Madison, Wisconsin (UP) –
A slate of Republican convention delegates pledged to former Governor Harold E. Stassen of Minnesota will be entered in the Wisconsin presidential preferential primary April 4, Dr. F. L. Gullickson, former GOP state chairman, announced today.
Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York and Wendell L. Willkie will also be represented by slates of delegates in the primary election.
By Ernie Pyle
In Italy – (by wireless)
In the past our Army has worried some because the soldiers didn’t have a very good idea of what the war around them was all about. This was largely because the Army never told them. But several months ago, a definite program of making our combat troops better informed was inaugurated, and it is taking effect now in many phases of our operations overseas with which I am not acquainted. But I have seen one example of it in the Air Forces.
In the bomber group which I have been visiting, pilots come down to the enlisted men’s mess hall every evening and tell them what happened on their missions that day. Our squadron flew three missions on this particular day so three pilots came down that night – one to describe each mission.
They brought maps with them and told the soldiers exactly what they were trying to bomb, how successful they were, how much flak they ran into, how many enemy fighters they saw, and what road strafing they did on the way home. They also told the men why each point was selected to bomb, and what its destruction would mean.
The pilots made it informal, and one of them who had had a rather tough mission wound up by saying:
I think I earned my pay today.
The next one got up and said:
Well, I didn’t earn mine.
His flight had had an easy ride, encountering no fighters and little flak.
Receive summary of ground war
Later I was with a squadron of 20 bombers and sat in on their early-morning briefing. The briefing officer, before starting on the details of the forthcoming mission, gave the crews a complete summary of the ground war throughout the Italian and Russian fronts in the previous 24 hours, as brought in over the teletype system.
All this is a good thing. It’s easier to fight when you know what the other fellow is doing and how he is getting along.
At this 20-bomber field one of the enlisted gunners finished his allotted number of missions the day I got there. He was Sgt. Lester C. Eadman of Weyauwega, Wisconsin. Sgt. Eadman has been overseas 15 months and was wounded in the leg by flak last winter in one of the raids over Tunis. Eadman just cleaned up and loafed all the next day after his last mission, and he looked mighty satisfied with everything.
A lot of pilots and enlisted men who have finished their missions get married as soon as they hit home. Three gunners in this same group went home together recently and all three were married within two days after they got to the States.
Pin-ups vs. girl back home
There has been a controversy in the Stars and Stripes over the pin-up girls vs. the girl back home. One soldier wrote in and said the picture of his one-and-only was good enough for him and to hell with pin-up pictures. but he had a lot of dissenters. Personally, I don’t see that there’s much conflict. I’ve ever heard of a soldier writing to his real girl to break off the engagement because he had fallen in love with a picture.
Looking at a pin-up girl is pleasant, and sort of academic. Everybody carries pictures of his own family, anyway, and gets them out on the slightest pretext. I’ve looked at thousands of pictures of wives and three-month-old babies of soldiers, and have said “Hmm!” and “Ah, beautiful!” and “My, what a strapping youngster!” until I’m red in the face. Don’t get the idea that I mind it. Not at all. It gives me an excuse to haul out my own pictures and show them right back.
My, how many women look alike!
But from this vast experience of looking at pictures of other men’s wives, I’ve got one definite cross-section impression, and that is how much alike so many women in the world look. Don’t shoot, boys, I didn’t mean YOUR wife.
The reason I have brought up the subject of pin-up girls is to tell of a pin-up gallery in one room occupied by six mechanics of my dive-bomber squadron. Tacked on their walls are three dozen of the most striking pin-ups you ever saw.
Before long the squadron will have to move and give up its present nice quarters. When it does I think the pin-ups should be left there and the room roped off by the Italian government as a monument to the American occupation. I’ll bet the place, if given a few centuries’ time, would become as historic as Pompeii.
They are being counted – those young Americans on the warships, in the air, on the beaches of the Marshall Islands in this greatest of our battles with the Japs.
They are being counted – those young Americans who press forward today against the Germans’ fire, over the hills and plains of Italy, on to Rome.
Their comrades have been counted on a hundred bloody battlefields, from Attu to Bataan to Guadalcanal to Tunisia – and white crosses mark the places where they stood when they were counted.
But some of their representatives in Congress, trustees of the government for which those young men are fighting and dying, don’t want to be counted – not even at $10,000 a year.
Today the Congressmen are voting on the question of whether the Armed Forces shall be permitted to vote in the next election by state ballots or by federal ballots. But they are not deciding this issue by a record roll call, which would provide a public count of where each Congressman stands.
They are deciding it by a “teller vote,” that being a parliamentary device by which lawmakers register their will anonymously – to the end that when election time comes constituents will not know where they stood or how they were counted.
Gen. MacArthur said:
Only those who are ready to die are fit to live.
Only those Congressmen who are ready to vote in the open on the merits of this issue or any other, without weighing party considerations and the danger of political death, are fit to make our country’s laws.
From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
There is some small speculation on the question whether President Roosevelt, saying “Oh: when a fourth-term resolution was presented to him, meant the expression to convey surprise, approval or dissatisfaction.
There are, of course, always the further possibilities that he intended the oh of depreciation, or the shrinking oh, or the wool-gathering oh which denotes that the speaker has not kept up with the conversation.
Possibly, also, the President intended to say “Oho,” and committed a typographical error. If he did, this would explain nothing at all, Oho being open to an equal number of interpretations. The best guess is that he meant exactly what he said, and that it was the noncommittal oh, the big round empty oh, the oh of the present non-indicative mood.
Question is whether ex-workers overseas should get ballots; Pittsburgh case is example
By Fred W. Perkins, Pittsburgh Press staff writer
Washington –
While Congress quarrels over votes for soldiers, the National Labor Relations Board is bothered by a similar problem…
Should men and women in the services vote in elections under NLRB auspices to determine collective-bargaining agents in the plants where they formerly worked, and to which they presumably will return when mustered out?
The problem is posed by two companies that demand voting rights in such elections for former employees now in the Armed Forces. In one case, the affected union opposes the company, and in the other the union has not been required to take a position.
NLRB’s record is against giving a general guarantee of voting rights to former employees overseas, its reason being the time element. It requires such elections to be completed within 30 days after they are ordered, and may of them are held within 15 days.
Before the war
Before the war, NLRB’s policy provided for absentee voting in collective-bargaining elections. This was changed soon after Pearl Harbor, because it was foreseen that the movement of troops overseas would complicate the receipt of ballots. Now, soldiers or sailors who happen to be in the vicinity when an election is held are allowed to take part in voting at their former place of employment, but no effort is made to send ballots even to servicemen still in this country.
The Botany Worsted Mills in New Jersey has objected to an election, held some weeks ago, on the ground that servicemen were not included. NLRB’s ruling is expected in a week or two.
Pittsburgh case
The other case has not yet reached Washington, still being before the regional board in Pittsburgh, Nicholas Unkovic, attorney for the Mine Safety Appliance Company, has said it will be carried to the U.S. Supreme Court unless a favorable decision is given by NLRB.
The company demands that its 655 employees in military service be allowed to participate, with the 2,700 now on the payroll, in an election to determine whether bargaining rights shall be won by the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers (CIO). The company is also fighting to make the election company-wide, in all its 14 plants, instead of restricting it as the union desires to one plant with 200 employees at Callery, in the Pittsburgh district.
NLRB officials say there is a decided difference between political elections and collective-bargaining elections, in that public officials are elected for specific terms while in bargaining elections the result may stand only until there is a substantial change in the employer’s personnel.
A soldier coming home may find that he is “stuck” for several years with a Senator or President he doesn’t like, but if he disapproves of the union in his place of employment (and if enough others think likewise), another vote can be forced on this question.
The Pittsburgh Press (February 3, 1944)
Alternate allows federal ballot only if state fails to act
Washington (UP) –
Administration foes in the Senate today threw their strength behind a new soldier-vote plan permitting a federal ballot only where states fail to enact adequate absentee voting laws.
The proposal, in form of an amendment to the Senate’s administration-backed Lucas-Green federal ballot bill, was injected into the soldier-vote dispute as both the House and Senate continued debate under limitations which may bring a decision Friday.
Senator Scott W. Lucas (D-IL), leading the administration fight for the Green-Lucas federal ballot which provides a vote only for President, Vice President and members of Congress, said the coalition amendment was not acceptable.
The principal features of the coalition plan included:
The federal ballot would be authorized only to Dec. 31, 1945.
The federal ballot would not be allowed for the resident of any state which prior to June 1 provided an absentee voter law waiving registration and setting up machinery to have ready 45 days before Nov. 7 ballots, envelopes and voting instructions weighing not more than 1.2 ounces.
Voters would have to write in the name of their choice for President, Senator and Congressman, and would be forbidden to write in only the name of the party they favored.
No absentee voter would receive either the federal or state ballot, however, without applying or it through a postcard to be supplied by the soldiers and sailors war ballot commission.
Specification that only the individual states shall determine voter qualifications and ballot validity.
Give state ballots equal priority with federal ballots in transmission to and from the war fronts.
State Democratic Committee to name candidates tomorrow
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania – (special)
Congressman Francis John Myers of Philadelphia is the probable choice of the Democratic State Committee for the party’s nomination for U.S. Senator, it developed here today.
The committee meets tomorrow to recommend a slate of candidate to Democratic voters in the April 25 primary.
Balance of slate
The balance of the slate which the State Committee is expected to choose will line up as follows:
JUDGE OF THE STATE SUPREME COURT: Charles Alvin Jones of Pittsburgh, now a federal circuit judge, 1938 Democratic nominee for Governor.
JUDGES OF THE STATE SUPERIOR COURT: Judge Chester H. Rhodes of Stroudsburg, who will be a candidate for reelection, and Auditor General F. Blair Ross of Butler.
AUDITOR GENERAL: State Treasurer G. Harold Wagner of Wilkes-Barre.
STATE TREASURER: Ramsey S. Black of Harrisburg, third assistant postmaster general.
Mr. Black was the original favorite of U.S. Senator Joseph F. Guffey for nomination to the senatorial seat now held by Senator James J. Davis (R-Pittsburgh). Other factions in the party, however, objected to Mr. Black’s candidacy and Philadelphia leaders won their argument for an eastern candidate.
Jones agrees to run
Judge Jones, whose present position is only one judicial step below the U.S. Supreme Court, is reported to have agreed to run for Pennsylvania’s highest court after party leaders assured him of their unanimity on his candidacy.
In his present job, Judge Jones has a lifetime appointment at a salary of $12,500 a year. The State Supreme Court pays each judge $19,500 a year and the terms run for 21 years.
Judge Rhodes was elected in 1933 and is the only Democrat on either appellate bench.
Ross bows to others
Mr. Ross was originally a candidate for the Supreme Court nomination, but bowed to the wishes of the slate-makers. He was the Democratic nominee for Governor last year, but lost by a wide margin to Governor Edward Martin, a Republican.
Mr. Ross was formerly State Treasurer and Treasurer Wagner now hopes to duplicate his predecessor’s trick of switching to the Auditor General’s office. Neither fiscal official is permitted to succeed himself, under the Constitution.
The ‘Boy Orator’
Congressman Myers, 42, is serving his third term in Washington. He is a lawyer, a former State Deputy Attorney General and a native of Philadelphia. After he was first elected, he attracted considerable attention among Democratic Party adherents as a “boy orator.”
In addition to selecting a slate of candidates for the April primary, the State Committee, at its session tomorrow, is expected to adopt a militant resolution advocating a fourth term for President Roosevelt and to line up a list of 12 candidates for delegates-at-large to the Democratic National Convention to be held in Chicago in June.
Denver, Colorado (UP) –
James A. Farley, former chairman of the National Democratic Committee, said today that “the people are tired of being pushed around.”
He said the election of many Republicans was evidence of that fact, and indicated that he believed the New Deal was in its “last days.”
Mr. Farley said:
It is up to the American people to say when they have had enough pushing around by the bureaucrats. They and they alone will settle the issue.
Washington –
Senate Democratic Leader Alben W. Barkley (D-KY) today named Joseph C. O’Mahoney (D-WY) as chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, succeeding Joseph F. Guffey (D-PA).
Lower living standard must be accepted, candidate says
New York (UP) –
Wendell L. Willkie, candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, said last night that Americans must submit to “ruthless” taxation and lower their standard of living or else “we shall lose in debt the victory we have gained in blood.”
Predicting a post-war public debt of more than $300 billion at an interest cost of $6 billion a year, Mr. Willkie told a meeting in the New York Times hall that:
We should pay now for as much of the war as we possibly can.
He assailed the administration’s tax program as “unrealistic” and said President Roosevelt’s request for more than $10 billion in new taxes should be doubled.
He said:
Every dollar of war cost that we pass on to the future thins the financial bloodstream of the future.
There is only one principle to apply to war taxation, and that is a hard principle; we must tax to the limit every dollar, corporate and individual, that is capable of bearing a tax, particularly those corporate and individual earnings which are created by the war itself. That limit is reached only when the war effort itself is threatened. All else must be sacrificed and all must share the sacrifice to the bone.
During a question-and-answer period, Mr. Willkie reiterated his demand for close international cooperation in boundary disputes such as the present Polish-Soviet one.
Wants Soviet friendship
He said:
Let’s still try to find a method of cooperation because millions of lives are involved in our finding it.
The 1940 Republican candidate, who leaves Friday on a speaking tour of Western states in connection with the 1944 campaign, criticized “so-called political experts” who contend that the American people “will never stand for a tough tax program.”
He said:
Give the people an understanding of the issues involved and they will do their duty by their country, however incredibly painful it may be.
The freedoms of a democracy which we in America enjoy were not won through political cowardice.
Men like Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Hancock and Patrick Henry had the courage to speak their minds and to “stand up and be counted” even though profession of their convictions may have resulted in death.
Similarly, the freedom of a democracy cannot be preserved through political cowardice.
Yet 233 members of the House of Representatives have demonstrated political cowardice in refusing to make known their positions on the question of giving servicemen the right to vote.
In a democratic legislative body, the members may vote as they see fit on any issue. But the citizens to whim they are responsible have an equal right to know how each representative votes on every issue.
Democracy falters when those entrusted with carrying out the grave responsibilities of government don’t have the courage to stand up for their convictions.
It is disturbing to record the tactics of the Republicans on this issue.
One of the vital strengths of a democracy is a strong, aggressive, intelligent, constructive minority – a “loyal opposition.”
By secreting their obstructionism behind an artificial parliamentary rule, the Republicans are attesting to the common charge that they have a peculiar talent for doing the wrong thing.
By Westbrook Pegler
Albany, New York –
It would be foolish to pretend that the rising interest in Tom Dewey’s work as Governor of New York is limited to just that.
Although he is not a declared candidate for the Republican nomination for the Presidency nobody is naïve enough to think he would refuse to and that is why his work as governor, the adoption of a short, understandable state income tax form, his determination to make the cities meet their financial responsibilities so as to reduce their debts, the better to meet post-war conditions, his attitude toward the people whom he regards as citizens, not wards of the government, are of national interest.
This new state income tax form consists of just one page, for taxpayers whose income consists of wages, salaries, commissions, pensions, interest, dividends, partnerships, estates or trusts. It contains only 22 questions and schedules from A to I, such as “Were you married and living with your wife or husbands?” and “if so, state name and did your wife or husband have a separate income and if so, it included in this return?”
There is a reverse side, but half of that is taken up by instructions and the blanks on the top half are for the explanation of deductions claimed on page one. It can be used for incomes up to any amount derived from the sources specified, by contrast with the idiotic federal return required of individuals above a certain rather modest bracket.
Duplication in taxes
Moreover, although Mr. Dewey has not attacked the subject, his tax department is imbued with the idea that the federal and state governments should divide the tax field by agreement and avoid duplications. The income tax is the horrible example of this duplication, because the New York law compels the citizen to pay a state tax on money already paid to the national Treasury, a plainly cynical imposition.
The question may be raised, for example, whether the federal government has any right to collect amusement taxes inasmuch as amusement is a strictly local occasion. A man takes a girl to the movies. In what respect is that an interstate transaction? If the federal government may tax tickets, why may it not tax real estate? But if it confines itself to its own traditional American responsibilities it won’t have to collect local taxes.
The Dewey administration’s tendency seems to be toward restoration of the responsibility of the subdivisions of government and the division of taxing powers so that the federal government will not be collecting from the people to finance local improvements and assuming the function of the subdivisions without reducing their wasteful rapacity. Similarly, the state would operate in its own well-defined tax field and the cities and other inferior subdivisions would have to make their own way on their own revenues.
Old bonds for sale
Recently, Mr. Dewey’s controller, Frank Moore, has been telling careless cities that they can’t refund old bond issues but will have to pay them of. There is political risk in this because it means higher immediate local taxes in some cases but Mr. Dewey pointed out in a speech to a meeting of publishers that one city has repeatedly refunded an issue of bonds sold to raise soldier bounties in the Civil War and is still paying interest on them although the payments have amounted to many times the original amount. In another case, Boss Tweed in 1868 sold a bond issue paying 7% to pay for a sidewalk in the Bronx. The sidewalk is gone and probably no man lives who remembers it.
He said:
Some of the bonds will mature in 1975, but some cannot be paid for another 100 years since they are not callable. The bonds go on and on. These stories could be multiplied by the hundred.
There is no Harry Hopkins anywhere in the Dewey state government, nor a Henry Morgenthau or Randolph Paul. there are no timeless moochers’ quarters in the Governor’s mansion or embittered failures in the battle of life striving to revise the rules in favor of the incompetent to the detriment and discouragement of those who are able.
That simplified tax return is a bright example of the new type of New Deal. The old one, including instructions, contained six pages.
The Pittsburgh Press (February 4, 1944)
Taft proposal is turned down, 46–42
Bulletin
Washington –
The Senate today rejected, 46–42, the substitute Taft plan for soldier voting which would have restricted use of a federal ballot in the coming election. The plan called for a federal ballot only in event the voter’s home state failed to certify by June 1 that it would be able to provide, 45 days before the Nov. 7 election, a regular state ballot weighing not more than 1.2 ounces.
Washington (UP) –
The administration’s fight for a special federal ballot for absentee voting by servicemen concentrated in the Senate today after undergoing a stunning defeat in the House of Representatives.
The House climaxed an 11-hour marathon session last night by passing, 238–69, a bill to leave the balloting process almost entirely up to the states – the same bill denounced by President Roosevelt last week as a “fraud.”
At his news conference today, Mr. Roosevelt was reluctant to discuss the House rebuff. He said the situation is now more up to Congress than to him.
The measure, originally approved by the Senate Dec. 3, thus went back to the Upper Chamber, carrying only minor House amendments. It promised to complicate still further the soldier-vote debate in the Senate which is considering whether it should reverse itself and provide at least limited use of a federal ballot.
The administration’s defeat in the House was administered by a coalition of Republicans and Southern Democrats. They not only upset administration strategy – to stall House action until the Senate acted in a compromise measure – but also accepted President Roosevelt’s challenge to “stand up and be counted” by name.
The coalition defeated an administration motion to recess without a final vote. It defeated, 215–164, an attempt to substitute the administration-approved Worley federal ballot bill for the states’ rights measure. It defeated, 155–104, a compromise substitute which would have provided limited use of a federal ballot.
Margin never close
The 51-vote margin in those two tries was as close as the administration ever came to stemming the tide.
Then, with victory at hand. House Republican Leader Joseph W. Martin Jr. (R-MA) announced to the chamber that his party was ready to accept the President’s challenge. He called of a roll call vote on a Republican-sponsored motion to recommit the bill to committee. The motion was defeated, 224–168.
A moment later, Mr. Martin clinched his victory. He obtained a “stand up and be counted” roll call on final passage of the state’s rights bill. Rather than be counted as voting against any form of soldier vote legislation, administration supporters swung over in droves and the final tally was 328–69.
‘It’s not hopeless’
Senator Scott W. Lucas (D-IL), co-sponsor of the federal ballot bill which the Senate has been debating for two weeks, said after the House action that the situation still “certainly is not hopeless.”
He was not certain by what parliamentary method the Senate could inject a federal ballot provision into a measure which had been passed by both Houses without it, but he was certain it could be done.
Otherwise, many Congressional observers believe that if the bill reaches the President without substantial change, he will veto it.
The bill approved by the House provides that members of the Armed Forces, the Merchant Marine, the American Red Cross, the Society of Friends, the Women’s Auxiliary Service Pilots or the USO outside the United States, and eligible to vote in any primary, special or general election, shall use the absentee balloting procedures of their home states.
It recommends that the states accept applications for absentee ballots which have been prepared under the 1942 Soldier Voting Act and which would be distributed by the Secretaries of War and Navy and the War Shipping Administrator.
Upon receipt of such applications, the secretaries of states should forward them to the voter’s home county or local election official who would then mail the proper ballot to the individual. The bill suggests that the states waive any registration requirements.
As a substitute for the state ballot method of absentee voting, the administration on Jan. 24 began a fight in the Senate for a special federal ballot, to be issued every qualified voter without application, allowing space for a “write-in” vote by either name or party designation for President, Vice President, Senator and Congressman.
In the Senate, as in the House, the opposition consisted of a coalition of Republicans and Southern Democrats. The Senate coalition stalled action in that chamber until after the House acted, upsetting administration strategy and throwing the whole issue into a parliamentary tangle.
Senatorial candidate choice delays committee
By Robert Taylor, Pittsburgh Press staff writer
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania –
Congressman Francis J. Myers of Philadelphia was chosen today by State Democratic leaders as the party’s candidate for U.S. Senator.
Agreement on Mr. Myers came after a wrangle held by action by the 109 members of the Democratic State Committee for 1.5 hours beyond the scheduled meeting time.
Once the leaders had settled on Mr. Myers, a three-term Congressman, immediate approval of the committee was conceded.
To seek Davis’ seat
Mr. Myers, if nominated at the April 25 primary, will oppose the Republican nominee for the post now held by U.S. Senator James J. Davis of Pittsburgh, who will seek renomination on the GOP ticket.
The wrangle over a Democratic endorsement developed when James P. Clark, Philadelphia city chairman, declined to select a candidate for State Committee endorsement but summoned a caucus of the Philadelphia delegation.
After 1.5 hours, the delegation and the state leaders announced agreement on Mr. Myers, this turning down the bid of some Philadelphia leaders, headed by publisher J. David Stern, to obtain endorsement for ex-Congressman James P. McGranery, who resigned his House position recently to become an assistant to the U.S. Attorney General.
Myers attends session
Opposition to Mr. McGranery arose when he took the Justice Department job and his vacated post was snapped up by a Republican in a special byelection several weeks ago.
Mr. Myers informed of the tangle, came here early today after a late-night session of Congress, and appeared before the Philadelphia group. Mr. McGranery was not here.
Forty-five minutes after the committee was scheduled to meet, State Chairman Davis L. Lawrence announced the delay was due to caucus of Philadelphia members.
Lead for 4th term
In addition to picking a senatorial candidate, the Democrats were prepared to take the lead in the fourth-term movement and instruct their leaders to enter President Roosevelt’s name in the April 25 preferential primary.
A resolution to that effect was to be presented to the State Committee and its adoption appeared certain.
The rest of the slate of state candidates was complete, although there was a prospect that one or two competing candidates will carry their fight for endorsement before the State Committee.
Previous agreement
The leaders ratified a previous agreement on U.S. Circuit Court Judge Charles Alvin Jones of Pittsburgh for Supreme Court, Superior Court Judge Chester H. Rhodes and Auditor General F. Clair Ross for Superior Court, State Treasurer G. Harold Wagner for auditor general and Ramsay S. Black, third assistant postmaster general, for state treasurer.
A Westmoreland County delegation, led by State Senator John H. Dent, urged a place on the judicial slate for Common Pleas Judge George E. McWherter of Westmoreland County and Mr. Dent said his name would be placed in nomination at the Committee meeting.
Another competing candidacy which may be put before the Committee is that of John F. Breslin of Carbon County, executive assistant to Auditor General Ross, seeking nomination for auditor general. State Treasurer Wagner, however, with soldier support from Luzerne County organization leaders, is scheduled to get the endorsement.
Group to meet in St. Louis in April
Chicago, Illinois (UP) –
Harry H. Woodring, former Secretary of War in the Roosevelt administration, said in an address prepared for delivery today that a meeting of “anti-New Deal Democrats” would be held soon with the aim of preventing a fourth term and proposed Secretary of State Cordell Hull for President.
Mr. Woodring prepared the address for delivery before the Chicago Executives Club after he met with anti-administration Democrats from 23 states to plan a campaign to “oust New Dealers” from the party.
He praised President Roosevelt’s foreign policies and suggested that he be appointed to head the American delegation to the peace table.
Mr. Woodring, former Governor of Kansas, in an interview, declined to divulge details of the proposed anti-New Deal meeting but said it probably would be held in St. Louis before the middle of April.
Mr. Woodring said New Dealers by necessity would have to align themselves again with the Democratic Party. He added:
But if those factions fail to relinquish control of the party and continue their dictatorial tendencies, the true Democrats will take steps to prevent them from using the name Democratic Party, thus forcing the New Dealers to organize a party of their own.
Mr. Woodring said a poll conducted recently by Herbert Hoover showed that “71% of the people of the United States are tired of present governmental operations.” But, he added, they are divided between the Democrats and the Republicans.
Washington (UP) –
Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg (R-MI) said today that he favored Gen. Douglas MacArthur for President because he would be a “better commander-in-chief” than President Roosevelt – particularly “if by next November, we are concentrating on wiping Japan from the Pacific map.”
Explaining his support of Gen. MacArthur, Mr. Vandenberg opposed nominating a civilian on the Republican ticket on the ground that he would not be impressive against “Roosevelt’s ‘win-the-war’ appeal, and against ‘swapping horses,’ etc.”
Birmingham, Alabama (UP) –
The Democratic administration, “which has piloted us through the perils of the past decade, saved the nation and then gave it the strength and determination to defeat its enemies,” Robert E. Hannegan, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said in a prepared address read here last night.
The speech, delivered at a Jackson Day dinner, was read by Edward W. Pauley, party treasurer, who earlier told newsmen that if President Roosevelt wants the nomination for a fourth term, “he’ll get it.”
Both Mr. Hannegan and Postmaster General Frank C. Walker, who was originally scheduled to make the address, were prevented from appearing, Mr. Hannegan because weather conditions grounded his plane in Washington and Mr. Walker because of a death in his family.
Washington (UP) –
President Roosevelt admitted today that Wendell L. Willkie had more nerve than he had when it came to calling for higher taxes.
Asked during his news conference for comment on Mr. Willkie’s recent speech calling for higher taxation, the President said that he did not have the nerve to ask for $16 billion in new taxes, as Mr. Willkie did. With a smile, the President remarked that he had asked only for $10 billion.
He added that as far as Mr. Willkie’s statement and his own position were concerned, he thought they were thinking a little bit more about the next generation and not just this one.
Los Angeles, California –
Vice President Henry A. Wallace will arrive here today for a three-day tour of war industries and a series of speeches.
Washington (UP) –
Senator Henry Cabot Lodge (R-MA) today submitted his resignation from the Senate so that he may enter active military service.
Mr. Lodge is expected to become a lieutenant colonel. He has been a reserve officer and in 1942 had a tour of duty as a major with U.S. forces in the East Libyan desert – before President Roosevelt ruled that Congressmen could not serve in the armed services while still retaining their Congressional seats.
One report from Boston said Governor Leverett Saltonstall, a Republican, would resign and be succeeded by Lieutenant Governor Horace T. Cahill, a Republican, who then would appoint Mr. Saltonstall as Senator to succeed Mr. Lodge, whose term does not expire until 1949.
Mr. Saltonstall, here for an American Legion meeting, said he had known nothing about Mr. Lodge’s plan to resign and that he would consider the appointment “if and when” he resigns. Mr. Cahill described the report as “fiction and a fine fairy tale.”
It would be a fine thing if every person of voting age in the United States could vote this year at his home polling place.
It would be a fine thing if everybody could vote both in the primaries, which are straggled out from April to September, according to varying state laws, and in the November general election.
But the country is at war, and this isn’t possible.
It isn’t possible because millions of voters are fighting that war. Some of them are still in the United States, either in training or providing behind-the-gun service but they are scattered through hundreds of camps, depots, bases, stations and headquarters.
Millions of them are overseas, not only in Italy, England and New Britain, where the main fighting is going on, but at Pearl Harbor, in New Guinea, Algeria, Cairo, Iran, China, Burma, Australia, Bermuda, Panama, Brazil, Liberia, Tarawa, Alaska, Guadalcanal and hundreds of other places.
These men and women are not assigned their foreign stations, or their domestic bases, by geographical origin.
Members of the Armed Forces from Pittsburgh, as from every city, hamlet and township in the country, are distributed all over the world.
There are 48 states and 48 sets of election laws, widely different. To make it possible for each member of the Armed Forces to vote in strict compliance with the laws of his own state it would be necessary for the Army and Navy to suspend many other pressing war matters and detour an inconceivable amount of personnel and equipment to the job of distributing and collecting ballots from the thousand and one spots where American voters are stationed around the world.
Secretary of War Stimson and Secretary of the Navy Knox have said this is not possible. They have said the only way the Army and Navy can handle this problem is by making use of a “simple, uniform” ballot.
Some Congressmen and Senators dispute this. They say the whole matter can easily be handled by the Army and Navy despite the different systems, or by routine mail without any special help from the Army and Navy.
They could be right. But Mr. Knox and Mr. Stimson are in a better position to know. They have at their fingertips authoritative information from competent Army and Navy officers, at home and afield. They are familiar with the overall picture. And they have demonstrated a sincere interest in this problem.
How can we do else than accept their advice?
We have a letter from a Wilkinsburg naval officer, now overseas, who attempted to vote in the 1943 local election. Here is what he said:
My ballot for Nov. 2 election arrived Jan. 2. I didn’t even bother to fill it out. Personally, I’m quite disgusted. It was mailed Oct. 18. Whether it was the Navy’s fault or the fault of the Board of Education, I don’t know. But I do know that if ballots are held up for the presidential election, there’s going to be an awful howl raised by the men overseas. I wish something could be done about it.
Something can be done about it. Congress can do something about it. And Congress had better do it soon.
Wendell L. Willkie’s views of fiscal policy, as set forth in his New York speech, are thoroughly sound. Unless we maintain vigorous economic health, we can neither play a successful major part in world affairs after the war nor realize our hopes for social gains and higher living standards here at home.
An economic bloodstream composed largely of debt will eventually starve all the cells in the body.
It has been said before that our standard of living will have to come down during the war. Mr. Willkie proposes to force it down by tax increases that would net twice the amount asked by the Treasury, about six times the amount voted by Congress.
We wish Mr. Willkie had been more specific as to what taxes he would lay. But he was thinking straight when he advocated, in general, ruthless levies on every dollar in every income group, leaving the American people only the actual necessities of life, in order to pay the costs of war while the war is being fought, to the limit of our ability.
This, he says, is only simple justice to the men who are doing the fighting; it is the way to save our standard of living in the future.
Expressing greater faith in the people than some others have shown, he predicts they would bear the burden willingly if given a clear understanding of the issues involved, and if assured that their money would not be wasted.
He recognizes, also, that the post-war period will present an entirely different problem. Then our desired objective will be to stimulate the flow of goods and services, the taking of risks, the creation of millions of peacetime jobs. Then will come the time for minimum rather than maximum taxes. And then the fiscal policy should be, not to impose the highest possible tax rates, but to provide the highest possible income so that relatively modest rates can provide necessary revenue.