RIP Lindsey Graham

Ave Atque Vale — Hail and Farewell, and Thanks for a Life of Public Service

I take this occasion to mourn the passing of a lifetime public servant, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.

The phrase I use in the subhead, Ave Atque Vale, translates roughly as “Hail and Farewell.” It is a phrase associated with the ancient Romans and later immortalized by the poet Catullus in his lament for a beloved brother. It seems fitting here.

There is also the ancient Greek proverb translated into Latin as "De mortuis nil nisi bonum", meaning "Of the dead, say nothing but good", ancient wisdom that one should never speak ill of the dead. Unfortunately, the social media universe appears to have forgotten that lesson. Before Senator Graham’s body was even cold, social media was already flooded with mean-spirited and hateful comments. I found them disgusting. For years, we have been lectured by the left that their hate has no home here. Apparently, there is—provided the hatred is directed at the right people (pun intended). The venom being directed toward Lindsey Graham in the hours following his death says far more about the snakes spewing it than it does about the man they attack.

Lindsey Graham’s life was one of service, resilience, and perseverance. He suffered personal tragedy as a young man and was forced to shoulder responsibilities that would have crushed many people. He earned a degree in psychology, graduated from law school, and entered military service through the Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps. He served with distinction and then moved almost immediately into another avenue of public service. He served in the South Carolina legislature before winning election to the United States House of Representatives and later the Senate. From that point forward, public service was not simply what he did; it was who he was. He remained in office until the day he died. Whatever one thought of his positions, no one could reasonably question his commitment to serving his country. He was married to his country and fought the good fight on her behalf until his final breath.

Senator Graham was a strong supporter of Israel and Ukraine. He was a leading voice on national security issues and one of the Senate’s most recognizable advocates for a strong American role in the world. He supported the current administration on many issues while never hesitating to express disagreement when he felt it necessary. Agree or disagree with him, he possessed qualities increasingly rare in politics: a willingness to speak his mind galvanized by the courage of his convictions, yet tempered by political pragmatism, a prerequisite to maintaining the power that is sine qua non of effectiveness.

As the Jewish tradition says, may his memory be a blessing.

One of the few consolations of death is that we often learn more about people during the process of eulogizing them than we knew of them in life. Looking back on Graham’s career, one cannot help but be impressed by the sheer energy he brought to public life. Although he was in his seventies, he remained active, engaged, and ambitious. Like President Trump, he seemed to possess reserves of energy that are the envy of young and old, whether friend or foe. The tragedy of the Senator’s demise is that he undoubtedly still had so much to contribute, contributions so desperately needed in these desperate times.

His death also raises broader political questions. One is whether we should consider age limits for elected officials. As people move through their seventies and especially into their eighties, the risks of mortality and serious health problems unfortunately but undeniably increase exponentially. The Grim Reaper can come suddenly and unexpectedly, deterred by neither filibuster nor veto.

We already recognize this reality in certain professions. Commercial airline pilots, for example, face mandatory retirement ages for obvious reasons. The question becomes whether a similar principle should apply to elected officials.

Personally, I have always been more skeptical of term limits than age limits. If voters are happy with a senator, congressman, governor, or mayor, why shouldn’t that person continue serving as long as the voters choose to elect them? Age, however, is a different matter. There may be merit in establishing an upper age limit, perhaps with some transparent mechanism for exceptions in extraordinary cases.

The devil, as always, is in the details. Should it be the biblical four score and ten? Would the age limit apply at the a terms’ commencement or conclusiont? Those are difficult questions. Still, the conversation is worth having.

Historically, many political norms began as customs before becoming laws. For years, presidents voluntarily followed George Washington’s example and limited themselves to two terms. Only later was that practice codified through the 22nd Amendment. A similar process could occur regarding age limits. Political parties could establish voluntary standards applicable to all levels of government as a prelude to constitutional amendments or statutory changes.

The immediate political consequences of Graham’s death are more urgent. What had been considered a relatively safe Republican Senate seat may may have become in play as suddenly as death came to Graham.

South Carolina law provides a somewhat complex process for filling the vacancy, and Republicans will now have to determine who carries the party banner moving forward. The governor’s temporary appointee may or may not be the same individual nominated to run for the seat. One person could serve out the remainder of Graham’s term while another becomes the nominee for the next six-year term. We simply don't know yet. The details will matter. Candidate quality matters. Timing matters. Political conditions matter.

As I was reading reactions in the middle of a sleepless night, I was subjected to one commentator already gleefully discussing the political opportunities created by Graham’s death. The image that came to mind was the episode Dickens’ A Christmas Carol when scavengers divide up Scrooge’s possessions before his body has even cooled.

That struck me as indecent. There will be time enough for politics. There will be time enough for campaign strategies, electoral calculations, and succession battles. Surely we can spare a few hours to acknowledge a life of public service before rushing to divide the spoils.

Lindsey Graham will be missed by many Americans who are grateful for his military service and admire his resilience, adaptability, and willingness to devote virtually his entire life to service to others, private and public, as caretaker of his orphaned sibling, young lawyer in the JAG Corps, and one of the most influential senators in American history.

His was a remarkable journey.

May he rest in peace.

As always, I appreciate your support. My goal remains to reach 100 paid subscribers, which represents an important milestone in the Substack ecosystem and helps expand the reach of this publication. So if you haven't already done so, please click the “Subscribe” button below and choose your preferred option.

Whether you are a paid or free subscriber, a longtime reader or someone who has just discovered my work, thank you.

Of all the things you can give another person, your attention is the most valuable. Thank you for giving some of yours to me; if you found my writing worth reading, please share it with others.

We are living through a pivotal moment in American history. Politicians always tell us that the next election is the most important election of our lives. Most of the time, that’s just boilerplate campaign rhetoric. This cycle, I genuinely believe we are witnessing a struggle for the future of our country. In my view, there are forces within American politics—particularly within the increasingly radical fifth column that has infiltrated the Democrats—that seek changes far beyond ordinary policy disagreements. I believe they are attempting to use the Democrats as a vehicle for a second American revolution, one rooted not in the principles of 1776, but in socialist and even openly communist ideas. Whether you agree or disagree with that assessment, it is a debate worth having honestly and openly.

That is one of the reasons I continue to write for what I believe is right. The sensible center needs a voice. If you believe that voice has value, I hope you will continue reading, commenting, sharing, and, if able, supporting this publication as a paid subscriber.