Dear Thomas Jefferson: Inauguration

Peaceful Transfer of Power

Dear Thomas Jefferson,

I am sure you remember when you were inaugurated president on March 4, 1801. You had been the nation’s second vice president under President John Adams. You ran against him and won the election. You were very happy. He was very angry.

Adams was so angry that he did not attend your inauguration. You were the third president, and it was first time that there was not peaceful transfer of power in the presidency. Fortunately, the country managed to go another two hundred years before an out-going president did not support the incoming president who had been elected in a free and fair election.

A peaceful transfer of power is very important. A peaceful transition is the expected outcome of democratic elections. It ensures that there will be stability in the constitutional democracy after an election. When the current leadership of a government peacefully hands over control of the government to newly-elected leadership, it signals that any remaining election battles are over.

John Adams did not want to hand over the government to you. Even though you had been friends and previously enjoyed a close bond, you did not talk to each other for eleven years after you won the election and took his job.

Do I have this right? Adams was a strong Federalist. He thought that government should be strong and centralized, and you preferred a weaker federal government and wanted more power at the local level.

This might be shocking to you, but we are still having that same argument about power and control today.

A new presidential inauguration and transfer of power is happening right now. No one knows for sure what is in store for our democratic republic. One thing is certain, there will be some changes. Some people will like the changes, and other people will not like what is happening.

I understand that you called Adams a ‘heretic’ behind his back. You thought that his defense of a strong executive for the country was not the best path for the country. He found out what you were saying and the two of you became estranged.

I don’t think calling your political opponents inflammatory names is a good idea. Did you ever regret resorting to name-calling? What advice would you have for a politician who called people names instead of being dedicated to positive communication, compromise, and consensus?

Healthy communication supports a peaceful transfer of power.

Let’s get together and talk about leaders who resort to taunting their opponents with offensive names to win an argument or promote condemnation of the opponent.

I can’t wait to talk to you about name-calling. Do you think it is winning a political strategy?

Sincerely,

Katy Dalgleish