James K. Polk

Polk: The Man Who Transformed the Presidency and America by Walter R. Borneman

Tier 3

This book was one of the most pleasant surprises I encountered during this project. I knew nothing about Polk and expected it to be another in a line of disappointing biographies. As I mentioned previously, the period between Jackson and Lincoln is mainly defined by men who never became president (Clay, Webster, and Calhoun), meaning I didn’t expect much from Polk.

But I was mistaken as Polk, and this biography proved fascinating.

Polk was one of many young politicians who formed themselves in the shadow of Jackson. It was hard to live through the Jackson era and not come to either love or hate him, and Polk was in the former camp. Jackson, too, had a fondness for Polk, going so far as to dub him “young Hickory.”

He was born in North Carolina and grew up in Tennessee. He served in the Tennessee legislature and later in the House of Representatives before becoming Governor of Tennessee. He is the only Speaker of the House to go on to become president.

Now, I don’t particularly care for presidential rankings, but if you look at them, you’ll find Polk often near the top. This is surprising as he’s typically in lofty company. Everyone knows about Washington and Lincoln and the Roosevelts, but what’s James K. Polk doing that high on those lists?

Well, it’s multifaceted, but I think a driving force behind his reputation is that he delivered what he promised during his campaign. He focused on four points:

1.     Re-establishment of the Independent Treasury System

2.     Lowering Tariffs

3.     Acquisition of Oregon

4.     Annexation of Texas

Check, check, check, and check. The idea of a president fulfilling his campaign promises in today’s world is so unthinkable as to be comical, but at the time, Polk managed to do just that. As to whether or not you agree with those policies and actions, that’s a different story. The point is that he ran on specific promises popular enough to get him elected, and he followed through on those promises. That’s kind of how it's supposed to work in a democracy.

Now, let’s dig a bit deeper into those four points.

First, we have the re-establishment of the Independent Treasury System. Federal banking was a constant discussion during this period in the United States. People ran on abolishing or instituting these banks every election cycle. Polk felt it was a poor idea for the United States to leave its funds in private banks. He felt there was a risk of bank failure and wanted the government to control its finances. Once elected, he worked with Congress to pass legislation to re-establish the Independent Treasury System.  

Second, we have the other pillar of his domestic economic policy, lowering tariffs. I’ve mentioned in past posts about the nation’s absolute fixation on tariffs. The debate was fairly static. Some people wanted high tariffs to promote and prioritize American industry. Others felt high tariffs hurt consumers by raising prices and limiting competition. In many ways, we’re still having this debate. Polk favored lower taxes and, upon being elected, worked with Congress to pass the Walker Tariff of 1846.

Next, we have the Acquisition of Oregon. This was in keeping with his fervent belief in manifest destiny. He saw the North American continent as the rightful possession of the United States, and all his foreign policy as president was contingent upon this belief. He wanted to expand westward, promote American influence, and secure the nation’s borders. These things seem unsavory to a modern reader; however, it was very much the nation's position at the time. Again, democracy is meant to reflect the people’s will, and Polk’s expansionist vision was in line with the people.

 Finally, we have the annexation of Texas. You can see most of the points above. Polk was also interested in flexing the nation’s military might against Mexico and was far from upset when this annexation led to war. It’s important to note here that Texas at the time was not solely the state that we now know but also stretched to parts of current-day New Mexico, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming.

Polk followed through on all of these promises, which is largely why his place among historians is high.

The annexation of Texas, and Polk’s further expansionist aims, led to the Mexican-American war. Polk was thrilled to fight this war, and overall, it was popular. Was it right? Was it morally correct to attempt to buy land from another nation and, upon that offer being rejected, station troops on their land? Was it right to provoke a fight and then use that fight to justify war?

No. None of that was right. None of that was correct or appropriate. Henry David Thoreau spent a night in jail for refusing to pay poll taxes that supported the war and later wrote Civil Disobedience based on that experience. Frederick Douglass was a vocal critic of the war, as was a lanky, young Whig Congressman named Abraham Lincoln.

Polk firmly believed in the expansion of the United States and executive power, and the office he took over bore little resemblance to the one he left. Another campaign promise of his was only to serve one term, and despite his overwhelming popularity, he stuck to that promise.

As for Borneman, whom I realize I have hardly discussed here, he is an excellent biographer. He focuses mainly on Polk’s presidency, but that makes sense here. People know very little about him, and his term in office is incredibly consequential. Borneman does a great job with the book’s pacing and even manages to incorporate some humor, notably with the Santa Anna double cross, a notable moment in the Mexican-American war that involved General Santa Anna promising to help the US if he was released only for him to immediately return to Mexico and resume his position as General in their army. It’s a great read and an excellent biography to choose if you want to learn more about the United States in the period between Jackson's and Lincoln’s presidencies.

Polk was far from a perfect man (he is another in a long line of slaveholding presidents), but he was a reasonably good president. I may not agree with his expansionist policies or how his presidency added kindling to growing national tensions that would culminate in the Civil War. Still, he did what he promised, and that is something only he can say. No other president has fulfilled all their campaign promises. I would contest that being president often involves making unpopular decisions and altering course to ensure the nation’s future. As such, I certainly do not see Polk as perfect, but he’s far from the worst.