In 1978, Alabama U.S. Senator Jim Allen (D-Gadsden) led the opposition to the treaty proposed by President Jimmy Carter that would transfer ownership of the Panama Canal.
In 2025, Alabama U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-Auburn) is leading efforts to reassert U.S. control of the canal and has the support of President-elect Donald Trump.
This unusual fact about Alabama's senatorial leadership has gone mostly unnoticed and unreported by the national media.
The 1978 'Save Our Canal' fight by Allen is an amazing but nearly forgotten story of senatorial effectiveness. Allen almost blocked the giveaway treaty. It passed by only one vote above the two-thirds required for ratification – 68 votes received, 67 needed. It was a courageous fight because Allen was fighting against a President of his own party.
Though Sen. Jim Allen was a Democrat, he was a very different kind of Democrat than we see today. He was a conservative, reining in the federal government, protecting states' rights, cutting back wasteful spending, and using a little common sense. He was one of a dying breed.
Jim Allen had run in Alabama and been elected as a Democrat—as a state legislator, lieutenant governor twice and U.S. Senator twice. His campaigns were toward the end of the era in which almost every Alabama candidate had run as a Democrat. Few candidates ran Republican in Alabama, and fewer were still elected. An exception was the 1964 Goldwater coattail effect, in which Alabama elected five GOP congressmen and most other GOP candidates who bothered to qualify.
The year of 1978 was pre-Reagan, pre-Jeremiah Denton, pre-Gov. Guy Hunt, and preceded the rapid transition of Alabama from a solid Democrat state to a shiny red Republican state.
So for Allen to loudly and effectively lead the opposition to a major proposal from a Democrat president was highly unusual.
After Allen was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1968, it took a while for the other Senators and the national press to figure out that he was an expert – maybe a genius – at parliamentary and Senate procedure. He had been the presiding officer of the Alabama State Senate when he was twice Lt. Governor, and he became a serious student of procedure – something that most senators find boring and tedious. Not Allen. He took procedural correctness and the strategic use of senate procedures deadly seriously and a source of fascination.
One reason others were slow to realize the unusual ability of Sen. Allen in senate procedures was his voice. He had a deep Alabama drawl, a looooow bass voice and a sloooow speaking cadence. The Washington crowd thought that because Jim Allen talked slowly, he thought slowly. Nothing could have been further from the truth. His brain, particularly his parliamentary brain, was as quick as lightning.
The Vice-President of the United States is the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate, as provided by the Constitution. He runs the calendar, calls up bills, recognizes senators to speak, and makes rulings on procedural questions. The VP does not have a vote, not being a senator representing any particular state. The exception is in the case of a tie vote when the VP casts a vote to break the tie. With the close margins of control of the Senate, the VP's vote has become a bit more frequent and more important than in bygone eras.
Vice presidents typically do not enjoy sitting in the presiding chair of the Senate and often are not there. Whenever VPs are not sitting in the chair, they make arrangements for one of the U.S. Senators to preside.
Vice-Presidents had an unusual run of trouble while Jim Allen was in the Senate. He served under VPs Spiro Agnew, Nelson Rockefeller, Gerald Ford and Walter Mondale.
The VPs slowly realized that the distinguished gentleman from Alabama was a knowledgeable, tough and fair presiding officer. Sen. Allen became a frequent presider over the Senate.
Alabama citizens visiting the Senate gallery were often surprised and impressed to see their own senator sitting in the chair, presiding, and doing it unusually well.
In the 1978 debates over Carter's proposed treaty to transfer control of the Panama Canal, Allen used his knowledge and dexterity with Senate procedures to good effect. He was constantly at odds with the Senate Democrat leadership, who supported the giveaway treaty.
Allen's maneuvering during the canal treaty debate and on other measures was so effective that he was widely credited with "rebirthing the filibuster."
During the canal treaty debate, Carter's Vice-President was Walter Mondale (D-Minnesota). Mondale had been a U.S. Senator before being elected VP. He knew as much about procedures as a normal senator.
Mondale was not about to let Jim Allen preside during the canal treaty debates. He either presided himself or designated a senator who supported the treaty as the presiding officer.
Sen. Allen had to call out Vice-President Mondale during the debate on procedural mistakes.
At the heart of the 1978 debate over the canal's future — long a symbol of American power and engineering ability — lay basic foreign policy and national security issues. Opponents of the treaty argued that turning the canal over to Panama would, in the words of Sen. Robert P. Griffin (R-Mich.), be "a dangerous step, a gamble for the United States and the security of the United States." They argued that such an action would undermine American prestige abroad. They represented another in a series of decisions by the Carter administration —cancellation of the B-1 bomber, deferment of neutron bomb deployment and withdrawal of U.S. ground forces from South Korea — that, they said, could serve to undermine the U.S. defense posture.
The floor manager for the treaty, Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho), countered: "A vote against this treaty represents a vain attempt to preserve the past. It represents a futile effort to perpetuate an American colony in Panama against the wishes of the Panamanian people…".
Opposition to any treaty giving away the canal had earlier reached a fever pitch in the 1976 Republican primaries for president. Challenger Ronald Reagan, then governor of California, strongly and loudly opposed the canal's return to Panama. Reagan lost the GOP nomination in a close race against the incumbent, President Gerald Ford, who had assumed the presidency after the resignation of President Richard Nixon. Ford then lost to Carter in the November 1976 general election.
The canal treaty was signed in September 1977 by President Carter and Panama's ruler, Herrera. It then went to the U.S. Senate for " advice and consent." Ratification would require a two-thirds vote.
Hearings on the treaties (it was actually two treaties) began in September 1977.
Carter's Secretary of State Cyrus Vance argued that, under the treaty, the canal would be open, neutral, secure and operated without cost to U.S. taxpayers. He and other supporters also argued it would help the U.S. position among other South and Central American nations.
Supporters of ratification included AFL-CIO President George Meany, New York Gov. Averell Harriman, Undersecretary of Ste George Ball, Lady Bird Johnson, former Senator and Ambassador to Vietnam Henry Cabot Lodge (R), former President Gerald Ford (who Carter had defeated in 1976), and former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Dean Rusk — quite a stellar cast of Washington operatives.
Opponents of the treaty included the American Legion, many conservatives, and America Firsters of that day.
Allen's opposition to the canal treaties included proposing amendments, points of order from the Senate floor, and mini-filibusters. Because Jim Allen knew the procedure so well, and many senators did not, he drove them crazy.
The entire debate is detailed in the Congressional Quarterly Almanac of 1978:
Sen. Allen and the opponents fell one vote short.
Following ratification of the basic treaty on April 18, President Carter said: "This is a day of which Americans can feel proud; for now we have reminded the world and ourselves of the things that we stand for as a nation."
"These treaties can mark the beginning of a new era in our relations, not only with Panama but with all the rest of the world. They symbolize our determination to deal with the developing nations of the world, the small nations of the world, on the basis of mutual respect and partnership."
With former President Donald Trump slated to return to the Oval Office on January 20, he has resurrected the giveaway of the canal as an issue. In doing so, he is following the lead of Tuberville.
Tuberville and former U.S. Rep. Jerry Carl (R-Mobile) visited the Canal in March 2023, and both agree that the U.S. does not need to allow China, Russia or any other non-American power to gain control of the Canal, in whole or in part. Tuberville returned to the Canal last year and added illegal immigration through the Canal Zone to the list of problems.
Trump says he will take steps to reassert U.S. control of the Canal. He will count heavily on Tuberville to lead the way in the Senate. Tuberville is ahead of Trump — and ahead of everyone else – on fixing the Canal's problems.
As the new session of Congress has started and the new administration starts January 20, 1819 News will cover the steps taken on control of the Canal.
Again, it is an Alabama Senator in the lead.
Jim' Zig' Zeigler writes about Alabama's people, places, events, groups and prominent deaths. He is a former Alabama Public Service Commissioner and State Auditor. You can reach him for comments at ZeiglerElderCare@yahoo.com.
Don't miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
