, whose office oversaw all polling and electoral operations for the Conservatives, told Taft that, if a general election was called, the Conservatives would be the outright majority party in the Commons. Morton’s polling showed that voters viewed the Independent Democrats as weak, ineffective, and incapable of governing.

Heading Morton’s advice, Taft announced that he would be waiving his right to attempt and form a government, forcing an election. The second General Election under the 1967 Constitution was underway.

[DKrol]

Very interesting.

Thank you!

[DKrol]

While the Conservatives were rallying around Robert Taft and Jerry Ford, the Independent Democrats were dividing over Mike Mansfield. At their Party Conference, held in Baltimore in August of 1968, a group of Independent Democrat MPs led a leadership challenge against Mansfield, citing his “poor leadership of our party in Government”. Mansfield, already defeated in the Commons on the motion of no confidence, read the writing on the wall and announced he would not be contesting the leadership race. Mansfield ended up not even attending the conference, choosing to, instead, take a vacation with his family to South Carolina and participate in the conference over the telephone.

Three main candidates came forward for the leadership of the Independent Democrats. Pat Brown, MP from California and Deputy Minister for Health and Social Affairs, was the first to declare he would be seeking the leadership of the party. He cited his long service as Governor or California under the old Constitution as the main reason he should be leader, pointing to his “long record of elected leadership in a Republican state”. The next main candidate to emerge was John Connally, a more conservative MP from Texas. Connally positioned himself as “the strongest candidate to flip seats in AIP and Conservative territory”. The third candidate for leader was the one that drew the most media coverage.

Julian Bond was a major figure in the ratification of the 1967 Constitution as the leader of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. He had stood as an Independent Democrat candidate for a seat in Atlanta in 1967 but lost the seat to the AIP candidate. Although Bond lost, Mansfield appointed him to the Independent Party Executive Council and made him the Government’s number one spokesman on Civil Rights. He had filed to run as a candidate for the same seat in Atlanta for the 1968 election. When Bond announced he would be running for leader of the Independent Democrats, he gave a scathing speech against the white leadership, saying “This party was at the front of the battle of racial equality in 1966 and 1967. We won the election. And what have we done? The Mansfield Government failed to pass a single bill for the African Americans voters that put the Government in office. I will change that”.

The Independent Democrat Party Charter laid out very specific criteria for the election of a leader. Members of the Independent Democrat Party Executive Council receive five votes for leader, all Independent Democrat MPs are given two votes, and non-MP delegates to the party conference each got one vote. The Executive Council, made of the leaders of the 14 internal organs of the party, held 70 votes, the MPs, made of the 255 men and women elected in 1967, held 510 votes, and the 200 delegates, selected by local party councils, held 200 votes. The Charter was designed to give the majority of the power in selecting leaders to the establishment. In the 1968 leadership contest, Pat Brown was the preferred candidate of the establishment.

On the first round of voting, Connally came in first with 300 votes. Bond came in a surprise second, claiming 218 votes, followed closely by Brown, with 214. The remaining 48 were spread across a variety of candidates. Brown, although supportive of Civil Rights, was insulted by coming in behind an African American and withdrew from the contest after the first vote. Some in the party worried that Connally was too conservative to lead the Independent Democrats, the main center-left party in the nation. Others worried about the electability of a party led by an African American. The second vote showed a much closer race, with Connally sitting at 341 and Bond at 311, with 128 either not voting or supporting other candidates. Some in the party began to murmur about putting forward another candidate for the third ballot, but who to put forward drew a bigger fight behind the scenes than the fight between Connally and Bond.

The third ballot was the deciding vote. Shortly before voting was about to take place, Agriculture Minister George McGovern and New York MP Robert Kennedy endorsed Julian Bond for leader and pledged their support to campaigning for him in Atlanta. McGovern was the face of the future of the party and Kennedy represented the past, according to many media commentators. Their endorsements swung many votes to Bond, enough to secure the nomination. The third ballot broke down to 402 votes for Bond, 357 for Connally, 18 not voting, and 3 for other candidates.

Independent Democrat Party Chairman John M. Bailey announced Bond as the new leader of the Independent Democrats on August 10, 1968. As Bailey read off the final vote totals, John Connally staged a walk-out with his supporters, mainly Independent Democrats who were moderate on Civil Rights issues. Of the 780 delegates credentialed to vote at the party conference, Connally walked out with 210 as Bond took the stage to give his victory speech. The next day, Connally announced he was resigning as an Independent Democrat MP and would stand for election in his San Antonio district as a member of the American Independence Party. His supporters were split in their defections between the AIP and the Conservatives.

[DKrol]

The 1968 General Election was the first one covered extensively by television. The 1967 Election was too short for television networks to shift their coverage-styles to the new system and reporting still relied heavily on newspapers. For 1968, all three of the networks devoted large amount of resources into following the party leaders, presenting major party rallies, and providing extensive punditry. The 1968 Independent Democrat Party Conference was the second highest-rated program on CBS, following the NFC-AFC World Championship game.

Most polls taken before the election of Julian Bond as leader of the Independent Democrats confirmed the internal Conservative Party polls. A NBC poll taken on July 21 showed Conservatives with 33%, Independent Democrats with 24%, American Independence Party with 20%, Socialists with 11%, Labor with 9%, and other local parties with 3%. Bond’s election massively shook up the electoral landscape. The first poll taken after Bond’s election, conducted by the Wall Street Journal, was widely discredited by the commentator class because of its massive swing for AIP.

The Wall Street Journal found the Conservatives leading with 28%, AIP in a close second with 27%, Independent Democrats sat at 19%, Socialists at 10%, and Labor was tied with other at 8%. A CBS poll also found an uptick in support for AIP, but not to the extent that the WSJ poll did and continued to show the Independent Democrats as the second party. Bond himself dismissed the WSJ poll as “a poll conducted by racists, of racists”. Conservative leader Taft was overjoyed by the rise in AIP, assuming that any increase in AIP MPs would lend the Conservatives a stronger ally in the Commons. AIP leader Strom Thurmond felt a groundswell in support, leading him to think the polls were understating how much AIP was rising, and began to reallocate resources to districts where AIP candidates had run second and third a few weeks before the election.

Thurmond’s AIP was focused on continuing its course of ardent conservativism, hitting on “preserving classic American values” and limiting government spending. Taft and the Conservatives tipped slightly to the center, making good on Party Chairman Richard Nixon’s promise to Greens leader Gaylord Nelson to include several pro-Earth policies in the Conservative Manifesto. The Conservative Manifesto called for the passing of clean air, clean water, and anti-pollution measures. Nelson announced an electoral alliance with the Conservatives, pledging to “work towards our common goals”. The Julian Bond-led Independent Democrats embraced Civil Rights and their manifesto called for several new policies, the most radical of which required that no less than 3 members of any Government Cabinet be African Americans and that the Chief Judge of the High Court always be an African American. The Independent Democrats focused most of their resources on the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, the Conservatives piled their resources in the Mid-West and the West, AIP spread their resources across the South, the Mid-Atlantic, and the West, while Labor put most of their efforts into the Greater Chicago and Greater New York City areas, and the Socialists and Greens fought for seats in California, Wisconsin, and Michigan.

The CBS News Exit Poll on October 3 showed a Conservative majority, with AIP rising to second party status, Independent Democrats slipping to third, Labor holding in fourth, followed by the Greens, Socialists, and independents. Over the course of election night, however, a different picture was painted. In district after district the CBS Exit Poll had to be corrected and the projection recalculated. Shortly after midnight, CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite declared “The boys in the back clearly got this one wrong”.

[DKrol]

After all the votes were counted, Strom Thurmond was the one receiving the commission to form a government. The final votes gave the AIP 342 seats, a 17 seat majority, the Conservatives came in second with 212, Labor in third with 41, Independent Democrats in fourth with 39, Greens in fifth with 9, Socialists in sixth with 4, and independents or other parties won 3 seats. The main party leaders, Robert Taft, Strom Thurmond, Julian Bond, Richard Daley, Tucker Smith, and Gaylord Nelson, all won their districts. Thurmond won his by the largest margin and Nelson’s win was the narrowest.

The 1968 General Election was a major blow to the Independent Democrats, who were once viewed by some commentators as the “new face” of America. H.R. Haldeman, a major Conservative donor and political commentator, told NBC’s Chet Huntley “This election only cements what the conservative parties have been saying for months – the Independent Democrats are a group of dangerous radicals. Now, we have proof that the American people agree”. Later polls and surveys found that people agreed with Haldeman’s assessment; many Americans viewed the Independent Democrats as a party more supportive of pan-Africanism and black nationalism rather than unity and economic progress for all Americans.

Thurmond offered several cabinet posts to Conservative MPs that he felt were “friendly to the AIP cause”. Thurmond’s original plan for his government had the Labor and Employment, Transportation, and Sports, Media, and Culture Ministries going to Conservative MPs. Ronald W. Reagan, a newly-elected MP from California, was Thurmond’s first choice for Sports, Media, and Culture and he hoped to keep John A. Volpe in office at Transportation. The “friendly” MPs were receptive to serving in an AIP Government but Conservative leader Robert Taft issued a declaration to all Conservative MPs banning them from serving in any ministerial positions “without the explicit consent of the leader”. The de facto ban on accepting cabinet posts was Taft’s way of ensuring his party did not simply become the business wing of the AIP.

Thurmond and Deputy AIP leader George Wallace announced the first AIP government on October 6. The State Opening of Parliament and the King’s Speech took place on October 10. In the King’s Speech, the Government laid out a very conservative agenda that cut the budget in several places, increased the requirements to receive government assistance, and reversed the pervious Government’s non-interventionist policy in Vietnam.

First Thurmond Government, October 1968
Prime Minister: The Rt. Hon. J. Strom Thurmond (AIP)
- Leader of the American Independence Party
Deputy Prime Minister: The Rt. Hon. George C. Wallace (AIP)
- Deputy Leader of the American Independence Party

Minister of Foreign Affairs: The Rt. Hon. J. William Fulbright (AIP)
Minister of Finance: The Rt. Hon. John B. Connally, Jr. (AIP)
Minister of Defense: The Rt. Hon. Curtis E. LeMay (AIP)
Minister of Justice: The Rt. Hon. James O. Eastland (AIP)
Minister of Interior Affairs: The Rt. Hon. John Ben Shepperd (AIP)
Minister of Trade, Industry, and Business: The Rt. Hon. George C. Wallace (AIP)
Minister of Labor and Employment: The Rt. Hon. Carl T. Hayden (AIP)
Minister of Health and Social Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Orval E. Faubus (AIP)
Minister of Education: The Rt. Hon. John J. Sparkman (AIP)
Minister of Agriculture and the Environment: The Rt. Hon. Barry Goldwater (AIP)
Minister of Transportation: The Rt. Hon. Richard B. Russell, Jr.
Minister of Infrastructure and Housing: The Rt. Hon. Lester G. Maddox, Sr. (AIP)
Minister of Veterans Affairs: The Rt. Hon. John C. Stennis (AIP.)
Minister of Native Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Paul J. Fannin (AIP)
Minister of Sports, Media, and Culture: The Rt. Hon. Spessard L. Holland (AIP)

Minister without Portfolio: The Rt. Hon. Harlan D. Sanders (AIP)

Leader of the Government in the House of Commons: The Rt. Hon. George C. Wallace
Chief Government Whip in the House of Commons: The Rt. Hon. John S. Wold

[DKrol]

Even in this world centrism is dead.

Oh well. Connally strikes me as a mainstream conservative, so hopefully he becomes leader soon. Also, go King Nelson!

The Hand Picked Successor (George Wallace) v. the Up-Start Challenger (John Connally)? Hmmmm..., certainly an interesting idea.

Glad so many people are liking this. As always, if you have any questions please feel free to ask, if you have any comments, please feel free to leave them.

[DKrol]

What did the national popular vote totals for the '68 election look like?

American Independence Party - 23,544,867
Conservative Party - 20,232,167
Labor Party - 18,910,767
Independent Democrat Party - 18,910,444
Green Party - 2,569,745
Socialist Party - 2,333,246
Other - 2,001,113

TOTAL VOTES CAST: 88,502,349

Turnout is higher in this TL for two main factors. First, many of the barriers for African American voters in cities throughout the South were lifted under the short-lived Liberal Democrat government, boosting numbers in places in Birmingham, Alabama, Atlanta, Georgia, Columbia, Columbus, Georgia, South Carolina, and Jackson, Mississippi. Note that many barriers still block African Americans from voting in the rural South. Second, the government of the 1967 Constitution is still new and exciting, driving more people to participate than in the RL 1968 election.

[DKrol]

Curtis LeMay, a retired Air Force General, was known for his outspokenness. During the Vietnam debate of 1967, LeMay was the main voice calling for America to return to active combat in Southeast Asia. Many viewed the selection of LeMay for Defense Minister as a confirmation that the Thurmond Government would be pursuing a very aggressive foreign policy, which many in the media compared to that of former President Lyndon Johnson. While the King’s Speech only called for a “change” in American policy towards Vietnam and the fight against Communism, media commentators and other MPs read “change” as “reversal”. They were not wrong.

Prime Minister Thurmond held his first Cabinet meeting on October 12 and the issue of Vietnam was the first topic discussed. With a section of the AIP Manifesto calling for “a new phase of the battle against Communism, especially Soviet Communism in Viet Nam”, the party-line position on the issue was well known. The only debate among the Cabinet Ministers was to what extent the battle should be waged, and where. After all American troops were withdrawn in the winter of 1966, the North Vietnamese Army had surged all the way to Saigon, where nationalist forces were able to fortify a small area around the American embassy as the last remnants of South Vietnam under President Nguyen Van Thieu.

LeMay, the biggest hawk of the Government, advocated for an immediate return to the troop levels that President Johnson had been preparing for. LeMay proposed “an American blitzkrieg” to “shock the pants off” the Vietnamese. Under LeMay’s proposal more than 4,000 Marines would be deployed to Saigon to secure a landing area for later deployments while about 150 aircraft began to bombard the Vietnamese countryside. An armored battalion would be airdropped near Hanoi and smash into the capital, scattering leaders and crushing morale. LeMay’s plan did not include an end-game but did leave the door open to the use of nuclear weapons should “standard operations fail to achieve success”.

Not all Cabinet Minister were on board with how aggressive LeMay’s strategy was. Veteran’s Minister John Stennis was the strongest voice of dissent to LeMay’s strategy. Stennis, always fiscally minded, worried about the future costs of such an aggressive combat mission. Stennis specifically noted that “LeMay’s lack of a clear exit strategy will increase the costs of returning to combat exponentially”. Joining Stennis in the dove corner of the Government was Minister without Portfolio Colonel Harlan Sanders and Native Affairs Minister Paul Fannin.

Thurmond took LeMay’s proposal and codified it into the Vietnam Act of 1968. The bill declared war on the “Communist rebels of Viet Nam” and authorized the Prime Minister to “take any and all actions deemed necessary to protect the interests of the American people” in Southeast Asia. The debate over the bill was sharply split over ideological lines. AIP MPs supported the bill, joined by a few defecting Conservatives, while most Conservatives, Laborites, Independent Democrats, Socialists, and Greens opposed it. Independent Democrat leader Julian Bond called the bill “another distraction from the real issues affecting Americans”. Leader of the Opposition Robert Taft issued a party whip directing Conservatives to oppose the bill “on the grounds that there is no substantial American interest in the region”, but Deputy leader Jerry Ford allowed some MPs to defect “to keep the peace” in the party.

The vote on the Vietnam Act was held on November 1. The final vote was 370 Aye to 280 No. Royal Assent was granted the following day, on November 2. America was going back to Vietnam, with a different Commander at the helm and a more aggressive General in the co-pilot’s seat.

[DKrol]

While Parliament was debating the Vietnam Act, Americans were focusing on more spiritual matters. During the Constitutional Crisis, as historians began to call the events of 1966 and 1967, teenagers and young adults became extremely dissatisfied and disinterested with the government and authority, in more general terms. Young people across the country turned to men like Timothy Leary and his message of “Turn on, tune in, and drop out”. Especially in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury neighborhood, more and more young adults were taking up communal living, psychedelic drugs, and alternative music. When it was announced that America would be returning young men to Vietnam in heavy combat situations, this trend only increased.

As Defense Minister LeMay and General William Calley were orchestrating one of the most extensive military operations in American history, Charles Manson was orchestrating one of the most gruesome crime families in American history. Built around his messiah mentality, Manson charmed young men and women into his family and controlled all aspects of their lives. In late July, Manson set his family into action. Several “family members” broke into the home of filmmaker Roman Polanski and murdered five people there before killing two influential California businesspeople only hours later. When the media reported the story of the Manson Family murders, many authority figures viewed the tale as an anecdote for the horrible effects of psychedelic drugs and the counter-culture movement.

During the growth of the counter-culture movement, music festivals became massively popular. They brought together like minded people to enjoy music, companionship, and experimental drugs. The largest ever music festival was scheduled for early August, 1969, in upstate New York. When news of the Manson Family killings spread, non-hippies feared such a large gathering of counter-culture youth. Thomas Dewey, the Conservative Premier of New York who had been in office since 1943, received hundreds of phone calls and letters from concerned residents of the Catskill region who feared the effect of having so many “radical hippies” come together in an otherwise quiet area.

Dewey also had his doubts about such a large gathering, as more than 400,000 people were expected to take up residence at the Woodstock Festival, and the effects it would have on “normal living conditions in the area”. After speaking to New York State Police Superintendent John Baron and New York State National Guard Commandant Donald Miller, Premier Dewey decided to allow the event to take place, although state police and National Guard units would be on stand-by at a nearby farm.

The first day of the Festival, August 14, went off without a hitch. Heavy rains dampened the spirits of many attendees, keeping the revelry to a minimum. The second day, however, took a turn for the worst. Shortly after Santana began performing at 2:00PM, a pair of festivalgoers began to “trip out” and stormed the police outpost on the edge of the festival. Although only two men attacked the police, Superintendent Barron did not take any risks and ordered the State Police and National Guard to storm the Festival and arrest anyone using, possessing, or “who may have knowledge of” illegal materials.

Santana front man Carlos Santana shouted “F--- man! It’s the cops!” in the middle of their hit song Evil Ways as he saw the wave of police officers and soldiers surge over the hillside from the stage. Santana’s warning spooked many festivalgoers, many of whom were drunk, high, sleep deprived, or some combination of the three, who panicked. The ensuing confusion ended in a high amount of violence, with three police officers, a National Guardsman, and sixteen festivalgoers dying. Hundreds more were severely injured and almost anyone in the area received a few bruises.

The images of state police officers, dressed in military-level armor, beating harmless-looking hippies and festivalgoers were quickly published in newspapers across the country and shown on all three evening news programs. Public opinion was split over what the media began to call “The Woodstock Massacre”; some viewed it as a strong sign that law and order was being upheld, others viewed it as a reckless abuse of power by the government. When Independent Democrat leader Julian Bond called out the Woodstock Massacre as “the first action of this authoritarian regime” during Prime Minister’s Questions on August 19, Prime Minister Strom Thurmond was furious, shouting “If they followed the law, no one would have gotten hurt. Because of a bunch of drugged-up hippies, I have to bury four of this nation’s finest men” as tears filled his eyes.

This exchange was replayed on television many times over the next week, with the showing of emotion by Thurmond driving up his favorability numbers and winning more support for the actions Barron and Miller took. When footage of the Manson Family trial was played with pictures of festivalgoers throwing bottles and rocks at police officers at Woodstock, support for Thurmond, Barron, and Miller went even higher. People were scared, and Thurmond knew how to play that game.

[DKrol]

Defense Minister Curtis LeMay’s operational plan for Vietnam was a massive success. The first Marine deployment easily secured Saigon within a week, with defense analysts comparing it to General Eisenhower’s D-Day. The resounding victory in Saigon boosted American support for the new phase of the war, with many expecting it to be a quick affair that would only last a few months.

The air campaign was also a success. During the year and a half absence of American forces, the North Vietnamese had established a complex series of westernized highways and infrastructure projects to connect the nation, allowing for the easy movement of people and resources to the South in the re-unification effort. LeMay’s air campaign quickly destroyed that system, effectively separating the North and South by vehicular traffic. The only ways to travel from Hanoi to Saigon after the air campaign was either by farm roads or by ship, either along the coast or through the river system.

While the American military was raking up victories in Vietnam, foreign nations were huddling together to develop a response to the suddenly more aggressive Americans. British Prime Minister Harold Wilson convened a summit in Edinburgh, called the “Conference on the Future of Conflict in Southeast Asia”, and invited representatives from the Soviet Union, China, France, the United States, and Australia. Wilson had a special meeting with Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin in advance of the summit in hopes of drawing up a peace deal, or at least a cease fire, in advance of the summit.

The Conference on the Future of Conflict in Southeast Asia faced a rough start. Prime Minister Thurmond refused to speak with Kosygin in private, instead demanding that all communications from Kosygin be relayed through French President Georges Pompidou. This infuriated Kosygin, who decided to not talk to Pompidou at all. The only line of communication from Kosygin to Thurmond required Wilson relaying what Kosygin had said to Pompidou to repeat back to Thurmond. One British aid at the summit described the event as “the most high-stakes game of telephone I’ve ever seen”.

The game of telephone went on for six days until, in frustration, Kosygin pushed past Thurmond’s aids and walked into the conference room set aside for the American delegation. Kosygin ordered everyone out of the room, including Foreign Minister William Fulbright and Defense Minister LeMay, and then locked the doors, leaving just himself and Thurmond. The leaders of the two most powerful countries in the world sat in the locked conference room of the George Hotel for more than five hours, talking in private until 3 in the morning.

When the door finally opened, Thurmond stepped out, joined by Kosygin. Both looked somber, tired, and worn down. The first person to speak was LeMay, who said “Well?” Thurmond cast a sideways glance at Kosygin, let out a little laugh, and replied “Sleep”.

[DKrol]

Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin and Prime Minister Strom Thurmond held a joint press conference in The George Hotel in Edinburgh on December 12, 1969. This was the first joint press conference of Russian and American leaders since the fall of the Tsar. The press corps present expected the only news out of the press conference to be that no agreement had been reached. What came out of the Thurmond-Kosygin closed door meeting has been hailed as the greatest example of person-to-person diplomacy.

Thurmond shocked the world when he announced that he and Kosygin had reached an agreement for a ceasefire in Vietnam. Although the exact details of the deal were still in the works, a rough deal had been drawn up by the two leaders. Thurmond would halt the air campaign in the country side, which Kosygin felt was unfairly harming poor farmers, and the air drop in Hanoi would be called off in exchange for Kosygin pressuring his Vietnamese “peers”, as Kosygin referred to North Vietnamese President Ton Duc Thang, to allow American Marines to remain in Saigon and move into Hanoi while a plan for free, fair, and democratic elections were scheduled. In exchange for the cooperation in Vietnam, both the Soviet Union and the United States agreed to reduce the number of nuclear weapons produced over the next decade and work towards ending the arms race before 1990.

As the American Delegation loaded onto Air Force One in Edinburgh, political commentators at home were split over the deal. Analysts supportive of Labor and the Independent Democrats praised the deal, with Robert Stauss hailing it as “the best aversion to full-scale nuclear war”. Conservative leader Robert Taft was cautious to support the deal, telling Conservative Deputy leader Jerry Ford “The Soviets are very tricky. We’ve got to keep our eye on them before we jump on Thurmond’s wagon”. Conservative pundits and analysts like H.R. Haldeman cautiously applauded the negotiations, turning the phrase “trust but verify” into a household buzz word.

The only people not praising the Thurmond-Kosygin deal were the AIP MPs. Before the press conference in Edinburgh concluded, Environment and Agriculture Minister Barry Goldwater had phoned the other cabinet ministers still in the United States and organized a meeting to discuss the deal before Thurmond Defense Minister Curtis LeMay and Foreign Minister J. William Fulbright landed in Washington. Finance Minister John Connally, Interior Minister John Ben Shepperd, Health and Social Minister Orval Faubus, and Veterans Minister John Stennis met with Goldwater at his home in Virginia in the early morning hours of December 13. Goldwater was furious with Thurmond for negotiating with “those Commie bastards”, saying “We should be dropping the bomb on Moscow, not having tea with them in England!”

Connally was the most restrained of the ministers at the mini-Cabinet meeting, advising the ministers to wait until Thurmond got back and talk to the Prime Minister about their concerns. Connally reminded the group, rather pointedly, that Thurmond was the leader of the party and “everyone in this room agreed to be his deputy, to support him, and to work towards his goals”. Connally left the mini-Cabinet meeting as the sun was rising, leaving Goldwater and the other ministers to fume and simmer until Thurmond’s plane landed shortly after noon-time. Goldwater and the mini-cabinet were waiting for Thurmond on the tarmac.

After being berated for most the car ride to the Executive Residence, Thurmond dismissed the mini-Cabinet’s concerns. He was not turning red, Thurmond assured his ministers, the negotiations were all a part of the plan. There would be many more rounds of discussion, debate, and negotiation before any kind of arms deal was finalized. Thurmond told the concerned anti-Commies “That was the only the first step. If you’re going to kill a flower, you’ve got to get past the thorns”.

[DKrol]

As Prime Minister Strom Thurmond was negotiating the deal to end the Cold War, negotiations were falling apart between Interior Minister John Ben Shepperd and the National Association of Letter Carriers.

In November of 1969, the contract for federal postal workers expired, leaving 200,000 unionized letter carriers without a guarantee for pay rate or conditions. Shepperd entered into negotiations with NALC President James Rademacher immediately, creating a stop-gap measure to keep postal workers on the job during the Christmas Season rush. The stop-gap deal expired on January 5, 1970, and Shepperd and Rademacher were miles apart on a new contract. The NALC, made up of members mostly from New York City, Philadelphia, and Washington, voted on January 12, after weeks of failed negotiations, to go on strike.

Thurmond ordered Shepperd to stop negotiations with Rademacher the minute he heard about the vote to strike, saying “We won’t waste our time talking to criminals” since it was illegal for federal employees to strike. Shepperd continued back-channel negotiations with the NALC against Thurmond’s orders once it became clear the devastating impact that the strike was having: The Dow-Jones fell from 4,667 on January 1 to 3,995 by January 14 and thousands of pieces of critical mail was left uncollected in post offices across the East Coast. Thurmond let the strike go on for three days, to see if the NALC was serious or “just playing chicken”, before taking action. On January 15, Thurmond placed a call to his old friend, New York State Police Superintendent John Barron.

Minutes after midnight on January 16, Thurmond issued Ministerial Directive 1005 - “Declaring a Nationwide State of Emergency”. Before the ink was dry on the directive, New York state police busted in doors and conducted a series of raids across New York City on the homes of post office management and other NALC-friendly labor leaders as other state police clashed with picketers in the streets. Under the details of the directive, police were authorized to “take any actions necessary to limit the spread of panic and propaganda”, leading many reporters to be harassed and their cameras destroyed when they attempted to cover the clashes and raids.

When the Commons convened later in the day, Thurmond came under heavy fire from all sides. Independent Democrat leader Julian Bond called the directive “a blatant abuse of power by this government that has not been seen in the history of democracy” and said that he would be traveling to New York “to stand with the abused postal workers”. Labor leader Richard Daley slammed the directive but called for cooler heads to prevail and urged “all parties to return to the negotiating table as equals”. Opposition Leader Robert Taft, who had developed a good personal relationship with Thurmond over the last year, was also critical of the directive’s anti-propaganda measures, saying “This nation was built on the freedom of the press. We cannot digress to the levels of King George and harass the press”. Thurmond remained defiant even in the face of such extreme opposition, saying “All I have done is within the powers of the Prime Minister and is for the good of our nation. The postal service must get back to work”.

In the short term, the directive had the opposite effect. As news of the police violence spread across the nation, more postal workers joined the strike, many just walking off the job in the middle of their shifts. By the end of the week, post offices in Chicago, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Denver, and San Francisco stood empty, with striking workers holding a picket line outside the doors. Some police chiefs, like Marc Belton of Denver, refused to follow the directive and arrest the picketers, choosing instead to cordon off an area around the picketers to “allow them to express their displeasure”.

As the strike carried on for several weeks, Thurmond’s strong arming approach fell apart. More and more police chiefs followed Belton’s approach as the strike spread to their cities and even John Barron, one of the fiercest police executives in the nation, started to tone-down the scale of operations in New York. While a few scabs were able to push through the picket lines, most post offices remained empty as the calendar turned to March. Thurmond and Finance Minister John Connally agreed to halt trading on the stock exchange as it neared a dangerous low of 2,500 as companies reported abysmal earnings, since bills could not be paid through the mail. Unrest was growing in the Commons, with some centrist AIP MPs begging Thurmond to open back up negotiations with the NALC. When Thurmond refused, reiterating that his government does not negotiate with criminals, Shepperd took matters into his own hands.

Shepperd met with the Executive Committee of the NALC, Labor leader Daley, and Opposition Leader Taft on March 4 in the basement of the old Senate Office Building on Constitution Ave. Shepperd believed that he could peel enough AIP MPs off of Thurmond’s whip to join with the Opposition to pass a new contract package with the postal workers. The negotiations went on for three hours before a deal was agreeable to all parties.

The next day, Daley introduced a bill in the Commons to end the strike, create a new contract for the postal workers, and get the postal service back to work. The bill called for a 25% increase in pay for postal workers who did not go on strike, a 10% increase for those who did go on strike, a guarantee that no striking employees would lose their jobs, and a Commons Committee to look into the privatization of the postal service. Thurmond told AIP MPs to vote against the bill but, in private, Deputy AIP leader George Wallace assured MPs that no negative actions would be taken if the whip was broken. Opposition Leader Taft made a motion to expedite debate on the bill and bring it to the floor for a vote the next day. The vote was almost a unanimous yes, as Thurmond figured it would be an easy way to kill the bill and get back to strong arming the strikers.

The final vote on the bill was greeted by a flurry of tensions. Shepperd was one of the first MPs to vote and then left the floor, retreating to his office to watch the votes come in in private. His actions could be considered treason by some in the AIP and, if it failed, he would certainly be sacked and sent to the backbenches. As the totals came in, Shepperd was taken aback. Thurmond had a change of heart once the vote began, changing the whip to Aye. The bill passed with 633 Aye, 7 Nay, and 10 MPs not voting.

At a press conference after the vote, as the news of the new deal spread across the nation, Thurmond told reporters “While I believe it is important to stand by your principles, when you’re the Prime Minister you’re not the only person you’re concerned with. The nation is your main concern and sometimes you have to put the good of the nation first. Interior Minister John Ben Shepperd showed this to me when he took it on his own accord to work towards a deal with the NALC leaders, even though it meant breaking the party whip and subverting my office”.

Shepperd slumped back in his desk chair, stunned as to how Thurmond could have known about the midnight negotiations.

[DKrol]

Are Connally and Shepperd kind of the Tory-wing of the American Independents?

Yes. Stennis is too, to an extent. Since the Constitutional Crisis, Stennis has become much more fiscally minded rather than racist.

[DKrol]

Are Connally and Shepperd kind of the Tory-wing of the American Independents?

Yes. Stennis is too, to an extent. Since the Constitutional Crisis, Stennis has become much more fiscally minded rather than racist.

OK. Are we going to see any new parties, maybe?

I'll say this: By the turn of the century, AIP will not be the far-right party, the Conservatives will not be the center-right party, and Labor will not be the center-left party.

I've got to leave some suspense, don't I?

[DKrol]

It's a yes-no question, but OK.

I'm probably an Independent Democrat/Tory swing voter ITTL. Gerald Ford seems to still be about like IRL, Connally seems less corrupt, and then the Independent Democrats seem pretty centrist. Is Ford very popular throughout Parliament ITTL, or has he alienated the Taft-Reagan wing?

Yes, there will be new parties.

Ford's pretty popular in Parliament. He's not really big on making waves or rocking the boat. He's a good deputy.

[DKrol]

How did the Green Party start and who are some party leaders?

Peter Camejo is thirty in 1969 and Ralph Nader is thirty-five.Other than them, I expect maybe Frank Zeidler and William Henry Meyer might be some OTL elected officials who could join.

Sorry if none of that's relevant. Consider it speculation.

Gaylord Nelson is the leader of the Green Party, founding it for the same reasons he was the main political driver behind Earth Day. Peter Camejo is the only "big name" Green MP, the rest are mainly from academia. Ralph Nader is a Green member of the Connecticut Legislature at this point in time.

[DKrol]

With the postal workers strike ended, Prime Minister Thurmond could return his attention to negotiating a landmark agreement with Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin. Thurmond tapped Henry Kissinger, a major policy adviser to Republican politicians before the Constitutional Crisis, to lead the American delegation to Geneva, the city selected to host the first direct communications between American and Soviet diplomats in decades. Foreign Affairs minister Andrei Gromyko was selected to represent the Soviet Union at the table. Kissinger and Gromyko sat down for the first round of formal negotiations on April 3, 1970.

While Kissinger and Gromyko went back and forth in Switzerland, Thurmond and Defense Minister LeMay were struggling to develop an “in-between strategy” in Vietnam. Thurmond promised Kosygin that the air campaign in the middle of the country would be halted and he intend to follow through on that promise, as a show of good faith in the process. LeMay, who had masterminded a strategy capable of “beating the Commies in a matter of weeks”, was furious with Thurmond’s decision to throw off the plan. This anger boiled over during a Cabinet meeting on April 10, when LeMay slammed his notepad on the table and said “You asked me for a battle plan that would win the war. I spend weeks planning it, drawing it up, testing it out, and then you just throw it out over a cup of tea!” Thurmond shouted LeMay down, reminding him who was Prime Minister and who was “a shiny-chested MP”.

After the Cabinet meeting, an even angrier LeMay barged into Opposition Leader Robert Taft’s office and demanding a meeting with the Conservative leader. Taft sat down with LeMay over coffee and whiskey, as LeMay laid into Thurmond for everything from his leadership style to the brand of cologne the Prime Minister wore. Taft lent a sympathetic ear, telling LeMay that he himself was once an often neglected member of a Government. The two chatted for more than an hour and a half, with LeMay complaining about Thurmond and Taft boosting LeMay’s spirits. LeMay felt that he had found a real friend in Taft and the two agreed to sit down again in a week’s time.

At the next Cabinet meeting, LeMay kept quiet. Thurmond reported on Kissinger’s progress in Geneva, telling the Cabinet that a deal would be brought to the Government before the next cabinet meeting. The negotiations hinged on both nations agreeing to reduce their nuclear arm production in exchange for bringing democracy to Vietnam. Kissinger wanted to create a longer period of American occupation in Saigon and Hanoi before elections were held while Gromyko was pushing for a power-sharing agreement instead of elections. LeMay gave his update on the state of the war in Vietnam, saying only that the ceasefire appeared to be holding up.

After the meeting, LeMay went straight to Taft’s office. After several glasses of whiskey-spiked coffee, LeMay started to tell Taft about the current status of the negotiations, expressing his anger that Kissinger was “making all my work on the battle plan a waste”. Taft once again played the role of sympathetic side-kick, stoking LeMay’s ego and pouring the Jim Beam when his cup came up dry. The two talked, with LeMay letting Taft in on the Geneva Negotiations and Taft reminding LeMay that he was a brilliant general, for two hours before Taft called for a car and sent LeMay home.

On April 21, Kissinger and Gromyko announced that they had reached an agreement in Geneva. American Marines would be allowed to occupy Saigon and Hanoi until elections could be held, tentatively scheduled for June of 1972, and active combat in Vietnam would end. Both the Soviet Union and the United States would arm 25% fewer nuclear warheads in 1970, 50% fewer in 1972, and arm no new nuclear warheads in 1980. A second round of negotiations would be held in 1980 to ensure that both nations were following the commitment through and to discuss future nuclear arms reductions. The deal, codified as the Stopping the Unnecessary Growth of the Arms Race Treaty (SUGAR), was sent to the American House of Commons and the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union for ratification. A signing ceremony with Thurmond and Kosygin would be held later to officially signify “the thawing out of the Cold War”, as one columnist put it.

The Cabinet met every Friday in the McCormack Office Building, formerly known as the Old Executive Office Building. On April 24, LeMay arrived at the McCormack Building for that week’s Cabinet Meeting but he was barred at the gate to the building. Security officers said that LeMay’s credentials to entered the McCormack Building had been revoked by the Prime Minister. Furious and confused, LeMay ordered the security guard to phone Thurmond and demand an explanation. After a few minutes of hesitation the guard did as LeMay demanded, only to be told by a personal secretary of Thurmond’s that “Cabinet meetings are only for cabinet ministers”.

Later that afternoon, Thurmond announced he had held a Cabinet Reshuffle that afternoon. In the reshuffle, LeMay, Interior Minister John Ben Shepperd, Agriculture Minister Barry Goldwater, Sports, Media, and Culture Minister Spessard Holland, and Veterans Minister John Stennis were all sacked. When pressed why he felt such a switch was necessary, Thurmond told the press “every now and then a garden has to be pruned of the bad flowers”.

First Thurmond Government, April 1970
Prime Minister: The Rt. Hon. J. Strom Thurmond (AIP)
- Leader of the American Independence Party
Deputy Prime Minister: The Rt. Hon. George C. Wallace (AIP)
- Deputy Leader of the American Independence Party

Minister of Foreign Affairs: The Rt. Hon. J. William Fulbright (AIP)
Minister of Finance: The Rt. Hon. George C. Wallace (AIP)
Minister of Defense: The Rt. Hon. John B. Connally, Jr. (AIP)
Minister of Justice: The Rt. Hon. James O. Eastland (AIP)
Minister of Interior Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Orval E. Faubus (AIP)
Minister of Trade, Industry, and Business: The Rt. Hon. John Anderson, Jr. (AIP)
Minister of Labor and Employment: The Rt. Hon. Carl T. Hayden (AIP)
Minister of Health and Social Affairs: The Rt. Hon. John J. Sparkman (AIP)
Minister of Education: The Rt. Hon. John S. Wold (AIP)
Minister of Agriculture and the Environment: The Rt. Hon. Harry F. Byrd, Jr. (AIP)
Minister of Transportation: The Rt. Hon. Richard B. Russell, Jr. (AIP)
Minister of Infrastructure and Housing: The Rt. Hon. Lester G. Maddox, Sr. (AIP)
Minister of Veterans Affairs: The Rt. Hon. John L. McClellan (AIP.)
Minister of Native Affairs: The Rt. Hon. Paul J. Fannin (AIP)
Minister of Sports, Media, and Culture: The Rt. Hon. Harland D. Sanders (AIP)

Minister without Portfolio: The Rt. Hon. Ernest F. Hollings (AIP)

Leader of the Government in the House of Commons: The Rt. Hon. George C. Wallace
Chief Government Whip in the House of Commons: The Rt. Hon. Barratt O'Hara

[DKrol]

The Constitution of 1967 came out of riots, protests, and disobedience. Although a majority of those riots, protests, and disobedience had been quieted with the new constitution and the change in leadership, some carried on.

The most outspoken group after the Constitutional Crisis was the Weather Underground. The Chicago-based group advocated for the violent rejection of social norms and an embrace of socialism. For years, the Weather Underground limited its actions to throwing bricks in the windows of businesses and protesting major speeches by capitalist politicians. In 1970, the Weather Underground changed their game plan.

Speaker of the Commons Larry O’Brien scheduled the final vote on the SUGAR Treaty for June 1, 1970. The vote was supposed to commence shortly before noontime, allowing Prime Minister Strom Thurmond to make a tee-time with British Conservative Party leader Ted Heath and French President Georges Pompidou. Thurmond cast the first vote, a privilege that he instituted, and then left the floor. On his way out of the building, Thurmond stopped into the men’s restroom on the first floor. As he was washing his hands, Thurmond recalls there being “a loud boom, a shaking, and then everything fell apart”.

An investigation found that the Weather Underground had infiltrated the Commons and placed a bomb in the second floor men’s restroom with the intent of killing the Prime Minister. While they did not kill Thurmond, the Weather Underground were successful in inflecting several bruises, a large cut across the forehead, and a broken collarbone from the debris falling on top of Thurmond. Conservative Party Chairman Richard Nixon, who was attending the Commons to watch the vote on SUGAR, broke both his legs when he fell from the second floor to the first. Thurmond and Nixon were the only people injured in the attack.

The Weather Underground put out a statement taking responsibility for the Commons Bathroom Bombing. In the statement, they confirmed that Thurmond was their target because of his “continued abuse of the worker” during the postal workers’ strike. The statement explained that the vote on the SUGAR Treaty was chosen because “it [was] the single greatest example of the Thurmond Government”. Although the attack caused confusion on the floor and created disorder in the Commons, the SUGAR Treaty was passed 645 to 5.

In Prime Minister Thurmond’s statement after the attack, he only had once sentence. “I will not be scared by some angsty teenagers”.

[DKrol]

The SUGAR Treaty was ratified by the Soviets a few months after it passed in the Commons, and the signing ceremony was held on January 5, 1971 in Edinburgh to commemorate the meeting that started the ball in motion. When Prime Minister Strom Thurmond returned to Washington, another foreign policy issue was placed on his agenda.

The global economy was very weak in the winter of 1971. Oil was selling at record-low prices while inflation was rising and wages were shrinking. The American stock market never fully recovered from the massive slide it took during the postal workers’ strike. When Finance Minister George Wallace released a recommendation that the United States stop tying the dollar to gold, the floor dropped out. Unemployment in the United States had sat at around 5.5% since the postal workers’ strike began in January. After Wallace’s announcement, it had rose to 6.3% in a two months’ span. Similar spikes were seen across the Americas, with especially large spikes in Canada, Mexico, and Nicaragua.

While the leaders of each nation attempted to counter the oncoming recession, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau saw a greater solution. In April of 1971, Trudeau met with Mexican President Gustavo Diaz Ordaz in Montreal to seek a solution to the growing economic crisis. Trudeau also invited French President Georges Pompidou, because Trudeau was looking to Europe for the solution.

On April 21, 1971, Trudeau announced his intentions to form the North American Union, based on the European Economic Community. Trudeau argued that “bringing the great economies of the region together with the weaker economies will allow for a greater flow of capital, of people, and of resources that will result in greater economic prosperity for everyone”. President Diaz Ordaz echoed Trudeau’s message and declared his wholehearted support for building the NAU.

Trudeau and Diaz Ordaz then took to Washington to make the case for America to join. Thurmond and Wallace met with the pair, although both were skeptical. The Trudeau plan called for the essential removal of borders between NAU members, the creation of equal exchange rates between all currencies, and the implementation of uniform regulations across the national markets. Thurmond was not receptive to the idea of removing so much authority from the Commons and the Prime Minister and politely dismissed Trudeau and Diaz Ordaz. The two then paid a courtesy call to the Opposition, expecting to receive a similar response. Leader of the Opposition Robert Taft echoed many of the same concerns that Thurmond had had. It was Shadow Finance Minister George W. Romney who lent the first receptive ear.

As the former CEO of American Motors, Romney was supportive of business interests as an MP. He saw the NAU as the gateway to larger markets for businesses and lower costs for consumers. Romney gave his support to the NAU and fought for it at the next Shadow Cabinet meeting. Taft held a vote on the issue and found that a majority of the fiscally minded Shadow Cabinet agreed with Romney’s logic and supported the NAU. Taft held a press conference on December 5 and announced his support for the NAU Treaty.

Thurmond declared that the NAU was “bad for America” and declined to allow it on the floor of the Commons. While Trudeau feared that the NAU was dead, with Thurmond’s opposition, Taft and Romney found a second path. The Conservative Party Leader set out to gather enough signatures to put the NAU to a national referendum. He found an unexpected ally in the voice of disaffected AIP MPs, former Finance Minister John Connally.