James March-April 2025 web - Flipbook - Page 9
hen Jimmy Carter
passed away, we
were in the middle of
the holiday season. I
knew that the deadline for the next issue of James would be several months
later and the late president would no
longer be in the news. But I thought
one last word from the most unlikely of
sources might be of some interest.
I’m not going to bore readers with
a rendition of how, as a youngster,
I came to be around a then newly
elected Governor Carter and his staff.
Georgia in the early 1970s was truly a
small state. But after I was grown and
involved in Georgia business and politics, I had the continued pleasure of
knowing many of Carter’s best-known
associates such as Bert Lance, Ham
Jordan, Jody Powell and Jack Watson. While the media likes to look at
Carter’s post presidency as some type
of catharsis for his four years in office, I
like to look back at the four years when
a Georgian was the nation’s president
and provide a far more positive view of
what he did for our nation.
I realize that as someone so associated with the GOP and conservative
leaning media, I seem not only an
unlikely source of such an assessment
but unqualified to provide it. To the
contrary, as a person who in his young-
est days was immersed in the Georgia Democratic Party and one who
became a part of the GOP as Ronald
Reagan went into his first term, I have
a unique perspective.
We knew that Jimmy Carter was
an agent of change when he delivered
his inaugural address as governor.
Sitting with my late mother in the
outdoor section of the Gold Dome
where Carter addressed the crowd
gathered below, even at the age of
11 I knew what Carter was saying
when he declared “the time for racial
discrimination is over.” Carter became
the symbol of “the New Georgia” and
the “New South.” It wasn’t popular
with everyone back in 1971. But in
essence, the state never looked back
and Georgia’s ability to become a
national juggernaut years later likely
started on that day.
Symbolism seems unimportant
when we examine leaders and their
policies. But in many instances image
and form truly can be as important as
substance. In 1976 the nation had lost
faith in government following the Watergate scandal and years of economic
upheaval. Then along came the
youthful Carter with his soft-spoken Southern accent and his
promise to never lie to the public.
A promise I believe he kept.
No leader ever likes to be known
for their image and style. That implies
that they have no substance. And this
is where I make my argument that Carter was indeed a substantial president.
Carter— mainly as governor and
in his post-presidency— should be
remembered as a slightly left-of-center
progressive, to use today’s vernacular.
But as president he was in fact viewed
as a moderate conservative. And the
leaders of the more left-leaning parts
of his Democratic Party like House
Speaker “Tip” O’Neill and Sen. Edward
Kennedy, were committed to blocking
Carter initiatives that they deemed out
of step with national Democrats.
Here’s an example of that dynamic
that might ring a bell with the headlines of recent times.
Early in his presidency Carter
announced a “hit list” of 19 federal
projects that he designated as “pork
barrel” wasteful federal spending. The
M A RC H //A PRIL 2025
9
