What does Presidents’ Day mean today? Historians at Pitt weigh in

Federal workers may associate Presidents’ Day with a long weekend, but the holiday also prompts some Americans to reflect on how the U.S. presidency has changed since its establishment.

Though the term “Presidents’ Day” may suggest a celebration of multiple presidents, the holiday was officially commemorated as “Washington’s Birthday” in 1879 through federal U.S. code — even though Washington’s actual birthday is actually on Feb. 22. The current concept of Presidents’ Day, which celebrates Abraham Lincoln as well, did not come into fruition until 1968, when Congress passed the Uniform Monday Holiday Act to give federal workers an extra day off of work and stimulate the national economy.

According to James Hill, a professor in the history department, many federal holidays were historically established to encourage civic ideals and promote national unity. Now, however, he believes these holidays are less attached to their original meanings.

“Holidays like Presidents’ Day in the past were opportunities for reflection and opportunities for building a shared sense of identity as Americans,” Hill said. “Now, I think they’re just kind of an excuse to sell cars.”

Hill said it is ironic that Presidents’ Day was solidified around the turn of the 1970s, when the Watergate scandal sparked public political opinion to “gradually become more cynical.”

Hill said American opinion has become increasingly polarized and partisan, especially with the 21st century’s rise of social media. Hill suggested the role of the presidency is “more powerful than it’s ever been before” with a shift in power from Congress and the use of executive orders, which increasingly is for personal ambitions.

“I don’t want to completely say this is new because there’s an element of [distrust] in how the presidency functioned before the late 1800s,” Hill said. “What’s changed is that the presidency is a lot more powerful than it was 150 years ago.”

With the increasing polarization, Presidents’ Day may begin to take on different connotations, according to Hill.

“I think the public is coming more and more into a position where they view higher offices kind of like a winner-take-all scramble for influence and power,” Hill said. “If you’re in power, you’re crushing your enemies, and if you’re out of power, you’re fighting to stay relevant.”

According to Hill, celebrated figures like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln have become “mythological” beings in U.S. memory. 

“I think everybody claims to love Lincoln, but they just make Lincoln whatever they want him to be,” Hill said. “There’s certain people we look at as heroes, but we don’t really interrogate too deeply as to, ‘Well, what would they think about certain things that are going on today? What would they do if they were in this position?’”

Hill believes holidays like Presidents’ Day are an opportunity to humanize the past by reflecting on both the good and bad ideals projected throughout American history.

“We can try to look for what is positive in how Americans have forged a society,” Hill said. “What is inspirational from our past? And without romanticizing it, you can try to live up to the better parts of our ideals.”  

Hill said Americans can use the day to reflect on what values they truly want to represent in today’s political environment. 

“There is a lot of resentment for people that once would have been considered neighbors,” Hill said. “I think that’s one thing that celebrations like this are trying to avoid — they were trying to [build] a sense of shared identity.”

John Stoner, another professor in the history department, said historians should use the day to contend not only with George Washington’s influence on the nation, but also his controversial history regarding issues like slavery. 

“I absolutely think that Washington continues to command a significant amount of respect, but at least for those of us who study American history, his legacy is more complicated,” Stoner said. 

In 1862, the Senate established a tradition of selecting a senator to read George Washington’s Farewell Address aloud on Feb. 22 in the Chamber. Both Hill and Stoner question the scope of public acknowledgement surrounding these celebratory events.

In his Farewell Address, Washington warned against division amongst Americans caused by loyalty to political factions. Now, some scholars equate his speech to a warning of the current two-party system, though Stoner believes many Americans do not actually follow Washington’s advice to unite.

“We live in a fairly hyper-partisan moment,” Stoner said. “I’m pretty sure that many Republicans and many Democrats aren’t bemoaning the fact on Presidents’ Day that they’re not cleaving to Washington’s imperative to unite rather than divide, unfortunately.”

According to Stoner, the rise of the “imperial presidency” provides a good opportunity for Americans to reflect. 

“My wish would be that Americans [take] an opportunity to reflect on what has made certain presidents justifiably great, what may complicate their stories and their legacies, and then also to think about what deserves closer scrutiny for being questionable or problematic in the context of our constitutional system,” Stoner said.