Election 1944: Pre-convention news

[NormanStewart]

Stokes: Quiet campaign

By Thomas L. Stokes

Milwaukee, Wisconsin –
If the mood of the people here is any guide, political campaigning in this critical war year is likely to be subdued and restrained.

This is an observation from watching Wendell L. Willkie’s campaign here for convention delegates to be elected in the April primary.

He has spoken to dozens of audiences. His hearers have been attentive rather than noisy and exuberant.

Wisconsin people are not, by and large, of emotional caliber. But there seems to be a deeper seriousness in their attitude. There is little hurrah and excitement, even though Mr. Willkie is not holding himself in. He discarded, after his first two formal speeches, the use of prepared manuscripts, and is speaking extemporaneously, and, in his best, he has power to lift an audience.

He never was better nor more effective in his platform manner in the opinion of this writer who followed him throughout his 1940 campaign.

But the blanket of war seems to have dropped down to muffle the usual sound and fury of political campaigns.

Servicemen not interested

You can see why when you look over the audiences. They are mostly middle-aged and old people who have other things on their minds now – those boys far off fighting somewhere.

Incidentally, the audiences are devoid of men in the service, those at home on furlough – and you see them in the streets – prefer apparently the more delectable pleasures of home, the girl on the sofa, or across the table at the cocktail bar.

The war hangs over everything.

All this leads one to wonder whether, in these times, there will be much sympathy for a type of political campaigning in which some Republican leaders of the old school seem ready to indulge themselves, a type of campaigning that Mr. Willkie has denounced.

This is the exploiting of the necessary sacrifices on the home front, what Mr. Willkie called “seeking to build strength on the people’s transitory wartime complaints and discontents,” and appealing to groups of nationals of other countries here who may be discomfited by some phase of foreign policy affecting their homeland, such as the Irish and the Poles.

Invitation to defeat

Mr. Willkie struck at such tactics as unworthy of the Republican Party. They will invite defeat, he said, and if the party resorts to them, it deserves defeat.

National Republican Chairman Harrison Spangler has predicted that nationality groups in this country would desert the Democratic Party in large numbers because of administration policies affecting smaller nations, and National Committeeman Werner W. Schroeder of Illinois has stressed taxes, rationing, and wartime regimentation.

Typical excerpts of Mr. Schroeder’s speech follow:

America today is bound in the chains of taxes and bureaucracy. The tax collector is the most grasping partner in every business; the greediest eater at every table; the most expensive child in every household.

With him, as the unbidden guest of every American, is his blood brother, that son of the New Deal, the bureaucrat. He is with you at every meal, telling you what coffee, sugar, bacon, canned goods and other foods you can and cannot consume.

He prescribes the shows you buy and the cut of your suit. He limits your tires and gasoline, while Lend-Leasing it to all the world–

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (March 30, 1944)

In Washington –
Soldier vote may go into law unsigned

Bill may not get President’s signature

Washington (UP) –
Indications mounted today that President Roosevelt will let the soldier vote bill become a law without his signature.

The President has until midnight tomorrow to act. He has three choices – he may sign it, veto it, or let it become a law without his signature.

Expectations that he will take the last course were strengthened by the fact that Congress intends to hold an unusual Saturday session this week.

The decision to meet Saturday, instead of starting the Easter recess this afternoon as planned, was made by Senate Democratic Leader Alben W. Barkley of Kentucky. He told reporters he did not know which course the President would take.

Senator Barkley declared:

I have not discussed his action with him at all. We will stay in session only to keep open all three courses of possible action.

Political observers believed that if the President decides to let the bill become law without his signature, the decision would be based on his desire to do everything possible to facilitate soldier voting despite his dissatisfaction with the bill’s limitations on use of a simplified federal ballot.

[NormanStewart]

Editorial: Insidious stuff

All those who have been holding up a moistened finger to the wind profess to detect a determined slump in Democratic prestige for the coming election.

There is evidence to support the view that the fourth-term candidacy will have a harder row to hoe than the third-term candidacy.

But–

Some Republicans seem anxious to make out the best possible case against themselves and their party.

There are numerous examples, but one of the best was the recent speech of Werner W. Schroder, Republican National Committeeman from Illinois. Mr. Schroeder was the man picked by Col. McCormick, the great Chicago rabble-rouser, for national chairman, but Wendell Willkie upset that plan.

In a radio broadcast, Mr. Schroeder attacked the OPA, the burden of his speech being that rationing is being forced on us by New Deal bureaucrats who propose to imprison the whole country in a straitjacket so they may better impose their political “whims” on the people.

Mr. Schroeder, speaking of the bureaucrat, said:

He is with you at every meal telling you what coffee, sugar, bacon and canned goods you can consume. He prescribes the shows you buy and the cut of your suit. He limits your tires and gasoline, while Lend-Leasing it to all the world.

If that’s the kind of insidious stuff the Republicans plan to use, they’ll succeed only in making the most bureaucratic bureaucrat look like a statesman by comparison.

[NormanStewart]

Willkie flays backroom boys

Superior, Wisconsin (UP) –
Wendell L. Willkie was scheduled to end his two-week pre-primary tour of Wisconsin here today after blasting the “backroom boys” of the Republican Party who threatened to make the New Deal the “lesser of two evils” facing the nation in the November election.

Mr. Willkie told an Eau Clair, Wisconsin, audience last night that certain factions of the GOP “think you can be elected by telling one group one thing and another group something else.”

Stumping the state in support of 24 delegates pledged to him in Tuesday’s primary, Mr. Willkie demanded that the Republican Party and its leaders “take an affirmative stand on the issues of the house because when confronted by the lesser of these two evils, the people will continue to vote for the New Deal” rather than an undecided GOP.

He said:

The Republican Party is entitled to leadership. I would be ashamed to lead a party made up of Gerald Smiths, a party with no guts, whose leaders don’t want to be men when men are dying for us.

Earlier, Mr. Willkie told audiences at Chippewa Falls and Menomonie that “the very men who hate the administration so much that they cannot see its good points are actually proving to be its best friends.”

He said:

These men and these forces, such as The Chicago Tribune and the Hearst papers, hate the administration so much that they advocate always-negative policies which prevent the people from removing the New Deal from leadership.

[NormanStewart]

Stokes: Third party

By Thomas L. Stokes

Madison, Wisconsin –
Typical of the times, the La Follette Progressive Party which dominated this state so completely a few years back is suffering now – at least temporarily – the usual fate of third parties when everybody has a job and there is no economic discontent.

Coming to its 10th anniversary which it celebrates in May, the party is weak and torn by factional strife.

Beyond its lack of a major economic issue, on which it flourished in the depression years and some time afterward, the party now is sharply divided on issues growing from the war. One faction clings to the isolationist tradition handed down by the elder La Follette to his two sons, Robert M. Jr., and Philip; the other is breaking away toward a program of international cooperation. The schism nurtures some bitterness.

The party reached its heyday, when Phil sat in the governor’s chair here a few years back. It controlled the legislature and had an effective machine down through state officers. Bob, then a Senator as now, had a close working alliance with the New Deal that supplied patronage and prestige.

Phil now with MacArthur

Today it has only 13 out of 100 members of the Assembly and six out of the 33 members of the Senate. Two of its leading members in the legislature switched to the Republican Party two years ago, and more are expected to join the exodus this year. Phil is on Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s staff in the Pacific. Bob is no longer so cozy with the administration.

What is happening to the Progressive Party has occurred in other third party and independent political movements in what was formerly known as “the radical frontier,” including Minnesota with its once-powerful Farmer-Labor Party and North Dakota with its Non-Partisan League.

The twin personalities, Phil and his older brother Bob, have held the Progressive Party together in a dual leadership. Phil tried a few years ago to branch out with a national Progressive Party, but it failed. He was defeated for governor and went into law practice.

In the tense days of debate before Pearl Harbor, he spoke all over the country under the auspices of America First, trying to stem the surge toward war. Then he went into the Army. He had served overseas in World War I.

Keeping hands off primary

The Progressive Party is keeping hands off officially in the presidential primary which culminates in next Tuesday’s election of convention delegates.

Very likely the Progressives will split their votes among the four candidates: Wendell Willkie, Governor Thomas E. Dewey, Gen. MacArthur and LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen. Some may vote for the Roosevelt slate of delegates in the Democratic primary.

What about the Progressive Party in the November election, and what about its future?

One thing is certain! There will be no formal alliance with the Democrats behind President Roosevelt as in the past. One authority told me that more Progressives would vote Republican than Democratic this fall. Bob La Follette is not up for reelection this year.

The Progressive Party may be in only a temporary slump. It is not wise, one is warned, to count it out.

Furthermore, it is pointed out that in the post-war period there are likely to be pressing economic issues which the party can capitalize to draw a clear line between itself and Democrats and Republicans. The Democratic Party is a third part in this state, and perhaps will continue to be.

[NormanStewart]

Message to Congress by President Roosevelt on a Bill to Facilitate Voting by Members of the Armed Forces
March 31, 1944

To the Congress:

I am permitting S. 1285, entitled “An Act to facilitate voting, in time of war, by members of the land and naval forces, members of the merchant marine, and others, absent from the place of their residence, and to amend the Act of September 16, 1942, and for other purposes,” to become law without my signature.

The bill is, in my judgment, wholly inadequate to assure to servicemen and women as far as is practically feasible the same opportunity which they would have to vote if they were at home.

Because of the confusing provisions of the bill and because of the difficulty of knowing just what will be the practical effect of the bill in operation, it is impossible for me to determine whether in fact more servicemen and women will be able to vote under the new measure than under existing law. That determination will largely depend upon the extent to which the states cooperate to make the measure as effective as its provisions permit. In view of this situation, I have resolved the doubt in favor of the action taken by the Congress, and am permitting the bill to become law without my approval.

In other words, this bill might fairly be called a standing invitation to the several states to make it practicable for their citizens to vote: in this sense the Congress is placing a certain responsibility on each state for action. But it will, of course, be understood by those in the armed services, who want to vote but cannot, that the Congress itself shares the responsibility through the complexities of this bill.

The issue regarding soldiers’ voting has been confused. The issue is not whether soldiers should be allowed to vote a full ballot, including state and local offices, or a short ballot confined to federal offices. I am, and always have been, anxious to have the federal government do everything within its power compatible with military operations to get the full state ballots to the men and women in the service. I always have been, and I am now, anxious to have the states do everything within their power to get the full state ballots to the men and women in the service.

The real issue is whether after the states have done all that they are willing to do to get the full state ballots to the men and women in the service, and after the federal government has done everything within its power to get the full state ballots delivered to the men and women in the service, those who have not received their full state ballots should be given the right to cast a short, uniform federal ballot which can readily be made available to them. This right which should be assured to all men and women in the service, is largely nullified by the conditions which the provisions of this bill attach to its exercise.

In my judgment, the right of a soldier to vote the federal ballot if he does not receive in time his state ballot should not be conditioned, as it is by this bill, upon his having made a prior application for a state ballot, or upon the prior certification by the Governor of the state that the federal ballot is acceptable under state law. This bill provides a federal ballot but because of these conditions, it does not provide the right to vote.

The federal government will and should do everything it can to get the state ballots to our men and women in the service. But it is not in my judgment true, as some have contended, that the federal government can assure the use of state ballots as readily as the use of federal ballots. No matter what effort the federal government makes, in many cases it will not be possible to ensure the delivery in time of state ballots to designated individuals all over the world or their return in time to the respective states.

Some of the servicemen and women, not knowing where they will be a month hence or whether they will be alive, will not apply for their ballots. Others will not receive their state ballots in time or be able to get their ballots back to their states in time. Remember that a number of states still require a special form of application and that the postal card application forms supplied by the federal government are only treated as an application for an application for a state ballot.

The federal government can ensure, and in my judgment, it is the duty of the federal government to ensure, that every serviceman and woman who does not get his state ballot in time shall have the right to use a short and uniform federal ballot.

It is in my judgment within the authority of the Congress to use its war powers to protect the political rights of our servicemen and women to vote for federal offices as well as their civil rights with respect to their jobs and their homes. If Congress did not hesitate to protect their property rights by legislation which affected state law, there is no reason why Congress should hesitate to protect their political rights.

In 1942, Congress did exercise the war powers to provide federal war ballots and they were counted in almost every state. What was constitutional in 1942, certainly is not unconstitutional in 1944.

In allowing the bill to become law, I wish to appeal to the states, upon whom the Congress has placed the primary responsibility for enabling our service people to vote, to cooperate to make the bill as fully effective as its defective provisions will allow. The response of the Governors to my questions, and reports made to me by the War Department, indicate that many states have not yet taken action to make the bill as fully effective as it could be and that a considerable number of states do not presently contemplate taking such action.

I wish also to appeal to the Congress to take more adequate action to protect the political rights of our men and women in the service.

It is right and necessary that the states do all in their power to see that the state ballots reach the men and women in the service from their states. In particular, I appeal to them to see that their state laws allow sufficient time between the time that their absentee ballots are available for distribution and the time that they must be returned to be counted.

I also appeal to the states to see that the postal card application forms for state ballots distributed by the federal government to the troops are treated as a sufficient application for their state ballot and not merely as a request for a formal application for a state ballot.

I also appeal to the states to authorize the use of the federal ballots by all service people from their states who have not received their state ballots before an appropriate date, whether or not they have formally applied for them. no state or federal red tape should take from our young folk in the service their right to vote.

I further appeal to the Congress to amend the present bill, S. 1285, so as to authorize all servicemen and women, who have not received their state ballots by an appropriate date, whether or not they have formally applied for them, to use the federal ballot without prior express authorization by the states. If the states do not accept the federal ballot, that will be their responsibility. Under this bill, that responsibility is shared by the Congress.

Our boys on the battlefronts must not be denied an opportunity to vote simply because they are away from home. They are at the front fighting with their lives to defend our rights and our freedoms. We must assure them their rights and freedoms at home so that they will have a fair share in determining the kind of life to which they will return.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (March 31, 1944)

Soldier vote bill to become law

Roosevelt refuses to sign measure

Washington (UP) –
President Roosevelt notified Congress today that he would allow the soldier vote bill to become a law without his signature, although it is “wholly inadequate” to assure servicemen and women a “feasible” opportunity to vote.

In a message to the House, Mr. Roosevelt also appealed to Congress “to take more adequate action to protect the political rights of our men and women in the service.” And he urged the states “to make the bill as fully effective as its defective provisions will allow.”

The bill provides for an abbreviated federal war ballot which may be used only by service personnel overseas.

Use restricted

But it further provides that these ballots may be used only if they are acceptable to the states and only if the individuals certify that they have asked for, but have not received, regular absentee ballots from their home states.

The federal ballot would allow votes only for President, Vice President, Senator and Representative.

The bill will become law at midnight tonight. To permit this, Congress had to defer its Easter vacation, which had been scheduled to start yesterday. Both Houses will hold perfunctory sessions tomorrow.

Further action doubted

If they had begun their recess before midnight tonight, the bill would have died under the “pocket veto” provisions of the Constitution.

It was considered most unlikely that Congress would take any further action on soldier vote legislation as urged by the President.

The President charged in his message that the bill could “fairly” be called nothing more than “a standing invitation to the several states to make it practicable for their citizens to vote.”

Congress, in passing the bill, placed a certain responsibility on each state for action, Mr. Roosevelt said, and those in the Armed Forces “who want to vote, but cannot” would understand that “the Congress itself shares the responsibility through the complexities of this bill.”

‘Wholly inadequate’

He said:

The bill is, in my judgment, wholly inadequate to assure to servicemen and women as far as is practically feasible the same opportunity which they would have to vote if they were at home.

Because of the confusing provisions of the bill and because of the difficulty of knowing just what will be the practical effect of the bill in operation, it is impossible for me to determine whether in fact more servicemen and women will be able to vote under the new measure than under existing law.

That determination will largely depend upon the extent to which the states cooperate to make the measure as effective as its provisions permit. In view of this situation, I have resolved the doubt in favor of the action taken by the Congress, and am permitting the bill to become law without my approval.

State aid asked

“No state or federal red tape should take from our young folk in the service their right to vote,” Mr. Roosevelt said in appealing further for individual state action to authorize the use of federal ballots.

He asked Congress to enact an amendment to the bill to authorize members of the Armed Forces who have not received their state ballots by a certain time, whether or not they have formally applied for them, to use the federal ballot without prior express authorization by the states.

‘Defending our rights’

He said:

If the states do not accept the federal ballot, that will be their responsibility. Under this bill, that responsibility is shared by the Congress.

Our boys on the battlefronts must not be denied an opportunity to vote simply because they are away from home. They are at the front fighting with their lives to defend our rights and our freedoms. We must assure them their rights and freedoms at home so that they will have a fair share in determining the kind of life to which they will return.

Prior to deciding what to do with the bill, Mr. Roosevelt canvassed governors of all the states about whether their state laws permit use of the federal ballot and if not, whether they planned to seek legislation to validate the ballots.

Seven states accept

He said in his message today that replies indicated many states have not taken action to legalize the federal ballots, and many states plan no such action.

Out of the 48 replies, only seven states said definitely they would accept the federal ballot; 18 said they would not accept it; five said they probably would not; one accepted conditionally; 14 promised to make an effort to legalize the federal ballot, and three were undecided.

[NormanStewart]

Dewey assailed in union probe

Governor accused of ‘soft-pedalling’

Washington (UP) –
Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York was accused today of “soft-pedalling” an investigation of international officers of the Hod Carriers’ Union (AFL), who were indicted here Wednesday on charges of misappropriating union funds.

The charges against Governor Dewey were made by Frederick W. Dusing of Newburgh, New York, business agent of Hod Carriers’ Local 17 which last June obtained an injunction in New York Supreme Court against the international union and its officers.

Earlier probe cited

Pointing out that Governor Herbert H. Lehman had directed the New York Attorney General to conduct an investigation in February 1942, Mr. Dusing said that when Governor Dewey assumed office, “he soft-pedalled the investigation and it now appears to have been completely killed on the eve of sensational disclosures.”

Mr. Dusing said the indictments here coupled with the New York Supreme Court’s action constituted a “tremendous blow against this vicious and powerful labor racket.”

Bonds posted

Meanwhile, Joseph V. Moreschi, President of the International Hod Carriers’, and 11 others named in Wednesday’s indictment were under $1,500-$2,000 bond here to appear for arraignment next week.

The defendants were accused of conspiring to embezzle union funds up to $500,000.

Still missing, however, was Larry Kelly, former treasurer of the Building Committee of Local 74, Washington affiliate of the union, who disappeared several months ago while a special grand jury was looking into the Hod Carriers’ affairs.

[NormanStewart]

Willkie prepares for Nebraska trip

Minneapolis, Minnesota (UP) –
His pre-primary campaign in Wisconsin ended, Wendell L. Willkie turned today to Nebraska where Republicans elect 12 delegates to the National Convention April 11.

Mr. Willkie arrived here last night after completing his 13-day tour of Wisconsin where he sought support for his slate of 24 delegates running for election in Tuesday’s primary. The 1940 GOP candidate showed evidence of the strain of his 1,500-mile trip through the badger state and with the exception of an appearance at the Minneapolis Club today, he planned no political activities.

In a final plea to Wisconsin voters yesterday, Willkie told an audience at Superior that he campaigned in that state because he wanted the people of Wisconsin to “know the beliefs and purposes of at least one candidate in the field.”

Mr. Willkie will leave for Omaha tonight to open a five-day tour of Nebraska.

[NormanStewart]

Landon offers 3-point plan to GOP

War, industry and peace stressed

Topeka, Kansas (UP) –
Alf M. Landon, the 1936 Republican standard-bearer, offered three planks today for the 1944 GOP platform – to win the war, reconvert to peacetime production by a free industry, and pursuance of a lasting peace.

In an address before the Kansas State Republican Convention, Mr. Landon called for the party to chose a presidential candidate who would work with Congress ad inspire confidence at home and abroad.

Scores red tape

The GOP nominee also must be a man determined to wipe out bureaucratic “red tape that is interfering with our war effort,” he said.

Mr. Landon recommended that the party platform include:

• “An assurance that we will exert every effort toward winning the war. No temporary political expedience will be permitted to jeopardize or delay on hour the winning of the war.”

• “Definite plans for reconversion from war to peace and for returning soldiers and sailors: a blueprint for free industry and not a socialistic state so that businessmen are assured of a fair profit, labor will be assured of full employment, good pay and higher standards of living, and farmers assured of a better price for their crops.”

• “The war and the way to lasting peace must be pursued with unrelenting vigor.”

Confusion charged

Mr. Landon condemned the present administration as “the same babble of voices confusing our foreign relations that confused our domestic relations.”

Off-hand comments by President Roosevelt, confusion among government agencies and vagueness of foreign relations in general, he said, have weakened the war effort.

He said:

The ballyhoo that surrounded the President’s return from Tehran is almost unpleasantly reminiscent of Dr. Cook’s return from the North Pole.

[NormanStewart]

Bricker: U.S. must lead world

Denver, Colorado (UP) –
The United States must take a position of world leadership in the post-war era, but U.S. interests must not be submerged by having a superstate or world government imposed upon us, Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio told the Denver Chamber of Commerce yesterday.

Mr. Bricker called on the nation to “recapture the spirit of private enterprise and self-government” and said the men returning from the battlefronts “want good jobs in private industry, not government-made positions or a dole.”

The gathering of businessmen applauded his other contentions – that “no man has the right to strike in time of war,” that secret conferences must be abolished, government must discontinue “competition with business” and that the ranks of “three and one-half million federal officeholders” must be drastically reduced immediately after the war.

Mr. Bricker said freedom of the press was essential, saying that “if we keep the news lines open, the truth will keep us free.”

[NormanStewart]

Dubinsky bolts Labor Party

New York (UP) –
Formation of an independent party pledged to support President Roosevelt for a fourth term loomed today as David Dubinsky, president of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union, announced he would urge the union’s 162,338 members to follow his example in bolting the American Labor Party.

Mr. Dubinsky, whose right-wing forces of the ALP were defeated by a left-wing faction in Tuesday’s primary, estimated an independent party could poll 300,000 votes in New York State.

Foes called Reds

One of the organizers of the ALP, Mr. Dubinsky promised his support to an independent party yesterday when he said he regarded “the former American Labor Party as a communist labor party, and am therefore withdrawing from that party.”

Mr. Dubinsky said that if an independent party was not formed, he would vote for President Roosevelt on the Democratic ticket, but intimated that if Wendell L. Willkie were the Republican candidate, he might vote for him. He added that under no circumstances would be vote for Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York for President.

Bore brunt of cost

Mr. Dubinsky also said his union paid about 60% of the ALP expenses in the last eight years and reported that the union’s contributions totaled almost $533,000.

The left-wing faction, led by Sidney Hillman, leader of the CIO Political Action Committee, scheduled a statewide meeting tomorrow to plan its campaign in support of Mr. Roosevelt. The goal of the group is to boost upstate enrollment in the ALP from 16,000 to 200,000 and to establish a working organization in every region of the state.

[NormanStewart]

Stokes: Compromises

By Thomas L. Stokes

Chicago, Illinois –
Democrats are really hard up this year.

You are sure of that when the boys in the back room, meaning the notorious Kelly-Nash Democratic machine of Cook County and this city, accepts as the party’s candidate for governor a hard hitter, who has been tossing nasty adjectives their way for years.

He is Thomas J. Courtney, Cook County state’s attorney for three consecutive terms over the opposition of the machine and for whom, times being normal the bosses would not give a second thought, and certainly not a kind thought.

The Courtney case is typical of the compromises that are going on here among Democrats in this year of desperation, themselves the measure of the worry of Mayor Ed Kelly, who now rules the roost alone since the death of his sidekick, Democratic National Committeeman Pat Nash; the worry of Senator Scott Lucas, up for reelection, and the worry of the national administration.

Boss Kelly is not sitting so pretty. Republicans have been whittling away at his once-lavish majorities in the city. At stake this year is a whole flock of Cook County jobs which are essential cogs in his once-well-greased machine.

A New Deal worry

This translates itself into administration’s worry. The machine’s Cook County majorities, offsetting downstate Republican votes, have given President Roosevelt the state’s 29 electoral votes three times in a row. His majority, however, dwindled to 105,000 in 1940 against Wendell Willkie, falling from a peak of 700,000 against Alf M. Landon in 1936.

Nor is it pleasant to recall that while President Roosevelt carried the state by 105,000 in 1940, the Republican Dwight Green won the governorship by 150,000. The President thus ran 250,000 ahead of the Democratic state ticket.

Governor Green, running for reelection, is assured of renomination at the April 11 primary. Mr. Courtney has no opposition and will be his opponent.

The President’s political lieutenants, looking dolefully over the terrain, are anxious to win Illinois to put together with a big state or two in thew East, scattering small states in the Far West, and the Solid South to carve out a scant victory in November.

Kelly makes his gesture

Out of the common plight of all concerned has emerged a series of deals typified by the Courtney case, an all-for-one and one-for-all program. Boss Kelly has made his compromising gestures.

The result is that the party has an unusually respectable slate of candidates, the object was to build a good base for President Roosevelt.

A part of the program, too, is that the national administration shall keep hand-off. No meddling is wanted by Washington New Dealers with more ardor than practical political sense.

Democrats will play the war heavily to offset the influence of Col. Robert R. McCormick and the Chicago Tribune and their hand-picked candidates, isolationist in hue, on the Republican ticket. A certain victory is seen for the Tribune candidate for the Republican senatorial nomination, Richard J. Lyons, a hell-roaring orator, in the primary against Deneen Watson, sponsor of the Republican Post-War Policy Association organized to jimmy the party away from isolationism. Mr. Lyons will oppose Senator Lucas in November.

At this stage, things look none too bright for the Democrats.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (April 1, 1944)

In Washington –
Soldier vote bill becomes law, unsigned

Federal ballot backers say fight isn’t over

Washington (UP) –
A new soldier voting act, greatly abridged from the original measure introduced by Senators Theodore F. Green (D-RI) and Scott W. Lucas (D-IL), tagged by President Roosevelt as “inadequate” and hailed by Southern Democrats and Republicans as a victory for states’ rights, became the law of the land at 12:01 a.m. ET today.

Its enactment, automatic under the Constitution when the President failed either to sign or veto the Congress-approved measure within 10 days after its passage, followed one of the bitterest political battles in current history.

Even before it became law, Senator Green declared “the fight is not over,” and announced he and Senator Lucas would introduce amendments suggested by the President to ease some of the measure’s restrictions on federal ballot use.

Failed to be counted

The President won grudging praise from federal ballot opponents for his refusal to veto the measure and for his language in explaining his attitude.

One critic, however – Rep. Robert A. Grant (R-IN) – objected to the President’s action. By not signing the bill, he said, the President failed “to stand up and be counted.”

The President, who stirred the ire of many Congressmen by his charges of “fraud” against an earlier “states’ rights” version of the bill, characterized it as “inadequate and confusing,” and said all it really did was to provide a “standing invitation” to the states to permit their servicemen to vote. Its effect, he said, would be measured entirely by the extent to which the states implement its acceptance.

Two major restrictions

The new law provides that servicemen and certain civilians overseas may use the short-form federal ballot – containing black write-in spaces for naming choices for President, Vice President, Senator and Representatives, and in some states interim Senator and Representative-at-large, with two major restrictions.

Servicemen may not use the federal ballot unless they request state absentee ballots by Sept. 1 and fail to receive them by Oct. 1.

Federal ballots must be accepted by the several states for counting before their use is valid for servicemen from those states.

President appeals

The President hit these two restrictions in particular, stating:

This bill provides a federal ballot, but because of these conditions, it does not provide the right to vote.

Consequently, he appealed to Congress to amend the measure:

…so as to authorize all servicemen and women, who have not received their state ballots by am appropriate date, wither or not they have formally applied for them, to use the federal ballot without prior express authorization by the states.

[NormanStewart]

Stokes: Willkie handicap

By Thomas L. Stokes

Lincoln, Nebraska –
Wendell L. Willkie entered this state for a five-day campaign for national convention delegates and here he faces the same kind of uphill battle that challenged him when he began his house-to-house canvass in Wisconsin two weeks ago.

In his pursuit of the Republican presidential nomination, he encountered here the same undertone of skepticism and hostility, from the regular Republican organization that he found in Wisconsin and elsewhere. Part of it comes from doubt about his basic Republicanism which he, himself, feeds unblushingly by his criticism of the party/s Old Guard element.

Here, too, as in Wisconsin and elsewhere, rises before him the specter of the young man in New York, Governor Dewey, who has substantial support among the regular organization which does not seem to be discouraged by the Governor’s refusal to announce himself a candidate.

Governor Dewey is not an open issue in the presidential primary here April 11. No delegates are entered under his banner as in Wisconsin. Four years ago, he was a factor here, and then after personal appearances here he ran away with Nebraska’s 15 convention delegates in a contest with Senator Vandenberg of Michigan, just as he won decisively against the Michigan Senator that year in Wisconsin.

Result may be paradoxical

The primary situation here is just as complicated, in its way, as the four-cornered race in Wisconsin, and may end in a somewhat paradoxical result.

Three slates of delegates are entered – for Mr. Willkie, for LtCdr. Harold Stassen, and one known as the Griswold slate, entered in the name of Governor Dwight Griswold ostensibly an uninstructed slate which, if elected, would be controlled at the convention by the Governor.

Also, Willkie and Stassen are pitted against each other in the presidential primary which, is a straight-out popular vote of preference.

While the popular vote will go to one of these two, the Griswold slate of delegates may be elected to represent the state at the convention. This result is regarded as probably by some political experts here. The slate is headed by Sam McKelvie, veteran political figure, and other well-known persons.

So, while either Willkie or Stassen will win the preference vote, the end result may favor Governor Dewey. It is reported that he has considerable support among the delegates on the Griswold slate.

Governor plays cagey hand

Governor Griswold has played a very cagey hand. He has maintained friendly relations with all of the presidential candidates. He has become, likewise, one of the leading figures among governors, who will be very influential at the Chicago convention. The governors showed their power at the Republican Post-War Advisory Council meeting at Mackinac last September when they revolted against the U.S. Senate oligarchy of the party and forced more progressive domestic and international commitments.

Governor Griswold has a place on the list of possible vice-presidential nominees. His critics say he is also looking toward a place in the Cabinet if the Republicans win. He is a candidate for a third term in the November election.

Consequently, if his slate wins here, he will be in a favorable trading position at the convention.

The election April 11 might be inconclusive with a delegation divided among the three contestants.

Mr. Willkie is facing a handicap here. The Stassen candidacy offers an opportunity for all the anti-Willkie forces to concentrate behind him the supporters of the other candidates as well as those of the ex-Minnesota Governor, and it is apparent that this is happening.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (April 2, 1944)

Dewey approves bills to aid needy, aged

Albany, New York (UP) – (April 1)
Governor Thomas E. Dewey, approving 14 bills designed to broaden benefits to the needy and the aged, said tonight that “unlike the statism which dominates totalitarian philosophies, we recognize that the state is but an instrument and a creature of its own people.”

Mr. Dewey said:

That instrument is justified so long as it serves the people well.

[NormanStewart]

Willkie faces test Tuesday in Wisconsin

Party heads await vote on delegates

Washington (UP) – (April 1)
Republican leaders tonight expected Wisconsin’s selection in Tuesday’s primary of 24 delegates to the GOP National Convention to provide the first real clue to the strength of Wendell L. Willkie’s bid for the party’s 1944 presidential nomination.

The second test of his strength will come April 11 when Nebraska chooses 15 delegates to the convention which opens in Chicago June 26.

Party leaders awaited the outcome of the Wisconsin primary with mixed feelings – and much curiosity. Some felt that election of half of the Willkie delegates would represent a triumph for the party’s 1940 standard-bearer. Others contended it would take more than this to get the Willkie bandwagon rolling.

Satisfied with majority

Winding up a 13-day campaign in the state, Mr. Willkie was quoted as stating that he would be satisfied if he won a majority of the delegates. State supporters said election of fewer than 18 or 20 Willkie delegates would not be regarded as a decisive victory.

Mr. Willkie was the only one of four potential candidates for the nomination to campaign in the state.

Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York sought unsuccessfully to obtain the withdrawal of candidates pledged to him. LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen, floor manager for Mr. Willkie in the 1940 convention, and Gen. Douglas MacArthur, Allied Supreme Commander in the Southwest Pacific, are on active duty and thereby prevented from engaging actively in a political campaign. But slates of delegates pledged to each of this trio are entered.

Bound by pledge

Mr. Dewey is bound by a pledge made upon his election to the New York governorship in 1942 to seek no other public office until he completes his four-year term. It was in keeping with this promise that he sought to withdraw delegates in the Wisconsin primary, and today sought to eliminate his name from the Oregon primary to be held May 19.

Despite his pledge, recent polls have shown Mr. Dewey to be the outstanding potential candidate for the GOP nomination at this time. There is no doubt among the party leadership that the governor would accept, if nominated.

More tests needed

The selection of convention delegates thus far is too inconclusive to forecast the comparative convention strength of the avowed and potential candidates, on opening day.

A better picture will be available at the end of this month after more than 400 delegates have been chosen in primaries and state conventions ranging from Virginia to Hawaii.

---

Willkie: Stress issues, not men

Lincoln, Nebraska (UP) – (April 1)
Wendell L. Willkie, stumping the state capital today for the Republican presidential nomination in the Nebraska primaries April 11, described “old-fashioned politicking and old-time organizational methods” as suicidal to GOP presidential hopes.

He declares:

Glorification of the individual – the tendency to rely upon a person rather than the principles he represents – is the greatest curse of the times. Members of the Republican Party are anxious for candidates who will represent their urgent needs. We must place ourselves on a platform and principles for which we will face even defeat.

In urging that Republicans nullify the Democratic argument that “one individual transcends all others,” Mr. Willkie charged World War II was brought about through faulty political leadership and the reliance “of the free people of the world upon men instead of the principles for which they stood.”

[NormanStewart]

Dark horse to run against George

Atlanta, Georgia (UP) – (April 1)
Senator Walter F. George (D-GA), veteran of 22 years in the upper chamber, tonight was forced into a race for renomination against a political unknown rather than against former Governor Eugene Talmadge, who had been rumored as his opponent.

While Governor Talmadge was announcing to reporters that a heated political campaign was not fitting in wartime, John W. Goolsby of Washington, Georgia, an electric appliance salesman, quietly qualified with Democratic Party chiefs to oppose George in the July 4 primary.

Mr. Goolsby, 47, declared that he was an independent and that he had no factional backing. Political leaders expressed ignorance of his very existence, and Governor Talmadge denied any connection with him.

In his singlehanded campaign against the powerful George, a member of the Senate since 1922 and head of the Senate Finance Committee, Mr. Goolsby said he would run on a farm platform.

[NormanStewart]

Minnesota GOP endorses Stassen

St. Paul, Minnesota (UP) – (April 1)
Minnesota Republicans in state convention today completed a 25-man delegation to the national GOP convention, committed to the candidacy of former Governor LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen as long as it was “feasible.”

Dr. R. C. Radbaugh of Hastings, a Stassen supporter since 1938 and chairman of the Stassen-for-President Association, was not included among the seven delegates-at-large, whose election was the principal business of the convention.

Senator Joseph H. Ball, close personal friend of the former governor, who sought a delegate-at-large position to back Stassen to the limit at Chicago, won election by the lowest number of votes cast for any of the seven.

The convention platform committee brought out a much-diluted resolution on Minnesota demands for a foreign policy plank, which asked for “a realistic program of collaboration with other nations to maintain the peace.”

[NormanStewart]

Governor cites New Deal benefits

Fairmont, West Virginia (UP) – (April 1)
Governor J. M. Broughton of North Carolina tonight summarized accomplishments of the New Deal which he said had served as “a governmental blood plasma” for a nation “threatened with death” and predicted a 1944 victory for the Democratic Party.

In a talk to Democratic Party members of the state at a Jefferson Day dinner, the Governor outlined the 12 years the party had been in power which, he said, resulted in:

…an almost miraculous rescue from financial debacle, continuing to the period of the nation’s greatest prosperity and climaxed with a victorious leadership in the earth’s greatest war.

In praise of the New Deal, the Governor said it might well be termed “a governmental blood plasma administered to a nation suffering from shock and threatened with death.” He added that “in any case, the patient recovered.”

Governor Broughton said at present there is:

…hardly a laboring man or woman… who is not making more money than ever before in our history farm income has attained new heights; business and industry have made record earnings.