Stokes: GOP problem
By Thomas L. Stokes
Washington –
The optimistic state of mind among Republicans over November election prospects shows itself in the current disagreement among them in the Senate over election of a successor to the late Senator Charles L. McNary as party leader in that body.
Aside from the question of who it should be – and the rivalry is lively – the Republican Senators are divided over whether they should choose a leader now or wait until after the election.
One group, which includes the nine “freshmen” members swept into office in 1942, wants to elect a vigorous leader, carry the fight aggressively on every issue to the Democrats from now until election, and perfect a smooth-working party organization that would function effectively if the party captures the White House.
Other group wants to wait
The other group, which includes some, but not all of the older members, prefers to wait until after election to see if their optimism about victory is borne out, meanwhile retaining their temporary organization with Senator Wallace H. White (R-ME) as acting leader.
In the event they capture the White House, they might want to choose a different type of leader than if the party were still a minority party. They would want as leader a man who would work well with their President and no one knows now who this might be, or what the party situation might be, it is pointed out.
They want no repetition of their last experience with Senate Republican leadership when they were in power. Senate Republican Leader Jim Watson, who had little regard for President Hoover, was constantly crossing up the President and making light cracks about him. One of his favorite quips about the President was:
How’re you going to follow a man who has St. Vilus dance?
Senator McNary, rather than “Sunny Jim,” became the liaison with the White House when the Depression began to pile trouble high.
Should the Republicans capture the Senate, which looks now to be a long-shot bet, the Senate Leader would assume commanding influence in the party councils.
Even should Republicans fail to get control of the Senate, they are certain to make gains and narrow the margin between the parties. There are now 58 Democrats, 37 Republicans and one Progressive. With a Republican President and a Senate nominally under control of the Democrats, a skillful leader would be needed who could work with the Democrats as far as possible to the best interests of the administration, particularly with the country at war.
Conference to decide course
The group which wants to wait leans toward caution. Among them are some who would not go too strong in opposition now, depending rather upon the present trend picking up momentum of its own weight, without any continuous running fight that might produce tactical errors of which President Roosevelt could take advantage.
Republicans will decide on their course at a party conference next Wednesday, with the advantage on the wait-and-see side.
Mentioned for the leadership are Senators Robert Taft (R-OH), Arthur Vandenberg (R-MI), John A. Danaher (R-CT) and Styles Bridges (R-NH).
Senator Taft takes the position among his friends that he would step aside if Senator Vandenberg wants the post. The Michigan Senator, it is reported, would like the job as long as the party is in the minority, but if it won control of the Senate, he would prefer to be President pro tempore and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, on which he is now ranking Republican member.
Senators Danaher and Bridges are younger men who have taken an active role in the Senate. Each has a following.