Magazine | December 7, 2015, Issue

Thank God and the GOP For the 13th Amendment

(Alexander Gardner/U.S. Library of Congress via Getty Images)
One hundred fifty years have passed since the abolition of slavery

On December 6, 1864, less than one month after his reelection, President Abraham Lincoln sent to Capitol Hill what would be his final State of the Union address. As he neared the conclusion, he called for the House to pass, as the Senate had already done, a constitutional amendment to abolish slavery. He implored the lame-duck Congress to be bold before the session ended.

Congress answered the call. The next month, the Republican-plurality House of Representatives passed the 13th Amendment. In doing so, Lincoln and the 38th Congress etched their places in the pantheon of courageous Americans who made the Union more perfect. And though it was unnecessary, Lincoln signed the amendment before it was sent to the states for ratification. He did so to mark for posterity his allegiance to the nation’s founding principles and to the extension of them to black Americans.

Lincoln was assassinated the following April. On December 6, 1865, exactly one year after his last address to Congress, Georgia became the 27th state to ratify the 13th Amendment, raising the total to the necessary three-quarters of the states. Ratification was officially certified on December 18.

This December is the 150th anniversary of that historic event. To honor the philosophical roots of the Republican party, remind the nation of its role in our history, and reaffirm its commitment to racial equality, the GOP, particularly Republican members of Congress, should lead a national, non-partisan commemoration of the day it transformed America.

In Lincoln’s words, “unanimity of action” is “almost indispensable.” The commemoration should be inclusive, recalling a moment in American history when our policy matched our principles, and should encourage us to confront the hard truths about race that we face even today. A quick perusal of the headlines shows that race remains a prominent national issue, and polls show that it remains divisive. But certainly Americans can unite in observing the sesquicentennial of the national decision to end slavery.

Ratification of the 13th Amendment is the most consequential action our nation has taken since it won independence. The commemoration should recognize both the electorate who willed the end of slavery and the soldiers who gave their lives to preserve the Union. And it should hold in high esteem the strength, faith, and determination of black Americans who persevered despite their deprivation of the benefits of the self-evident truths that our nation was founded on. The ceremony should serve as a national rededication to the virtues that unite different people under a common cause.

While the historic occasion belongs to all Americans, Republicans should take the lead in organizing the commemoration, to communicate that their party shares the ideals of their forerunners who ratified the 13th Amendment. Let’s face it: On race, the popular perception of the party is a problem. The party is not racist, but it cannot deny that it comes across as insensitive to the experiences of minorities, particularly black Americans.

Over the past 150 years, the nation has made enormous progress on race. The past few years have been marked by milestone anniversaries of monumental events — from the Emancipation Proclamation to the March on Washington and the March from Selma to Montgomery — when the nation was forced to confront racism. Republicans have either been absent from these remembrances or ceded leadership of them to independent organizers or Democratic officials. When that is coupled with deafening silence on race issues or with remarks by some in the party who label Black Lives Matter a movement advocating police killings and the Democratic party a plantation for black voters, it is clear that the Republican party has strayed from its roots.

It’s time for the party of Lincoln to awaken and resume its leading role in American race relations. But the moniker “party of Lincoln” cannot be simply a historical claim. Faith without works is dead, and so too is the party of Lincoln if it is unwilling to acknowledge the plight of American citizens and take action where necessary to ameliorate it. So a ceremony would not be enough. The party should take a hard look at the challenges facing black Americans and specify how present-day Republicans will address them.

The facts are clear. According to nearly every socioeconomic indicator, from income to health, black Americans lag behind the rest of the nation. Social mobility for many black Americans is terribly difficult, making the American dream unattainable for many.

Republicans should make explicit, for example, how their proposals for criminal-justice reform follow from the principles of the Eighth and 13th Amendments, which permit involuntary servitude as criminal punishment but require that such punishment not be cruel and unusual. They should also emphasize charter schools, homeschooling alternatives, and school-choice legislative proposals. These policies enjoy strong support in black communities, where quality of education is an important issue. The fastest-growing demographic of American entrepreneurs is black women, so Republicans should show how their economic plans and tax-reform proposals increase access to capital, which would enable black Americans to start their own small businesses and thereby reduce unemployment. Blacks have a higher military-participation rate, so Republicans should stress their positions on military pay, veterans’ care and employment, and preservation of associated benefits for housing and education. Suffering job and income losses, black workers are often the most affected by regulations that increase costs for businesses, so Republicans should show how a smarter regulatory structure is beneficial to them. Blacks are disproportionately victims of violent crime, so Republicans should show how they would make communities safer.

This is not identity politics. These are not special set-asides any more than Lincoln’s advocating the 13th Amendment was a set-aside for liberty for black Americans. Rather, these measures address the basic question of who is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They are designed to remove barriers to self-determination so that all citizens can make of their lives whatever their hard work and talents allow.

Following a White House official’s rhetoric about “leading from behind,” Republicans have seized on the phrase as an aspersion to cast on Democrats. On race relations, however, the phrase fits the GOP, which has ceded the moral high ground. But the party can reclaim it, in substance as well as symbolically, and the anniversary of the 13th Amendment is the perfect occasion. As Lincoln asked in his final formal address to Congress — he was referring to passage of the amendment — “May we not agree that the sooner the better?”

– Mr. Johnson is a doctoral candidate in public policy at Northeastern University and a former White House Fellow.

In This Issue


Politics & Policy

The Islamic War

The historian Thucydides felt that democracies were characteristically volatile and yet complacent when existential dangers loomed on the horizon. But once faced with impending doom — such as the near ...


Books, Arts & Manners

Politics & Policy

Holding Up a Mirror

People know 18th-century London more from Hogarth’s drawings than from the work of any novelist. Indeed, the titles of his best-known picture series — “A Rake’s Progress” and “Gin Lane” ...


Politics & Policy


Where Have You Gone, Yogi Berra? I take issue with the editors’ comment that “Berra’s personal career statistics — batting  average, home runs, wins above replacement value — were strong but ...
Politics & Policy

The Week

‐ In light of the unspeakable horrors they have suffered, please take a moment today to pray for the victims and survivors of Yale. ‐ Senators Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio ...

War and Imagination

After the Charlie Hebdo attack, it seemed as if French grief followed the Western model set in place after the death of Princess Di. Emotional prostration. Candlelight vigils. Heaps of ...
Politics & Policy


FIREFLIES After sundown you see the first Out of the corner of your eye, then another In the middle distance, the gloaming, Where a grove of maples conspires, Darkly thinking night-thoughts While these inklings of light ...
Happy Warrior

Liberalism Besieged

Here’s a historical bullet that I’ll happily bite: The “miracle” of the American founding was as much about tribal affinity and aligned incentives as it was about any higher notions ...

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

ABC Chief Political Analyst: GOP Rep. Stefanik a ‘Perfect Example’ of the Failures of Electing Someone ‘Because They Are a Woman’

Matthew Dowd, chief political analyst for ABC News, suggested that Representative Elise Stefanik (R., N.Y.) was elected due to her gender after taking issue with Stefanik's line of questioning during the first public impeachment hearing on Wednesday. “Elise Stefanik is a perfect example of why just electing ... Read More
White House

Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’

When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.” Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page ... Read More
Law & the Courts

DACA’s Day in Court

When President Obama unilaterally changed immigration policy after repeatedly and correctly insisting that he lacked the constitutional power to do it, he said that congressional inaction had forced his hand. In the case of his first major unilateral move — “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” which ... Read More
White House

Impeachment and the Broken Truce

The contradiction at the center of American politics in Anno Domini 2019 is this: The ruling class does not rule. The impeachment dog-and-pony show in Washington this week is not about how Donald Trump has comported himself as president (grotesquely) any more than early convulsions were about refreshed ... Read More

A Preposterous Review

A   Georgetown University professor named Charles King has reviewed my new book The Case for Nationalism for Foreign Affairs, and his review is a train wreck. It is worth dwelling on, not only because the review contains most of the lines of attack against my book, but because it is extraordinarily shoddy and ... Read More