Three Black U.S. Senators Since Reconstruction—Who & Why So Few?
There have been three black United States Senators elected in post-reconstruction America.
( Here is a post on the three black post-reconstruction Governors.)
Just three.
Here is who they are and here are some reasons as to why there have been so few.
Ed Brooke was a Republican elected from Massachusetts in 1966 and 1972. He was defeated in 1978 by Paul Tsongas who went on to a notable career himself. Mr. Brooke was part of the moderate to liberal wing of the Republican party that does not so much exist anymore. The decline of moderate Republicanism is a big reason why Democrats are so strong in New England and New York state today.
Here is a Time Magazine article from 1971 pondering if President Richard Nixon would consider replacing Vice President Spiro Agnew on the ticket with Senator Brooke.
Carol Moseley Braun is the only black woman to have served in the Senate. She represented Illinois. Ms. Moseley Braun defeated an incumbent Democrat Senator in a primary in 1992 and went on to win the General Election.
People had hopes for Carol Moseley Braun. For a variety of reasons, some maybe relating to her own mistakes and some maybe a product of unreasonable expectations, Ms. Moseley Braun lasted only one term. Some also cite racism as a problem she had to deal with. This New York Times story from Ms. Moseley Braun’s 2004 run for President offers some perspective.
If Ms. Moseley Braun had been able to hold on, Barack Obama would most likely not be in the Senate today. Mr. Obama now holds the seat once held by Ms. Moseley Braun. The Republican who defeated her in 1998, Peter Fitzgerald, did not run for reelection in 2004 against Mr. Obama in strongly Democratic Illinois.
Barack Obama of Illinois was elected in 2004.
He is very much in the news today.
Why only three black senators in post-Reconstruction America?
Here are some reasons for the low number —
1. Jim Crow and racism denied black people the right to vote and to run for office.
2. Even given the (not always uncontested) right of blacks to vote today, a large proportion of blacks in America live in the South where whites are not always inclined to vote for blacks. This is how George W. Bush easily carries Mississippi even though 30% of the people there are black.
3. Many states have very few black people and so black candidates are less likely to emerge from these places. (However, as I’ll be discussing in an upcoming post, sometimes black candidates do better where there are fewer blacks. Ed Brooke’s Massachusetts was a very white state. And Massachusetts is the only state with a black governor in 2008. )
4. The overwhelming majority of blacks are Democrats. As many Senators are Republicans, this limits the options.
5. Since most blacks are going to vote for Democrats no matter what, Democrats use this fact and do not push blacks to run for the highest offices. If someone is going to do something for you anyway, why not take advantage of them seems to be the line of thinking.
6. Since many black office holders have safe majority-minority districts or serve in majority-black cities, why take a chance on a tough statewide race?
7. Black politicians often have a terrible record of cultivating new people and young people for the tough battles ahead. It’s easy to sit in a safe seat and accumulate power while looking the other way at how the Democratic party uses blacks. It is more difficult to help people and fight for people in a more constructive way.
(There have been a total of five black U.S. Senators. The other two, from the Reconstruction Era were Hiram Revels a Republican from Mississippi who served in 1870 and 1871, and another Mississippi Republican, Blanche Bruce, who served from 1875 until 1881. Both of these men were appointed by the state legislature as was done for much of American history. Here is information about the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913, that provided for direct election of Senators. )
Texas Liberal is leading the way in political history blogging in 2008. Please click here for more political history posts on Texas Liberal.
[...] have been 5 elected African-American Senators or Governors[4] post-Reconstruction and only one candidate (Ed Brooke) ever served more than one [...]
There is a simple reason why there have been so few Black U.S. senators elected. A U.S. Senate seat is a statewide office. To be elected by a statewide electorate, a Black candidate needs a considerable number of white votes, even in the states with the highest Black population.
The state with the highest Black population in 2000 was Mississippi, with 36.6% Blacks, followed by Louisiana, with 32.9% Blacks. Although they have a relatively high population of Blacks, they are still outnumbered by whites by two to one. And these ex-slave states, where whites still fly the Confederate flag sometimes, are unlikely places for a Black candidate to run statewide and win with a majority white vote.
The state of Vermont had a total population of 608,000 at the time of the 2000 census. Although it has a majority white population now, with only 0.7 percent of the population Black and 99% of the population white, if 25% of the Black population of the state of New York moved to Vermont (750,000 people), then Vermont would have a majority Black population and could reliably elect two Black US Senators to the US Senate.
So, the reason that there are so few Black US Senators is that Blacks don’t want more US senators enough for 700,000 of us to move to Vermont.
See here for the US Census Bureau source of these statistics.
Note that Vermont and New York are neighboring states.
2 Black US Senators From Vermont????!!
2 Black US Senators From Vermont????!!
The Texas Liberal blog asks the question, Three Black U.S. Senators Since Reconstruction: Who & Why So Few?” There is a simple reason why there have been so few Black U.S. senators elected. A U.S. Senate seat is a statewide office. To be elected by a statewide electorate, a Black candidate needs a considerable number of white votes, even in the states with the highest Black populations.
For example, the state with the highest Black population in 2000 was Mississippi, with 36.6% Blacks, followed by Louisiana, with 32.9% Blacks. Although they have a relatively high Black populations, Blacks there are still outnumbered by whites by two to one. And these ex-slave states, where whites still fly the Confederate flag sometimes, are unlikely places for a Black candidate to run statewide and win with the support of a quarter of the white vote, which is about what would be required in Mississippi.
If Senate districts included half the voters in each state instead of all of them, then the population of Blacks in each district would be relatively higher and Blacks would have a greater chance of electing US Senators. You might well say that the US Constitution makes it very hard for a minority to elect a member of the US Senate.
There is a viable solution however, that does not require a Constitutional amendment or any change of existing laws:
At the time of the 2000 census, the state of Vermont had a total population of 608,000. Although it has a majority white population now, with only 0.7 percent of the population Black and 99% of the population white, if just 25% of the Black population of the state of New York (750,000 people) moved across the border into Vermont, then Vermont would have a majority Black population and could reliably elect two Black US Senators to the US Senate.
Oh, but wait a minute! Blacks don’t need to be the majority of the population, but only the majority of the voting age population that actually turns out to vote. In 2004, a year in which Vermont voted both for the presidency and one of its US Senate seats, only 300,000 votes were cast for all of the US Senate candidates combined, with 60% of the state’s votes going to Kerry, the Democratic Party candidate for president. If a Black candidate won the Democratic primary, s/he would have an excellent chance of winning the general election.
The entire voting age population of Vermont was 490,000 in 2007. So, even if the influx of Blacks caused every single white Vermonter of voting age to register and turn out to vote for the white candidate, still 500,000 voting Blacks could win 2 US Senators for Black America from the state of Vermont, or 900,000 with a 60% turnout. (Blacks who move to snowy Vermont for the purpose of electing Black senators are likely to be highly motivated to vote.)
In a sense, the reason that there are so few Black US Senators in the United States, in addition to the Constitutional requirement that senators be elected statewide, is that Blacks have not wanted two more Black US senators enough for 500,000 of us to move out of New York and across the border into the state of Vermont.
See here for the US Census Bureau source of these statistics.
Only since 1913 have US Senators been directly elected by the voters in their states. Before that time the state legislatures selected the Senators.
Senators are funny things. Once, when a US Senator from Louisiana died in office, Governor Edward Edwards of Louisiana was having a steamy affair with a woman who was not his wife. Edwards immediately appointed his wife the the vacant Senate Seat in Washington DC, to get her out of Louisiana. Then he resumed his affair in New Orleans.
Mr. Holland–Thanks for your comments and the link in your fine blog.
ed likes barbara walters ok that is for sure.
For my information
We are also dealing with a gerrymandered concept called the electoral college. Nobel Prize winner vs. “Daddy got me this job” have proven it as an anti-democratic, anti-one-man-one-vote soul flushing device. In defense of Vermont, they heavily requested a black president in the same way Iowa did. Vote for the guy who talks to you like you aren’t a mouth-breathing rube.
The Electoral College is a racket. But one I imagine that will never go away.
The people of Vermont are as you say good people.
Thanks for the comment.