Election 1944: Pre-convention news

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (April 29, 1944)

Leaders hint GOP is ready to back world peace plan

Washington (UP) –
New foreign policy declarations by three leading Republicans pointed strongly today toward a GOP platform pledging U.S. participation in an international organization to preserve peace and promote world economic stability.

That theme appeared in statements during the week by two leading presidential possibilities – Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York and Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio – and Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg (R-MI), ranking active Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Mr. Bricker outlined his views in a speech Tuesday night and Mr. Dewey spoke on foreign policy Thursday night. Mr. Vandenberg went on record last night in an exchange of correspondence with John Sampson, American correspondent for the London Daily Mirror.

Mr. Bricker declared that the four great Allied powers (Russia, China, England and the United States) must assume joint of the peace “until a permanent international organization can be established.”

Mr. Dewey spoke of cooperating with other nations in building “a structure of peace backed by adequate force to prevent future wars” and of promoting worldwide economic stability “not only for the sake of the world, but also to the end that our own people may enjoy a high level of employment.”

Mr. Vandenberg said that:

American self-interest includes rational and practical international cooperation with Britain and all the other sovereign United Nations to stabilize peace, justice and economy.

The response among Senate Republicans, to whom any treaty setting up such international cooperation must be submitted for ratification, was generally favorable.

Mr. Vandenberg, who drafted the GOP Mackinac Charter pledging international cooperation to maintain the peace, said his party will keep that pledge if it wins the November election but that the United States will not join a world state.

In reply to Mr. Sampson’s questions, he said that he could answer only for himself, not the party, but he believed that:

The next Republican administration first of all would be dedicated to swift and total victory over both Germany and Japan.

Would guard U.S. interests

Mr. Sampson had asked whether, if the Republicans win the election, the United States would tend to withdraw from the field of international cooperation, whether there would be any material change in Anglo-American relations and what would be the Republican attitude toward a “strong and united British Commonwealth of Nations after the war.”

Mr. Vandenberg said that while the United States would not join a world state, “it will vigilantly protect essential and legitimate American self-interest precisely as Mr. Churchill repeatedly asserts his vigorous purpose to protect British self-interest.”

Mr. Vandenberg added that he thought permanent friendship and fair play between the United States and Great Britain are indispensable.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (April 30, 1944)

His stand on Presidency –
Gen. MacArthur: I’m not a candidate, would not accept

Position is made ‘entirely unequivocal’

Allied HQ, Southwest Pacific (UP) –
Gen. Douglas MacArthur declared unequivocally today that he is not a candidate for the Presidency of the United States and would not accept the nomination if it were offered to him.

Gen. MacArthur’s statement repudiated the efforts of some political leaders in the United States to place his name before the Republican convention in Chicago in June.

“In order to make my position entirely unequivocal, I request that no action be taken that would link my name in any way with the nomination, his statement said, “I do not covet it, nor would I accept it.”

Gen. MacArthur said his statement was prompted by a number of critical newspaper articles which charged that the candidacy of any high-ranking officer on active service at the front would be detrimental to the war effort.

His statement follows:

On my return from the Hollandia operations, I have had brought to my attention a number of newspaper articles professing in the strongest terms a widespread public opinion that it is detrimental to our war effort to have an officer in high position, on active service at the front, considered for nomination for the office of President.

I have on several occasions announced that I was not a candidate for the position. Nevertheless, in view of these circumstances, in order to make my position entirely unequivocal, I request that no action be taken that would link my name in any way with the nomination. I do not covet it, nor would I accept it.

[NormanStewart]

Party contests may hinge on second place

Several mentioned by both parties
By Lyle C. Wilson, United Press staff writer

Washington – (April 29)
The trend toward selection of President Roosevelt and Governor Thomas E. Dewey to head the major party tickets this year suggests that the national convention contests will center around the vice-presidential nominations.

Neither Mr. Roosevelt nor Mr. Dewey is an avowed candidate for the presidential nomination. But the President’s renomination is inevitable unless he refuses to ruin. Whatever may have been said of his third term selection, there is every evidence that the Democratic Party is determined to draft him for a fourth term.

Dewey in lead

Mr. Dewey is less securely established, but in the first four months of this campaign year, he has consistently topped all others in the expressed and implied favor of Republicans.

Mr. Dewey was the favorite, also, when the Republican National Convention met in 1940. The 1,000 convention votes then were scattered among 13 persons on the first ballot. Mr. Dewey polled 360, Senator Robert A. Taft (R-OH) 189, Wendell L. Willkie 105, and Senator Arthur H. Vandenberg (R-MI) 76.

Mr. Dewey’s strength steadily diminished and Mr. Taft’s and Mr. Willkie’s steadily increased until the sixth ballot when Mr. Willkie went over the top. He had passed Mr. Taft on the third.

Warren mentioned

Mr. Dewey’s position appears this year to be much better – so much that if nominated he may be able to choose, and obtain nomination of a vice-presidential running mate without a real contest.

Many observers believe Governor Earl Warren of California would be the most suitable running mate for an Eastern presidential nominee. But there are others available in case Mr. Warren, as reported, prefers other employments. Mr. Warren has a large family and no personal fortune. Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio is making an aggressive campaign for the presidential nomination. If he misses the top spot, he would be a prize for second place.

Others listed

Other frequently mentioned include LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen (former Governor of Minnesota), Rep. Everett M. Dirksen of Illinois (one of the ablest members of the House), Governor Dwight Griswold of Nebraska and Rep. Joseph W. Martin Jr. of Massachusetts (House Republican Leader).

Mr. Roosevelt, if he is renominated, will determine whether there will be a convention floor fight over the vice-presidential nomination. By refusing to accept nomination himself unless he had a free hand in choosing his running mate, the President undoubtedly could compel the convention to accept his choice.

If that choice were Vice President Henry A. Wallace, there would be at least a minority explosion of considerable force.

Barkley, Rayburn?

Organization leaders who ultimately hope to regain party control from the Roosevelt faction of the party probably would meet such a maneuver by proposing “a man more satisfactory to themselves but whim it would be difficult for Mr. Roosevelt to oppose.”

Senator Alben W. Barkley (D-KY), Senate Democratic Leader, is mentioned as a possible compromise vice-presidential nominee.

Speaker Sam Rayburn (D-TX) has backers, as does Senator Harry S. Truman (D-MO).

[NormanStewart]

Taylor: A lone lame duck

By Robert Taylor, Press Washington correspondent

Washington –
Last Tuesday’s apathetic Pennsylvania primary created three lame ducks in the House of Representatives, but two of them are voluntary lame ducks who are running with formidable backing for other jobs.

The sole Congressman who was involuntarily eliminated is Democratic Rep. Robert Grant Furlong, Donora physician and first victim of the 1943 reapportionment of Pennsylvania Congressional districts. Mr. Furlong is a first-termer, elected in 1942 from the patchwork 25th district, composed of Washington County and part of Allegheny County, which was a feature of the compromise 1942 apportionment.

The district reverted to its former boundaries when the present Republican Legislature reapportioned for the second time, and became the Washington-Greene district. Mr. Furlong won in his home country; was defeated in Greene.

Two years ago, Mr. Furlong was strongly backed by the United Mine Workers and the Democratic organization. He was elected by the slender margin of 413 votes out of a total of 76,219. His voting record has been consistently pro-labor and in support of administration policies.

Republican Rep. William I. Troutman of Shamokin, elected as Congressman-at-Large under the makeshift 1942 apportionment, couldn’t run again for the same job because the at-large post was eliminated in the new apportionment.

To remain in Congress, Mr. Troutman would have had to run against Rep. Ivor D. Fenton, Schuylkill County Republican. Instead, he ran for nomination to the State Senate against Republican Senator George A. Dietrick in the 27th district (Northumberland County), and eliminated Mr. Dietrick from the running.

Mr. Troutman, an attorney, became Congressman-at-Large with the support of his brother-in-law, Henry Lark, Northumberland County Republican leader. Mr. Dietrick, a member of the Senate for eight years, fought consistently with Mr. Lark’s organization and will be replaced with a more friendly member.

Two in one district

The third lame duck in the House is Rep. Francis J. Myers, Philadelphia Democrat, who didn’t run for renomination because of his designation as the Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate against the veteran Senator James J. Davis. Both were unopposed in the primary.

The new reapportionment caused the unusual situation of pitting two members of Congress against each other in the November election in Philadelphia’s new 3rd district.

Republican Rep. Joseph M. Pratt, who was elected only three months ago to replace Democrat James P. McGranery in the former 2nd district, is now in the 3rd district, represented by Democratic Rep. Michael J. Bradley.

Mr. Bradley, with some labor backing, was a strong contender for the Democratic endorsement for U.S. Senator, withdrawing only at the last moment in favor of Rep. Myers. He now must campaign against an opponent who turned a normally-Democratic district Republican.

Only four of the 19 Republican Congressmen from Pennsylvania who sought renomination had any opposition in the primary and all of them came through unscathed.

Party regularity

The renomination of 19 Republican Congressmen and 11 Democratic members and the loss of only one incumbent candidate is a sort of testimonial to the party regularity among Pennsylvania Congressmen.

The state’s delegation here splits along party lines in the voting in the House with such monotonous regularity that nobody has to wait for the official count to find out how his Congressman voted. If he’s Republican, he supports the party policy; if he’s a Democrat, his vote is for the administration.

There will be more – perhaps many more – Congressional lame ducks from Pennsylvania after Nov. 7. By common agreement, the most important factor, and the question Congressmen would like to have answered, is: How well will President Roosevelt run in Pennsylvania this time?

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 1, 1944)

Bricker answers Ickes on Japs

Columbus, Ohio (UP) –
Governor John W. Bricker said today that criticism by Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes of his statement that local communities should have a voice in post-war resettlement of Japanese-Americans was an attempt “to take the mind of the country off the mismanagement of these Japanese relocation camps.”

Mr. Ickes’ criticism followed a statement by Governor Bricker that the “rights and wishes” of West Coast communities should be considered in post-war resettlement plans and that “disloyal and non-citizen Japanese should be returned to Japan.”

Governor Bricker said:

The New Dealers don’t understand the Japanese any more now than in the pre-Pearl Harbor days when they tried by a program of appeasement to handle the Japanese situation. They permitted the Japs to fortify mandated islands in violation of treaties and failed to take notice of Japanese plans which led to the disgraceful attack at Pearl Harbor and took no steps to protect ourselves.

[NormanStewart]

Observers ask –
Will MacArthur be summoned to conference?

Critics of Roosevelt hint at jealousy
By Lyle C. Wilson, United Press staff writer

Washington –
There was speculation here today whether Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s unqualified disavowal of presidential aspirations would put him in line for a return to the United States for military conferences.

He is the only officer of comparable rank or command responsibilities who has not been brought back to this country for one reason or another since Pearl Harbor.

There has been no hint whether failure to include him in mainland discussions has been on his own motion or for lack of any invitation from the War Department. Some of Gen. MacArthur’s top subordinates have been back.

Jealousy a factor?

Unfriendly critics of the Roosevelt administration have suggested that Gen. MacArthur had not been summoned home because there was no desire to give him an opportunity to become the center of political demonstrations here.

Others have suggested that there was military opposition to his return on the ground that he might say something which would encourage pressure groups to demand greater allocations of men and munitions to the Southwest Pacific at the expense of the European Theater. Still others believed Gen. MacArthur could have returned anytime at his convenience but simply wanted to remain with his own command.

In any event, his return now could have slight political significance, if any. Gen. MacArthur’s statement that he would not accept the presidential nomination if tendered definitely removed him from the contest.

Roosevelt, Dewey silent

There remains now the paradoxical situation in which the only candidates with respect to whom there has been no conclusive and public statement of political intentions are the two men most generally regarded as the probable presidential contestants this year – President Roosevelt and Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York.

Mr. Dewey’s position is that he will not seek the Republican presidential nomination and that he prefers to serve out his four-year term as governor. He was elected in 1942. Mr. Roosevelt has smilingly parried questions whether he is a fourth-term candidate or would accept if nominated.

Uncertainty regarding either Mr. Roosevelt or Mr. Dewey, however, is strictly technical. The Democratic National Committee, the big city Democratic organizations in New Jersey, New York and Chicago and most of the party leaders are preparing to nominate Mr. Roosevelt. He has not said anything to dissuade them.

Neither has Mr. Dewey raised any bar to the extraordinarily successful pre-convention campaign being conducted by his admirers.

Gen. MacArthur’s contrastingly unequivocal withdrawal astonished political Washington since he had such excellent precedent for avoiding a definite statement.

The impression here is that Gen. MacArthur was a receptive – and more likely hopeful – aspirant for the Republican nomination until he learned of the unfavorable reaction to publication here of letters he had written to Rep. A. L. Miller (R-NE).

Roosevelt assailed

Mr. Miller assailed the Roosevelt administration in a letter to the general and got in return a letter saying that Gen. MacArthur agreed with the “complete wisdom and statesmanship of your comments.” The general also intimated his dissatisfaction with allocations of men and munitions to his theater.

It is possible the War Department admonished Gen. MacArthur upon publication of that correspondence and hinted that her had better get out of politics – and quickly. Something evidently changed the general’s point of view.

On April 16, three days after publication of the Miller correspondence, Gen. MacArthur issued a communiqué denying he was a presidential candidate but adding a paragraph which was accepted immediately by his supporters as meaning that he was receptive and would run if nominated.

‘Military man’ mentioned

Possibly even more illuminating was a report received in the Washington Bureau of the United Press Jan. 27 from a visitor to Gen. MacArthur’s headquarters. This summary of political sentiment was by an experienced observer and it was remarked that the dispatch passed through Gen. MacArthur’s own censorship.

Its most striking sentence was a suggestion that MacArthur believed an experienced soldier in the White House would bring an earlier victory in the war.

The report said:

It would not be surprising if MacArthur felt – as do a good many here – that the shortest way to victory would be to place an experienced military man in the White House.

The report reflected the impression at his headquarters that Gen. MacArthur would neither declare his availability nor withdraw his name from consideration for the Republican nomination, but would “let events take their course.”

Between Jan. 27 and last week, something evidently jarred Gen. MacArthur considerably to cause him to say now of the nomination, “I do not covet it nor would I accept it.”

[NormanStewart]

Primaries will be held in four states this week

Washington (UP) –
One Republican and three Democratic incumbent Senators will seek renomination this week in primaries in Alabama, Florida, Maryland and South Dakota.

Maryland voters open the political activity today at primaries which and Senator Millard E. Tydings, a Democrat, opposed for renomination by four aspirants, with Willis R. Jones of Baltimore furnishing the most active opposition.

Other Senators seeking renomination this week are Claude E. Pepper (D-FL), ardent administration supporter; Listen Hill (D-AL), and Chan Gurney (R-SD).

The Maryland Republican nomination is being sought by Rives Matthews (Princess Anne publisher who recently charged a state official with misusing gasoline rations), Paul Robertson and Blanchard Randall Jr., both of Baltimore.

Eighteen delegates to the Democratic convention and 16 to the Republican – all apparently uninstructed – will also be chosen in Maryland as well as candidates for six Congressional seats.

Tomorrow’s Florida primary has attracted the greater national interest. Mr. Pepper, outspoken pre-Pearl Harbor interventionist, is opposed for renomination by four men – Jacksonville Judge Ollie Edmunds, Jacksonville lawyer Alston Cockrell, Daytona Beach lawyer Millard B. Conklin and Lake City realtor Finley Moore.

Florida will also choose 18 delegates to the Democratic convention from a ballot that includes a slate favoring Senator Harry F. Byrd (D-VA) for the presidential nomination. Most of the others favor President Roosevelt.

In Alabama, Mr. Hill is opposed for renomination by Birmingham attorney James A. Simpson.

Mr. Gurney faces opposition for the Republican senatorial nomination in South Dakota where voters will also choose 11 Republicans and eight Democrats to the national conventions.

Candidates for two Congressional seats as well as gubernatorial candidates will be chosen in South Dakota while Alabama will select candidates for nine House seats.

Delegates to national conventions will also be chosen this week in North Carolina and Washington.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 2, 1944)

Roosevelt called poor administrator

Norfolk, Nebraska (UP) –
Senator Ralph Owen Brewster (R-ME) quoted “one of the best-informed Democrats in Washington” yesterday as saying “President Roosevelt is one of the greatest politicians and one of the worst administrators the world has ever seen.”

Mr. Brewster did not identify the Washington Democrat in his keynote speech to the Republican State Convention.

The New England Senator charged that:

The New Deal was considerably concerned over the youth of Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York. There are others of us who think this administration is too old.

Mr. Brewster called Mr. Dewey “a young David who may be the one to slay the Goliath of bureaucracy that now dominates in Washington.”

[NormanStewart]

Tydings wins renomination in Maryland

Democratic incumbent victor by 3–1
By the United Press

Two stalwart New Deal Senators sought renomination against strong opposition in Democratic primaries in Florida and Alabama today as results from yesterday’s Maryland primary showed that Senator Millard E. Tydings, Democratic incumbent, was renominated by better than a three-to-one margin.

Senator Claude Pepper sought renomination in Florida and Senator Lister Hill in Alabama, both nominations tantamount to election.

Mr. Hill, Democratic whip in the Senate and a loyal New Dealer, was opposed by Birmingham attorney James A. Simpson, who campaigned on a platform of “less bureaucracy and more states’ rights.”

Republicans went to the polls in South Dakota with Senator Chan Gurney seeking renomination.

Opposed by four

Mr. Pepper had four opponents – Jacksonville Judge Ollie Edmonds, Alston Cockrell of Jacksonville, Finley Moore of Lake City and Millard B. Conklin of Lake City.

Blanchard Randall Jr., Baltimore banker, won the Republican senatorial nomination. His nearest opponent was Paul Robertson, Baltimore Central Republican Committee chairman. The only other contestant was Rives Matthews, country editor.

There was a six-man race for governor in Florida and five Congressional races. Leading candidates for governor were Millard Caldwell of Tallahassee, Ernest R. Graham of Miami and Lex Green of Starke.

Congressmen seeking renomination in Alabama included Reps. Joe Starnes, Sam Hobbs, Albert Rains and Carter Manasco. Voters in both Alabama and Florida will select delegations to the Democratic National Convention.

Willkie slate wins

In Maryland, with returns from 937 out of 1,326 precincts tabulated, Mr. Tydings had 51,175 votes against 14,043 for Willis R. Jones, his closest opponent in the five-man Democratic senatorial race.

In the Republican contest for delegates to the GOP nominating convention, an uninstructed delegation was leading a slate pledged to Wendell L. Willkie, 9,839 to 3,145 with 819 precincts reported.

Mr. Willkie’s name was placed on the ballot before he withdrew from the Republican presidential race. Some voters disregarded the facts that write-in votes are not counted in Maryland primaries, and wrote in the name of Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 3, 1944)

Pepper, Hill triumph in Senate races

New Deal supported in Southern primaries
By the United Press

Four states gave a stamp of approval to the wartime conduct of their Congressmen today as Alabama, Florida, Indiana and South Dakota tabulated the results of their primary elections.

Senators Claude Pepper of Florida and Lister Hill of Alabama, strong supporters of the Roosevelt administration, were returned to their seats by wide margins.

Tantamount to election

Democratic nomination is equal to election in the South.

The primaries showed, state by state.

ALABAMA: State Senator James A. Simpson conceded his defeat by Senator Hill who was leading 100,318 to 80,919 on the basis from return from 1,748 of the state’s 2,500 boxes. Rep. Joe Starnes, a member of the Dies Committee, lost a nip-and-tuck race to Albert Rains, with 12,003 votes to Rains’ 13,118. He was the only Congressman unseated thus far.

Other Alabama Congressmen were having minor trouble. Rep. Carter Manasco was forced into a runoff against J. H. Deason when he failed to obtain a majority in a three-man race. Rep. John P. Newsome failed to pick up a majority in the 9th district and probably will face former Congressman Luther Patrick in a runoff.

FLORIDA: Pepper had 132,000 votes to 86,375 for his nearest opponent, Judge Ollie Edmunds of Jacksonville in a five-man race, for a clean-cut majority and avoided a runoff. Meager returns showed 10 residential delegates pledged to President Roosevelt and seven pledged to Senator Harry F. Byrd of Virginia leading,

INDIANA: Rep. Charles M. La Follette, defeated Maj. Chester V. Lorch of the Army Air Forces in the 9th district Republican race, the only close Congressional contest. The remaining incumbents (eight Republicans, two Democrats) were unopposed or renominated by wide margins.

SOUTH DAKOTA: A Dewey slate of 11 delegates to the Republican convention was leading a slate pledged to LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen (former Governor of Minnesota) 27,999 to 18,869. Both Democratic slates, one entered in opposition to that chosen by the state party leaders, were pledged to President Roosevelt. Senator Chan Gurney led Lieutenant Governor A. C. Miller 35,106 to 27,021, for the Republican senatorial nomination on the basis of returns from 1,407 of the state’s 1,963 precincts.

Pepper secures majority

In the Florida majority, the three other candidates – Millard Conklin of Daytona Beach, Alston Cockrell of Jacksonville, and Finley Moore of Lake City – apparently failed to obtain even enough votes to check Senator Pepper’s majority and force him into a runoff with Edmunds. Negroes cast their ballots in the Florida primary for the first time. Senator Pepper campaigned on a platform of solid support for the national administration and contended that his opponents attacked him only to stab President Roosevelt in the back.

Senator Hill was also a setback to hopes of anti-administration leaders of a revolt in the Democratic South. He hailed his victory as “a verdict for America’s war effort.” Senator Hill, who nominated President Roosevelt for a third term, based his entire campaign on his support of the administration while Simpson pleaded for “less bureaucracy and more states’ rights.”

[NormanStewart]

Change of political pace –
Roosevelt keeps hands off as ‘purged’ Senators run

By Lyle C. Wilson, United Press staff writer

Washington (UP) –
President Roosevelt has apparently changed his political tactics since 1938 when he undertook to purge from the Democratic Party a number of members of Congress whom he regarded as too conservative for the New Deal.

Regardless of fourth-term intentions, Mr. Roosevelt now appears to be willing to accept Democratic Congressional candidates as primary voters select them in this presidential election year.

This attitude is accepted by some persons here as further evidence that he is reconciled to the evident determination of most of his party colleagues to draft him for another term. A man who foresees himself about to begin a campaign is not likely to undertake to read anybody out of his own party.

Senator Millard E. Tydings (D-MD) was renominated this week in a moderately spirited primary and by an overwhelming margin over his several opponents. No word from the White House challenged Mr. Tydings’ fitness to remain in the Senate this time.

Conducted personal fight

Mr. Tydings was one of four members of Congress Mr. Roosevelt himself sought to defeat in primary contests in 1938. The President conducted the fight himself against renomination of Tydings, Senator Ellison D. “Cotton Ed” Smith (D-SC), Senator Walter F. George (D-GA) and Rep. John J. O’Connor (D-NY). Senators Tydings, Smith and George were triumphantly renominated and they are up again this year.

Another whom the White House sought to purge in 1938 was Senator Guy M. Gillette (D-IA). The job was handed to Harry L. Hopkins – then, as now, a close personal and political friend of Mr. Roosevelt’s. Mr. Hopkins was born in Iowa and he backed a candidate against Mr. Gillette in the Iowa Democratic primaries. But Mr. Gillette came through with votes to spare. This year, Mr. Gillette has received a presidential blessing.

Transcontinental journey

Mr. Gillette’s primary comes this year June 5. South Carolina votes Aug. 29 and Georgia’s primary comes July 4.

Mr. Roosevelt made his extraordinary incursion into Democratic primaries in July 1938 in a transcontinental journey which broke political seismographs throughout the country.

Mr. Roosevelt was greatly moved in his direct and indirect action against various Democrats in 1938 by resentment of their opposition to his attempt to reorganize the Supreme Court by legislative process. But after the coast-to-coast journey was completed, one of his closest associates explained that the long-range objective was “control of the Democratic Party by the liberal elements in preparation for the 1940 campaign.”

“That means, naturally,” he said, “reducing the strength of the conservatives.”

For whatever it is worth, some men regarded as too conservative for renomination in 1938 apparently will not be opposed on that or any other grounds this year.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 4, 1944)

Politics charged in ration move

Washington (UP) –
Lifting of ration restrictions from all but the better cuts of beef today provoked the cry of “politics.”

“The administration is preparing for the fall elections by a program of appeasement,” was the way Rep. August H. Andersen (R-MN) put it. It was “purely a political move,” he added.

The Congressional farm bloc continued to criticize the lowered hog support price. Senator Clyde M. Reed (R-KS) said he and other farm state Senators were “on the warpath” until prices were restored. War Food Administration officials said, however, the feed situation would not warrant any such move, since it would divert corn from war industries to hog troughs.

[NormanStewart]

Stokes: New Dealers heartened by wins in South

Roosevelt’s true strength not shown
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer

Birmingham, Alabama –
Any lingering doubt about the standing of President Roosevelt and the New Deal along the Southern front was dispelled by the victories here and in Florida of Senators Lister Hill and Claude Pepper.

Everything in the unexpurgated edition of the Southern political catalog was hurled at the New Deal Senators, including wads of big money and the racial issue.

For that reason, the effect of their victories will spread over the country, reviving the hopes of Democrats and New Dealers for success in the presidential election.

Republicans were not pleased by the Alabama-Florida returns, the United Press reports. Senator Homer Ferguson (R-MI) said:

There are still a lot of people who won’t vote against Santa Claus, although there aren’t so many as there used to be.

Big anti-New Deal interests elsewhere had anxious eyes on this state and Florida and there is evidence that they had their finger in the situation through absentee-owned holdings.

But those who work in the mines and mills still have the most votes.

Both Senators knew they had been through a tough fight. Their margins were not too comfortably large. They learned that there is a substantial percentage of their constituencies dissatisfied with New Deal domestic trends.

Largely anti-vote

Neither Senator had particularly attractive or effective candidates in opposition, and it was largely an anti-vote.

In assessing the strength of this protest vote, however, it must be kept in mind, in trying to apply it as a formula outside the south, that the vote in both states is not truly representative of the whole people. This is especially true in Alabama, where the poll tax disenfranchises many thousands of voters. Florida has no poll tax and therefore cast a much larger vote, though it has only two-thirds as many people as this state.

Stayed at home

The vote here in Alabama was light. Farmers are behind with their work here, and apparently many of them stayed at home Tuesday.

President Roosevelt’s personal popularity in both states undoubtedly had an appreciable effect. Both Senators capitalized it to the limit, that and the war. Yet their vote did not represent by any means the full Roosevelt strength.

Those who deplored injection of the racial issue in the campaigns are hopeful that the defeat of those who raised it will minimize it in politics hereafter elsewhere in the South.

[NormanStewart]

Editorial: More of same

Them-what-has-gits seems to be the rule in the primaries. Fourth-term advocates won in Florida and Alabama, while in South Dakota the Dewey supporters beat the Stassen boys. Of course, the leadership of Mr. Dewey and Mr. Roosevelt is such – despite the fact that neither is an avowed candidate – that this week’s primaries could not have made much difference.

In the case of Mr. Dewey, the South Dakota Republican primary indicates the bandwagon is rolling so fast that a first ballot nomination is probable and that even most of the usual favorite-son ritual may be dispensed with.

The weak Stop-Roosevelt movement within the Democratic Party had its best chance in Florida and Alabama. Senators Pepper and Hill are New Deal symbols and made their primary campaigns as such. In addition to the anti-bureaucracy cry, the opposition raised the race issue in a particularly dirty way. But not even the usually-surefire “white supremacy” appeal was strong enough to rout the administration forces.

Most of the Democratic politicians who dislike the President think he has made it impossible to build up any other candidate at this late date – that he is their best bet in November. But he may be their best vote-getter and still be not good enough.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 5, 1944)

In Washington –
Republican charges meat ration lifting is ‘purely political’

Congressman Andresen sees restrictions made even tighter if Roosevelt wins again

Washington (UP) –
Accusing the administration of playing “politics” with rationing, Rep. August H. Andresen (R-MN) predicted today that almost all rationing will be lifted before the November elections and then be made tighter than ever if the “New Deal elects its fourth-term candidate.”

He charged in a speech prepared for delivery on the House floor that the new OPA order ending rationing of all meat except certain beef cuts were “purely political” and motivated by either of two factors:

• To “remove the odor” of the seizure of Montgomery Ward properties by military force, or

• “Political expediency properly timed to end food rationing a few months before the presidential elections” Nov. 7.

More drastic later

Mr. Andresen said other items he expected to be removed from rationing before the elections were beef steak, sugar, butter, canned fruits, gasoline, fuel oil and auto tires, but added:

I am convinced that should the New Deal elect its fourth term candidate Nov. 7, the Office of Price Administration will shortly thereafter reinstate and make more drastic all rationing policies to further regiment and socialize the economy of our country.

He said that for more than a year, beef and pork producers pleaded with OPA to lift rationing to prevent a glutted market, but the proposals, not being “geared to proper New Deal timing,” fell on “deaf ears.”

Who ordered it?

Mr. Andresen said he was especially interested in knowing who ordered Price Chief Chester Bowles “to virtually discontinue” meat rationing, in view of the fact that a national magazine just five days before circulated an article in which Mr. Bowles, discussing meat rationing, said there would be “some relief in 1945 (with luck) and possibly end when the war is over.”

Meanwhile, Food Administrator Marvin Jones hinted that steaks and beef roasts – the only meats still requiring red points – may be made point-free by fall, but warned that the present abundant supplies of food may be only temporary.

He said there is now an abundance of cattle and that as soon as the movement into processing plants is sufficient, everyone should be able to have a good supply of beef. But again, he warned that the feed shortage, and possibly bad weather, hang over the future food outlook, and pointed out that farmers are faced with labor and machinery shortages.

[NormanStewart]

Pegler: On the election

By Westbrook Pegler

New York –
Some of us seem to think that our British and Russian friends, as a matter of politeness, tact and good sense, ought to put out of their minds entirely the subject of the presidential election in the USA this year or, if that is impossible, to say nothing about it.

This is asking too much, because this decision of the American people is very important to them as well as to us.

Naturally, they favor President Roosevelt, because he has been extremely cooperative since the fall of France and before, and they know him well and are pretty sure what he will do.

Tom Dewey they know only by reputation, and he might have some new ideas which would trim some of Mr. Roosevelt’s open-handed generosity to the rest of the world and might want to get positive commitments from our allies as to what we are to get back for what we give.

He is definite where Mr. Roosevelt is vague and would want to put something down in writing in place of the emotional, political generalities exchanged hitherto by men whose word is not necessarily binding on their peoples after they die or lose office, such as Mr. Churchill’s gaudy promises of everlasting cooperation given at an hour when things were going very badly for Britain and he had to do a job of salesmanship.

Communist intrusion

This interest is not an intrusion in our domestic politics, except in the case of the Communists. Naturally, they will raise a fuss for the President because he is so good to them on the home front, permitting them to dirty up our labor relations, and they can be sure that if and when Governor Dewey should take over, he would give the entire government a thorough delousing of the fellow travelers.

Nor do I accept as a fact the pretense that the international Communist organization has been dissolved or that Stalin has abandoned the old custom, admitted in our treaty of recognition, of maintaining agents among us to promote his interests. It is just that this is a normal condition among us, encouraged by the New Deal for all these years, and not a special impudence in this election year.

The Communists are gluttons for humiliation. Stalin boots them around, slams doors on them and leaves them out on a limb every few weeks, but they love the guy with the suffering submission of a drunkard’s dog and whimper for more of the same.

So far, we have always handled this Communist interference like an easy infield out, and their noisy support of Mr. Roosevelt’s more outrageous moves, such as the Montgomery Ward case, probably makes more votes for Governor Dewey than for their man.

Churchill’s experience

Churchill is one who really knows what foreign interference is. He was a victim of it himself back in the ‘30s when his anti-Nazi potboilers pecked out in the role of journalist had earned him a high priority on Hitler’s blacklist and he couldn’t get anything to do in the government lest this be taken by the Führer as a deliberately unfriendly act. He is in no position to try anything like that on us in this campaign, but there is no reason why an Englishman shouldn’t say he hopes President Roosevelt will be reelected.

That we should be sensitive about such expressions will seem inconsistent to other peoples who see us now in Italy fumbling around trying to invent some new form of government for the lower part of the boot and hear our pundits muttering about the re-education of the Germans toward democracy and freedom which they hate. We are even going to try the miracle of unifying France, whether with a club or through bribery we haven’t yet made up our minds.

Just so they say what they have to say in their own countries, our gallant allies should have our permission to sound off at will. And Republicans should be the last to complain, because such expressions are sure to favor Mr. Roosevelt and the more emphatic they are, the more sales-resistance they arouse to the detriment of their own purpose.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 6, 1944)

Background of news –
The South stays in line

By Jay G. Hayden

Washington –
The prospect of Southern opposition to a fourth term for President Roosevelt, either in the Democratic nominating convention or the November election, all but vanished when Senators Claude Pepper of Florida and Lister Hill of Alabama won easy renomination this week.

Anti-Roosevelt leaders in the South, including a majority of its businessmen and editors and a fair sprinkling of top-flight Democratic officeholders, have insisted that their section was thirsting for New Deal blood if only it could find a way to express itself, short of going Republican.

The significance of the Florida and Alabama senatorial contests was that they squarely met their specification. Senator Pepper had stuck to the New Deal line, even to the point of favoring enfranchisement of Southern Negroes, and Senator Hill had done likewise, with the single notable exception of the race issue.

Participants in these primaries, both candidates and voters, all were Democrats. The sole difference was that Messrs. Pepper and Hill stood squarely on their pro-Roosevelt records and their opponents just as definitely opposed the President and all of his domestic works.

Both clear-cut winners

In a straight two-man contest against James A. Simpson, president pro tempore of the State Senate and a leading Birmingham lawyer, Mr. Hill won with approximately 55% of the votes cast.

Mr. Pepper’s victory is even more decisive in that he appears to have won the clear majority of votes necessary to insure his reelection as against four opponents. With three-fourths of the state heard from, Mr. Pepper had an overall majority of 10,000 and was 46,000 ahead of the next best runner, Judge J. Ollie Edmunds.

In addition to these senatorial results, Roosevelt adherents are crowing over the lead in Florida of delegates pledged to the President, as against a slate entered in the name of Senator Harry F. Byrd of Virginia, and the defeat of Rep. Joe Starnes for renomination in Alabama’s 5th district.

Incomplete returns indicate that a minority of Byrd delegates may have been elected in Florida, but in light of the Pepper and Hill victories, nothing short of a Byrd sweep of the state could have given encouragement to the Southern anti-fourth term movement.

Rep. Starnes has been known chiefly as the first assistant of Rep. Martin Dies in the much-controverted Special Committee to Investigate Un-American Activities. His votes in the House have frequently been anti-New Deal.

What Alabama likes

One of Mr. Starnes’ Alabama colleagues, asked the reason for his defeat, said he thought it was not so much that his constituents disagreed with the findings of the Dies Committee as that Mr. Starnes’ name was printed so frequently in connection with it.

He said:

You know, folks down in Alabama don’t want their representatives to be bothering about any of these big national things. When they hear their man talk about things going on in New York, they just think it would be better if he tended more to getting things for his home district.

In their overall meaning, the present Southern primary results seem to beat out the notion, held by any political observers all along, that while the upper crust elements in the South are violently anti-Roosevelt, this sentiment has not penetrated very deeply into the voting mass.

Also, the administration still has its vast civilian bureaucracy, numbering into the hundreds of thousands in single states, now supplemented by the military and naval bureaucracies. There is no doubt that the Washington administration did everything in its power to marshal these forces in behalf of Mr. Hill, Mr. Pepper and all others of its recognized supporters in Alabama and Florida.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 7, 1944)

Labor Party backs 4th term

New York (UP) – (May 6)
The American Labor Party dedicated itself today to the “task of assuring the nomination and election of President Roosevelt” in its 1944 national election program, chairman Sidney Hillman announced.

A 4,000-word platform, distributed by Mr. Hillman after a meeting of the Executive Committee, did not mention Vice President Henry A. Wallace, but Mr. Hillman said the party favored him for renomination.

The CIO Political Action Committee platforms and ALP policy on state and municipal issues will be drafted later, Mr. Hillman, also chairman of the CIO committee, said.

The national platform called for full labor representation at the peace table and encouragement of worldwide democracy as the goal of U.S. foreign policy.

[NormanStewart]

Editorial: The men lose a champion

We know nothing of the issues, personalities or the local cross currents that contributed to the defeat of Rep. Joe Starnes in the Alabama primary. Albert Raines, the man who took Mr. Starnes to the cleaners, may prove to be a good lawmaker.

Yet for one reason at least we can’t help mourning the unseating of Congressman Starnes. Mr. Starnes is the author of legislation to give war veterans and their dependents preferred status in getting government jobs after the war – which legislation contains one interesting, unique and highly courageous provision, namely: That the widowers of WACs, WAVES, WASPs, SPARS and Lady Marines shall have the same preference as that given to the widows of soldiers, sailors and male Marines – which is by way of being a very stout stand for the oft-neglected principle of equal rights for men.

[NormanStewart]

Völkischer Beobachter (May 8, 1944)

Diktator Roosevelt in Nöten

vb. Wien, 7. Mai –
Aus einem an sich zunächst harmlosen Lohnkonflikt bei der großen Chikagoer Postversandfirma Montgomery Ward hat sich eine hochpolitische Affäre entwickelt, durch die die Diktaturmethoden der Roosevelt-Regierung ins Licht der Öffentlichkeit gezerrt wurden. Dies ist für die Regierung umso peinlicher, als die dem Präsidenten vom Kongreß erteilten besonderen Kriegsvollmachten (Eingreifen in Betriebe im Sinne der Aufrechterhaltung der Kriegs Produktion) am 30. Juni ablaufen und vom Kongreß verlängert werden sollen.

Die Belegschaft der Firma Montgomery Ward war wegen unerfüllter Lohnforderungen in den Streik getreten, woraufhin die Regierung, weil sie der Ansicht war, daß die Betriebsleitung eine Teilschuld an dem Konflikt trug, die Beschlagnahme des Betriebes durch das Handelsministerium anordnete. Der 69jährige Leiter der Firma verweigerte die Herausgabe der Bücher und wurde schließlich, nachdem die Regierung den Betrieb durch Truppen besetzen ließ, förmlich aus seinem Büro herausgezerrt. Dieser peinlichen Szene wohnte der Justizminister Francis Biddle persönlich bei. Die Firma legte nun vor Gericht eine Protesterklärung nieder, in der die Regierung der Überschreitung ihrer Kriegs Vollmachten unter Anwendung ungesetzlicher Methoden beschuldigt wurde. Der Präsident sei durch seine Kriegsvollmachten jederzeit in der Lage, grundlegende Verfassungsrechte zu ignorieren. Besonders unangenehm wirkte die Schlußfolgerung des Protestschreibens, in der es hieß, die logische Folge der Machtbefugnisse der Regierung wäre die Einführung des totalitären Systems.

In Erkenntnis des politischen „Dynamits,“ das in dieser Beschuldigung gegen die Regierung lag, rief die Regierung schleunigst die Truppen ab und forderte die Belegschaft der Firma zu einer geheimen Abstimmung über den Lohnstreit auf.

Im Bundeskongreß entstand durch den Zwischenfall eine derartige Erregung, daß es die Roosevelttreuen Parlamentarier vorzogen, ihren Widerstand gegen eine von der Opposition geforderte parlamentarische Untersuchung der Vorgänge aufzugeben. Die Untersuchung wird also nun wahrscheinlich stattfinden, und zwar unter dem Gesichtspunkt, ob unter solchen Umständen die Kriegsvollmachten des Präsidenten in ihrer jetzigen Form aufrechterhalten oder revidiert werden sollten.

Es ist klar, daß diese Zwischenfälle der Regierung Roosevelt im Hinblick auf die kommenden Kongreß- und Präsidentschafts- Wahlen besonders unangenehm sind. Sie werden Wasser auf die Mühlen der republikanischen Opposition gießen, die ja stets mit dem Argument operierte, daß die demokratische Regierung die freie Wirtschaft in eine totalitäre Zwangsjacke zu stecken drohe und damit den Weg zu einer Diktatur Roosevelts ebne. Wenn nun Roosevelt zum vierten Male gewählt würde, würde diese Gefahr immer größer werden.