Over the past few months, I’ve attended many social events, at which I shared a few drinks and conversation with friends from both political parties. Those gatherings have given me an open window into the rapidly emerging fracture among lifelong Republicans as well as the sharp divisions among Democrats. Democrats are always arguing, so it’s been the Republican fissures that have surprised me the most.
Regardless of what the pollsters tell you, President Trump is tearing these lifelong partisans apart. There is division about the president’s arguments with the pope and deep concern about the impact of the war in Iran on the party’s chances in November. But the one issue that seems to evoke even more angst is Trump’s encouraging his name to be plastered on anything and everything that is brandable.
George Washington’s name appears in all kinds of places across the country, including the national capital. The city was named after him while he was still in office, but he strongly opposed it and tried to block the effort when it was brought before Congress. Washington surrendered his military role when the Revolution ended, rejected efforts to have himself declared king and stepped down after two terms as president. His greatness was not only that he led the country, but that he declined a number of honors.
Have other presidents drawn the line? During Gerald Ford’s presidency, Congress passed a bill to name a federal building in Grand Rapids, Mich., after him. Ford refused to sign it, saying he knew of no federal building named for a president still in office and did not want to establish a precedent. President Harry Truman also resisted such honors, and once wrote emphatically that he had no desire to have roads, bridges or buildings named after him. His supporters wanted the Marshall Plan to bear his name, but Truman said the plan deserved the name of its author.
Clearly, the temptation to name things after politicians isn’t limited to one party. Members of Congress have long attached their names to federal buildings, courthouses, highways and bridges. Sen. Mitch McConnell has five buildings named after him in Kentucky.
And every president has been surrounded by supporters who want to flatter him, celebrate him and turn policy into legacy. The danger is especially high in our age of branding, social media and permanent campaigning. That is exactly why every president, irrespective of party, should draw the line when there is an effort to rename everything in sight after him.
There is something unhealthy in a republic when a president uses public property to enlarge his own image. This isn’t a Republican or Democratic concern — it’s an American concern. The presidency belongs temporarily to one person, but the government belongs permanently to the people. Public buildings, passports, coins, agencies and national institutions should not become personal billboards for whoever happens to occupy the Oval Office.
There is also a moral difference between a grateful nation honoring a leader after history has had time to judge him, and a president accepting — or encouraging — public honors while he is in office. This isn’t a question of whether a president is admired. The pollsters have attested to the fact that Trump is supported by 85 percent of registered Republicans. But there will be ample time for our country to render honors unto this president and those who follow him.
We need to have a law that applies equally to all parties. That law should prohibit the naming of entities, structures and objects after a sitting president. It must apply equally to Trump and all those who follow him.
Our founders worried about this issue. They knew that republics can decay not only through force, but also through flattery. Let presidents serve. Let citizens judge. Let history name the buildings.
