William Howard Taft and the
First Motoring Presidency,1909-1913

 

Taft and Sleep Apnea

Important new research by John G. Sotos, M.D. has clarified an old and misunderstood Taft legend regarding his tendency to fall asleep during the day. Taft could fall asleep standing. He slept in his car, at church, at the theatre, and on train rides. Rather than assume he was fat and lazy, Dr. Sotos explained that Taft suffered from a "severe" case of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a sleep disorder caused by obstruction of the oxygen flow to the lungs during sleep. As the condition causes the sufferer to unknowingly and frequently awaken during the night (the brain reacts to the cut air flow by "energizing" the airway muscles), the principle symptom is daytime sleepiness. The condition may impede mental focus and daytime performance as well as to cause an overwhelming need for frequent napping. Taft's OSA was a result of his obesity, which was at its peak during his presidency.

Dr. Sotos published his findings in the medical journal, Chest (see "Taft and Pickwick: Sleep Apnea in the White House," Chest. 2003;124:1133-1142). The findings and the disease itself are explained at Apneos.com, a website dedicated to to the sleep disorder. See also Dr. Sotos' excellent personal website, DoctorZebra.com, which contains the most extensive online collection of medical history of American presidents, including a review of Taft's medical history and his OSA. (The website is a fabulous resource for all kinds of information, especially for its complete citations and bibliographies.) The Washington Post discussed Dr. Sotos' findings in the article, "Taft's Nodding Off Attributed to Illness" (September 21, 2003).

While Dr. Sotos' arguments are persuasive that Taft suffered from OSA, as I told the Post, I disagree that the events of his presidency were changed by it. Dr. Sotos wrote at Apneos.com that as a result of his OSA,

Taft had no energy left for politics. A good President, but a poor politician, he was defeated for re-election.

Here, I depart. First, Dr. Sotos assumed that Taft's presidency was a failure, principally for having lost his bid for re-election. Next, he attributed that failure to bad judgment, which, he argued, was caused by a case of OSA.

Taft did lose the 1912 election. But if we assign that loss to OSA, then mustn't we also assign everything else that happened during Taft's presidency to OSA -- good and bad? That is, of course, absurd. The best that could be said for the theory that it affected his presidency is that Taft's presidency was what it was despite, and not because, of this terrific condition.

Taft's success as President came in ways that cannot be measured by the results of the 1912 election. This is principally for what Taft prevented from happening in 1912, and not in what happened that year. This story I have told in a paper for the Woodrow Wilson National Symposium (Staunton, Virginia, September 23-25, 2004), entitled, The Constitution's Bodyguard. Meanwhile, and for our purposes here, let me offer an example of a Taft success that came directly of clarity of vision, decisiveness in action, and resoluteness in purpose. I'll let The New York Times speak that success, as concerned his ground-breaking trade reciprocity deal with Canada:

As high politics this was masterly. As statesmanship, it is unexampled in our history... The president has literally tried his case before the people, and, by the force of the conviction he has implanted in the public mind, he has won. ["Mr. Taft’s Triumph," editorial, July 23, 1911]

History's view of the Taft presidency is changing. My work, William Howard Taft and the First Motoring Presidency is part of a larger movement to re-assess the meaning of the Taft presidency and the value of those things he made happen, and, most importantly, to understand what he prevented from happening. As I have told it in that book and in the upcoming paper, in defeating the extremes of progressivism and its wild prophet of 1912, Theodore Roosevelt, Taft preserved the principals and the products of the American Founding as expressed in the Constitution and in the core tenet of judicial review. Furthermore, in his vigorous battle with Roosevelt and in clarifying and defending conservative principles, Taft set the ongoing legacy of the Republican Party.

Dr. Sotos correctly points out that Taft had a sleep problem, and for this insight he is to be applauded. Rather than see faults and errors that -- and it would be impossible to prove -- were supposedly the result of OSA, we will all do Taft and history better by speaking of how Taft acted as President, achieved his successes, and made his decisions despite it. We cannot know what he would have done had he not suffered this condition. Just the same, we cannot assume that he would have done anything differently, or chosen or decided differently. In that Taft's presidency uniquely conformed to his campaign promises, that he would have chosen any differently is an especially dubious proposition. Taft displayed a unique consistency in action and principle throughout his presidency, and, indeed, throughout his career. He suffered OSA. He never bowed to it. No, Taft was, and his presidency was, no victim of OSA. He was a sufferer. His presidency was not. He was, then, more the hero for it.

- Michael L. Bromley, Summer 2004

 

back to Taft