Election 1944: Pre-convention news

LIFE (May 22, 1944)

americavotes1944

Editorial: Advice to the Republicans

Before stampeding to Dewey, the delegates should consider the claims of the Midwest

As a magazine, LIFE is neither Democrat nor Republican. If and when this magazine comes out for a candidate in the 1944 campaign, it will do so from a nonpartisan base. Thus, in giving some advice to the Republican Party, which we now propose to do, we are not adopting that party, or asking it to adopt us. We are giving it the kind of advice which any outside has the right to offer to any party whose affairs are, after all affected with a public interest.

The delegates to the Republican National Convention seem at the present moment to be hellbent on nominating Governor Dewey as fast as possible and then hellbending home. This may turn out to be a good thing for them to do. But our advice is: think it over. A case can be made that the best thing the Republicans can do is nominate a Midwesterner. And not only the best thing for the Republicans, but – more to the point – the best thing for the country in case they win the election.

The Republican renascence

The average delegate entraining for Chicago next month knows there is a widespread reaction against Washington bureaucracy, against OPA, against 12 too-exciting years of personal and theatrical government. he figures it’s a Republican year, so what the hell. It is true that this may be an anti-Roosevelt year. But if it is also a Republican year, what made it so? What and who revived the Republican Party? How does it happen that the anti-Roosevelt sentiment, instead of skulking through the streets, has a respectable vehicle?

The mainspring of the Republican renascence is the Midwest. Here, in the birthplace of the Republican Party, the land of corn, wheat and Lincoln, the Republican renascence got its start. Since 1938, the Midwest has been returning Republicans to Congress in an ever-widening stream. It gave Willkie 68 of his 82 electoral votes in 1940. Even those Midwestern states that went for Roosevelt that year went Republican in their state governments. To be sure, other sections did their share to keep the party together, notable New England. Nevertheless, the spearhead of Roosevelt’s Congressional opposition is 22 senators from the Midwest. The Midwest is the one section which can be counted on to go Republican this year.

For that very reason, many leading Republican politicians feel that it is unnecessary to take the Midwest’s mood into account. They concentrate their calculations on the problematical East and West. Hence: “Dewey and Warren.” Although the Midwest would support this ticket, it would rather have some recognition for its years of loyalty and hard work. But quite apart from that, there are serious national reasons why a Midwesterner, if the country goes Republican, should take the responsibility that goes with the victory the Midwest will have earned.

Whoever is President during the next four years will not have an easy time. While he is trying to conclude the peace treaties with one hand, the other will have to deal with a turmoil of demobilization. For a while the economic pie will be smaller; inevitably there will be renewed bitterness over who gets what. In that bitterness, group and sectional rancors will come boiling to the top.

Of sectional prejudice, the Midwest has perhaps a little more than its share. At its worst, it is suspicious of foreigners, of the East, of big cities (including its own), of Wall Street and of Big Business. The only thing the Midwest completely trusts is itself. The Midwest is just like the rest of America, only more so.

How can the Midwest be kept at its best during the next four dangerous years, instead of at its worst? By giving it responsibility, which is the surest antidote to prejudice. With 22 Senators, the Midwest is bound to exercise a great deal of power, of it does not enjoy responsibility commensurate with this power, it may become more self-sufficient, self-regarding and exclusively regional than ever.

Republican foreign policy

Among the serious consequences of such a withdrawal would be its effect on U.S. foreign policy. This would be the first target of the Midwest’s suspicions.

A lot has happened in the last few weeks to change the Republican position on foreign policy. Soon after Willkie’s withdrawal from the race, Governor Dewey came out for Secretary Hull, Governor Bricker came out for post-war credits abroad, and both came out for a joint peacekeeping deal with Britain, Russia and China. Meanwhile Senator Taft has written a blueprint for a new League of Nations and, of course, ex-Governor Stassen went on record with his famous seven-point program way back in January 1943. Throw in progressives like Senators Ball and Burton and throw out the Illinois crowd (who though powerful are not candidates) and you emerge with a wholly new Republican orientation: its leaders, even without Willkie, are all on record against anything that could remotely be termed “isolation.”

Now, the Midwest is the old home of isolation. The Midwest today is not against America’s participating in world affairs; but it is still very skeptical about any program of participation that has been offered to it to date. It is still isolationist in a relative sense; it is capable of supporting an active foreign policy, but only after its doubts about the motivation of that policy are completely removed. And the doubts of the Midwest spring from its prejudices – its suspicions of all foreigners and their supposed influence on the East.

A vocal handful of diehard Willkieites may say, “The Midwest is hopeless. No appeasement!” That is tantamount to saying that on foreign policy, the Republican Party without Willkie has no case.

But the Republicans have a foreign policy case. Their case is that internationalism will be not so much an issue as a fact of post-war life. Given this fact, U.S. foreign policy should be one of enlightened and responsible selfishness. Their case is not that Roosevelt is too inclined to make commitments, but that he cannot make his commitments stick. Congress will probably be Republican and certainly anti-Roosevelt; therefore, only a Republican President can make any foreign policy responsible and effective.

The Republican case is that when a Republican President sits down with Stalin, Churchill, Chiang Kai-shek and whoever else, the meeting will get somewhere; for Stalin et al. will know that the presidential signature on a treaty will not be written in vanishing ink.

Keep it clean

But if this is a good case for a Republican President, why is it not an even better case for a Midwestern Republican President?

If a Republican foreign policy were administered by a Midwesterner, its selfishness would never be open to doubt. For the Midwest trusts its own – especially those whom it has elected to office. With both the selfishness and the responsibility of our foreign policy assured, the debate could then be conducted on one level only: is it enlightened? This debate will go on forever. Our problem will be not to end it, but to keep it on this high plane.

The best way to keep it on this high plane is to stage it at the corner of Main and Elm. To the Midwestern eye, America is merely an extension of these two streets, and maybe the Midwest is right. In any case, they are long, straight streets, and they can lead to all parts of the world.

By naming a Midwestern candidate, the Republicans will assure the country that the great post-war debate will not degenerate into a sectional brawl. Yet to name a Midwesterner would not turn the Republicans into a sectional party, or an isolationist party, or otherwise narrow its base. There are at least four candidates – Bricker, Burton, Stassen, Taft – who are not only representative Midwesterners, but also men with a national viewpoint, and an expressed realization of America’s need to participate in world affairs.

The political case for Dewey is a strong one: his state is doubtful, while the Midwest is not, and any party has to figure things very closely when it is up against The Champ. But the delegates to Chicago will perform a patriotic service if they delay the stampede at least long enough for the Midwest’s case to be heard.

The Brooklyn Eagle (May 23, 1944)

americavotes1944

ALP names union chief for Congress

Municipal workers head chosen to make race in new 14th

James V. King, president of the CIO-affiliated State, County and Municipal Workers, has become the first member of the American Labor Party to be entered as a candidate in Brooklyn’s 1944 Congressional race, it was learned today.

Petitions designating him to run in the new 14th Congressional district, as established under the State Reapportionment Act, have been placed in circulation with the leaders setting 10,000 signatures as their goal. The district is one of several in Brooklyn, where the ALP outranks the Republicans as the runner-up to the Democrats in strength.

The new district has no Representative in Washington now and must elect one for the first time in November. This has produced a wide and open field to the Democratic, Republican and Labor parties, with the latter becoming the first to reach a definite agreement on its candidate. The district consists of the new 2nd and 16th ADs and includes Coney Island, much of the area which touches Gravesend Bay south of 16th Avenue and a large part of the Kings Highway section.

Ready to fight

The ALP’s selection of King is regarded as the first confirmation of the party’s determination to fight both the Democrats and Republicans, in certain districts, if necessary, in order to win a share of Brooklyn’s legislative offices. Although the party in recent years endorsed numerous Democratic and a more limited number of Republicans, no ALP member now holds an elective office from Brooklyn.

The only Democrats who have been assured to date of ALP endorsements for reelection are Irwin Steingut, the Democratic minority leader in the Assembly at Albany, and Rep. Emanuel Celler. A “limited number” of others will be endorsed, according to ALP leaders, with such backing being based on the candidates’ support of President Roosevelt’s fourth term and his New Deal administration policies.

Rayfiel mentioned

The Democratic leaders controlling their party’s slate in the 14th Congressional district have reached no decision on their choice. They are Kenneth F. Sutherland, the Coney Island leader, and Joseph B. Whitty of the 2nd AD. However, the name of Assemblyman Leo F. Rayfiel has been prominently mentioned.

King is one of the ALP’s most experienced members in legislative procedure. He has gone frequently to Albany, where he has appeared at legislative hearings in support of progressive legislation. As legislative spokesman for the State, County and Municipal Workers, he has been active to obtain an adjustment in the wage standards of thousands of low-paid state hospital workers.

americavotes1944

Browder seeks to extend basis of Communism

Communists, by dissolving their political party and reorganizing under the name of the Communist Political Association, hope to gain collaboration with “broader circles” of American life, Earl Browder, general secretary of the Communist Party of America since 1930 and president of the newly-formed association, said at the close of the Communist convention yesterday in the Riverside Plaza Hotel in Manhattan.

Browder, elected to head the new association by acclamation, explained that the political party has been an obstacle to such collaboration. He added that other obstacles remain such as “the Red scare and anti-Communist ideology fostered by Hitler’s propaganda organization.”

In placing Browder’s name in nomination, William Z. Foster, veteran lender, described the first president of the new association as “one of the finest agitators and educators” America has produced.

Commenting on German criticism of the Communists’ reorganization, Browder said he was happy the Communists had “displeased Berlin.”

“It was as I expected and predicted,” he said, referring to a Nazi DNB broadcast that assailed the new setup as a move to stop criticism of United States and Russian collaboration.

The broadcast stated that Berlin political circles viewed dissolution of the party as a “technical maneuver” to stifle attacks by President Roosevelt’s enemies against the “Roosevelt-Bolshevist coalition.”

‘Comrades’ no longer

In his closing address to the convention, Browder addressed his audience as “Ladies and Gentlemen,” dispensing with the customary Communist greeting “Comrades.”

A national committee of 40 members and 20 alternates will govern the new association. Among those elected as members of the committee, which includes all 27 members of the governing body of the dissolved party, were City Councilmen Peter V. Cacchione and Benjamin J. Davis Jr.

americavotes1944

Editorial: Success of Wallace’s mission would enhance his prestige

The circumstances attending Vice President Wallace’s departure on his mission to China and Siberia make it possible to speculate with somewhat more certainty upon prospects for his renomination in July. When the announcement was first made some weeks ago that the Vice President would be out of the country at a significant time there was a hasty disposition to see in it a portent of political doom. President Roosevelt, it was assumed, had reached the decision that Mr. Wallace was not a political asset and that the cause of a fourth term would be served best by looking around for another running mate, one who would placate the conservative South, where there have been disturbing rumblings of discontent.

The possibility of Mr. Wallace’s retirement has brought a number of potential candidates for the vice-presidential nomination to the forefront but today Mr. Wallace looms somewhat larger upon the political scene than in the past and there is in consequence diminishing probabilities of his being replaced.

As the President’s personal representative to an Allied nation which has been waging a war for freedom for the last seven years and which has earned the right to a strong voice in the peace and in the future of Asia, Mr. Wallace undertakes a mission whose success will enhance his stature. It is unquestionably true, as the President said in his announcement, that “Eastern Asia will play a very important part in the future history of the world’” and that “forces are being unleashed there which are of the utmost importance to our peace and prosperity.”

This is not a junket nor is it a scheme cunningly designed to eliminate Mr. Wallace from the political scene at a time when his fortunes will hang in the balance. It is a mission planned to meet a definite need which is essential to the winning of the war and to the establishment of a satisfactory peace.

The Allied leaders have been charged frequently with thoughtlessness with respect to China’s interests and there is some justification for the charge. Preoccupation with the more pressing challenges of the Pacific and of Hitler’s Europe has operated to the neglect of China, whose needs have been great and whose sacrifices and sufferings cannot even be comprehended by their Allies.

It is important that we know more about China and that we bring to her plight a more practical and sympathetic concern. “The Vice President.” Mr. Roosevelt has said, “because of his present position and his training in economics and agriculture, is unusually well fitted to bring both to me and to the people of the United States a valuable first-hand report.”

The personnel of a carefully selected staff must be recognized as a further indication that the mission is one which is intended to accomplish purposes vital to a nation which has endured much in the struggle for a peaceful world.

Mr. Wallace’s opponents will not find it easy to make political capital of his trip to Siberia and China, particularly when there is the probability that he will return in time for the Democratic National Convention in mid-July. The developments are in his favor.

The Brooklyn Eagle (May 24, 1944)

americavotes1944

4th term splits Democrats in Texas session

Austin, Texas (UP) –
A split over the fourth term issue divided Texas Democrats into rival camps today and provided the party with what appeared to be its first convention fight.

The break occurred at the party’s state convention yesterday when the pro-Roosevelt faction, headed by A. J. Wirtz, former Under Secretary of the Interior, bolted from the meeting and held a rump session, naming a separate group of delegates to the national convention.

Under the usual convention procedure in disputes of this kind, the Credentials Committee will have to decide in advance of the balloting for nominations which delegation to seat. Texas has 48 votes at the convention.

Split over pledge

The split resulted from the question of pledging electors to support the Democratic national ticket, regardless of its composition.

A resolution which favored a return to the old party plan of nominating the candidates for President and Vice President by a two-thirds majority rule and declaring that states and parties had a right to fix their own election rules precipitated the break.

According to the terms of the resolution, if the national convention did not approve the proposals, the delegates would be free to cast the state’s 48 votes for any Democrats “holding views in accord with those here expressed.”

FDR group bolts parley

The pro-Roosevelt faction bolted the meeting and held a rival convention, naming a full slate of delegates.

Governor Coke R. Stevenson was invited to head the main convention’s delegation to Chicago and former Governor Dan Moody was named its chairman.

A resolution adopted by the pro-Roosevelt group declared that the original convention was an “usurpation and manipulation by enemies of the Democratic Party procured by delegates from Texas’ four largest counties, a large part of whom supported the Republican candidate for President in 1940.”

americavotes1944

Three groomed for Twomey’s seat in Senate

Assemblymen Rudd, Smolenski, Gittleson considered by party
By Joseph H. Schmalacker

Three Democratic legislators were being considered today for their party’s nomination to succeed Senator Jeremiah F. Twomey of Greenpoint, who has announced that, after nearly 30 years of service at Albany, he does not intend to run for another term. The three are Assemblymen John Smolenski, who now represents Greenpoint in the lower branch of the Legislature; Roy H. Rudd of the Bushwick section and Harry Gittleson of Williamsburg.

According to word from Leader Frank V. Kelly’s office at Democratic headquarters, no immediate decision on the choice is expected. It may be deferred until a number of other pending Democratic designations are ironed out.

The chief one in the latter group is the designation for the $22,500 judgeship in the County Court. The judicial office must be filled at the November election lor a 14-year term because of the death of Judge Peter Brancato. Judge Nicholas Pinto, a Republican, is the temporary incumbent by virtue of appointment by Governor Dewey.

McGuinness for Smolenski

Assemblyman Smolenski’s name has been advanced for the Senatorship with the backing of Greenpoint leader Peter J. McGuinness. Greenpointers have also talked of booming Walter Carley, chairman of the Greenpoint district committee, but Carley has eliminated himself. He has been aide to Twomey for 14 years and is minority secretary of the Senate Finance Committee at Albany, of which Twomey was formerly chairman.

Democratic insiders said the seniority factor would be an important, though not necessarily controlling one, in deciding the race. From this standpoint Rudd, Smolenski and Gittleson are closely bunched. Rudd entered the Assembly in 1937. He was followed in 1938 by Smolenski. Gittleson served his first term in 1938 and, after an interruption of service, returned in 1941.

Greenpointers said Smolenski rates high consideration because he ranks as one of New York State’s outstanding Polish-Americans, whom the Democrats are anxious to keep in line for President Roosevelt. Estimates place the Polish-American vote in Greenpoint at 5,000.

Rudd strong in 20th

On the other hand, Rudd carries the 20th AD for the Democrats in his Assembly campaigns, although the Bushwick district is inclined to go Republican in presidential and gubernatorial election years. He has a strong following among taxpayer groups.

Gittleson, however, is rated as one of the Democratic Party’s most skillful debaters against the Republican majority in Albany. Republican majority members, although they follow the strict party line when votes are cast on the roll call, applaud Gittleson when he has finished a full-dress debate on civil rights issues.

Twomey’s old senatorial district has been revised under the state Reapportionment Act so that it now extends from the East River and Newtown Creek as far as the upper Bushwick section. The Democratic leader in Bushwick is the veteran James W. Tuomey. Gittleson’s leader is Dr. Joshua H. Friedman, whose district, according to pre-presidential straw polls, is one of the strongest New Deal areas in Brooklyn.

americavotes1944

Editorial: What’s in a name?

The American public has been officially informed, to the accompaniment of all the excitement of a party convention plus the usual paraphernalia of a huge Madison Square Garden rally, that the Communist Party is dead! Yes, honest to goodness dead, and Comrade Browder would presumably swear it on a stack of Bibles if he felt that would lend any plausibility to his story. But knowing it wouldn’t, he didn’t.

At any rate, that’s his story and he’s stuck with it. Orders from Moscow, you know. Just as when he changed overnight in 1940 from being anti-Roosevelt and pro-Hitler to pro-Roosevelt and anti-Hitler when he got unexpected orders from Moscow.

If he received orders from the same source tomorrow to start propaganda for a peace settlement with Japan and a movement for the removal of Eisenhower if he didn’t start his invasion by next Tuesday morning, there is little doubt in most American minds as to what Mr. Browder would do.

Anyway, the Communist Party in America is now dead, according to Browder and Stalin, and, we presume, all the fellow travelers are delighted. In its place stands the Communist Political Association – pure as driven snow.

Americans with any memory will remain unimpressed. This new Red outfit will be 100% Russian as its predecessor has always been. It will stand for American policies and ideas only as long as they meet with Stalin’s approval. And it will bear close watching just as the Communist movement always has, regardless of the name it may adopt to suit its own selfish purposes.

Brooklyn Eagle (May 25, 1944)

americavotes1944

State opens drive against vote frauds

Herlands appointed to set up permanent nonpartisan bureau
By Joseph H. Schmalacker

A sweeping drive to block ballot frauds was opened by the state today when William B. Herlands, Mayor La Guardia’s former Commissioner of Investigations, was called in by Nathaniel L. Goldstein, the Attorney General, to organize a new Election Frauds Bureau in the State Law Department.

The new bureau, authorized by the Legislature under a $50,000 appropriation, will be permanent and will be formed on nonpartisan lines, Mr. Goldstein announced.

Herlands, a former Brooklyn resident, who is now living in Manhattan, was appointed by Mr. Goldstein as the bureau’s organizer with the rank of Special Deputy Attorney General at a salary which will be at the rate of $750 a month. His assignment will be part-time and he will continue to maintain his private law offices.

Must guard sanctity of ballot

Mr. Goldstein said:

While Americans on the battlefield are fighting a war to preserve democracy, we on the home front must vigilantly guard the sanctity of the ballot so that the vote of the soldier in the field and the civilian at home may be properly protected. The right to vote for candidates of one’s own choosing, the secrecy of the ballot and an honest count of the votes cast lie at the very root of our form of government. These rights must be preserved, even though we may differ as to candidates and issues. It is more important that our elections be conducted free from fraud and according to law than that any particular candidate should win.

Mr. Goldstein said Democrats as well as Republicans would be named to staff the new bureau. The appropriation to permit the new agency to be organized was urged upon the Legislature last winter by Mr. Goldstein. This was after a special report had been submitted to him by J. Edward Lumbard Jr., a special deputy who headed an investigation of election frauds last year.

The investigation was centered in Albany and other large population areas, including Brooklyn, where a spot-check last year uncovered evidence of considerable election irregularities. The Brooklyn investigation was in charge of A. David Benjamin, a special deputy.

Herlands familiar with task

Mr. Herlands, before his appointment in the La Guardia administration, was chief assistant to Governor Dewey while the latter was making his investigation of rackets in New York County. He resigned as Commissioner of Investigations March 1.

Attorney General Goldstein said Mr. Herlands was familiar with election law problems and that he and Mr. Lumbard prosecuted a number of election officials for ballot frauds committed in 1932.

americavotes1944

Governor Warren shies away from nomination

Washington (UP) –
A telegraphic inquiry to Governor Earl Warren brought an explanation today that “obligations here in California” cause him to shy away from the 1944 Republican vice-presidential nomination.

But Warren did not say he would not accept the nomination if offered. Political observers believe the vigorous boom on his behalf will continue to develop and that he would be a welcome running mate for any likely Republican presidential nominee, including Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York.


Students name Dewey in mock GOP session

Nominated on the first ballot as the Republican candidate for President at a mock GOP national convention staged in two sessions for 3,000 students at Manual Training High School, 7th Avenue and 5th Street, today. Governor Dewey, nevertheless, failed to carry his home state when the booming voice of Roy Bredholt, third-year student, as convention secretary, called the roll of states.

New York’s 93 delegates split its voting strength three ways, casting 46 votes for Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio, 37 for Dewey and 10 for Navy LtCdr. Harold E. Stassen. The big laugh of the roll call was Oregon’s “14½ votes for Dewey and half a vote for Stassen.”

On the shoulders of Mr. Dewey as the convention’s nominee would rest the burden of leading this nation “out of the wilderness and spiritual chaos,” according to Gordon White, “a gentleman from Alabama,” who was elected permanent chairman. Tumultuous applause greeted Dewey’s nomination by 774 votes (only 523 were required). Stassen was a poor second with votes of 154 delegates and Bricker trailed with 127 votes.

Assails New Deal

This nation can’t be run on “promises” of what will be done for the people, said keynoter Ward De Silva in a voice of authority. The New Deal “in its bureaucratic way,” he declared, has “forgotten the rights of industry.”

In placing Dewey’s name in nomination, Joan Abbrancati noted opponents’ claim that New York’s Governor is “too young” and then proceeded to show what “this young man” has done.

The party platform, presented by Joseph Tesoriero, recorded its opposition to a fourth term favored an organization of all the nations for “collective security” and promised simplification of the tax system.

americavotes1944

3rd party aim is disavowed by Hillman

The Congress of Industrial Organizations has no intention of using its Political Action Committee to create a third party, but intends to work within the major parties solely for the support of “liberal, win-the-war candidates” and the reelection of President Roosevelt, according to Sidney Hillman, chairman of the committee.

Hillman said today that the committee has a fund of about $700,000. He declared the 5,500,000 CIO members would not be under any compulsion to vote the committee’s choices, but described the CIO as the largest voting bloc outside either of the two major parties.

Hillman said:

All we are conducting is an educational campaign. We give our members the records of Congressmen so that they may vote intelligently.

Immediate aim of the committee, he said, is to “get our members to register – we don’t ask that they register Democratic: we are interested in getting them to qualify to vote.”

Hillman credited the committee with having purged Martin Dies from Congress and with the capture of the American Labor Party in New York State. Hillman is the state chairman of the party.

He declared the committee’s books are open to inspection and ridiculed Governor Bricker’s charges that the committee has $5,000,000 allocated for a fourth-term drive.

Because only 28,000,000 votes were cast in the last Congressional election, Hillman said, his committee would attempt to mobilize war workers who have migrated from their homes. He estimated New York State had lost 1,000,000 workers and indicated this aided the Republicans.

He declared that the CIO had no further “purge list” but other CIO leaders placed Senator Taft high on such a list.

The Brooklyn Eagle (May 26, 1944)

americavotes1944

CIO political group plans June meeting

Washington (UP) –
The CIO Political Action Committee, which has already endorsed President Roosevelt for a fourth term, plans to call a national conference in Washington in mid-June to chart his program for the 1944 political campaign, it was disclosed today.

A CIO spokesman said more than 300 delegates – the committee’s regional and state directors and field officers, as well as Political Action representatives of CIO affiliates – were expected to attend the conference on the eve of the Republican and Democratic national conventions.

The defeat or retirement of three of its foes on the Dies Committee has focused attention on the CIO committee, and its activities were blamed by Senator Rufus C. Holman (R-OR) yesterday for his recent defeat in the Oregon Republican primaries.

The CIO committee and New Dealers employed unlimited financial resources to wage an “effective smear campaign” to throttle his bid for renomination, Holman told the Senate.

The committee said the June meeting would “outline labor views on issues which will decide 1944’s crucial elections” and would prepare a platform calling for full production and full employment the post-war period.

The conference is also expected to give further attention to the organizational problem of getting workers to register and to vote – a problem which has been given heavy emphasis during the early stages of the committee’s work. CIO leaders have blamed the political lethargy of labor for what they interpreted as an anti-labor trend in the 1942 and 1943 elections. They have been cheerful over the result of recent primaries.

Spokesmen for the Political Action Committee have looked upon those results as evidence that their drive to mobilize the labor vote was being successful.

americavotes1944

GOP nominates Gwinn for Congress race

White Plains, New York –
Assemblyman Jane H. Todd of Tarrytown was out of the race today for Republican candidate for Congress from the newly-created 27th Congressional district, which is so heavily Republican that a party nomination is considered equivalent to election.

At a meeting of the Westchester County Republican Committee, held in the Eastview Junior High School last night, Ralph W. Gwinn of Bronxville was formally designated for candidate from the 27th while Ralph A. Gamble of Larchmont was named for the nomination from the 28th.

Miss Todd sat on the platform with Livingston Piatt, county leader, when the nominations were made, and Mrs. Virginia Morrison of Elmsford, who had supported Miss Todd, seconded the nomination of Gwinn.

The Brooklyn Eagle (May 27, 1944)

americavotes1944

Wives must show they are entitled to absentee vote

Although their husbands are entitled to vote in the fall elections under laws in this and many other states which provide, in substance, that no person gains or loses residence through entrance into military service, large number of wives of servicemen have lost their voting privileges because of the closing of homes to take up temporary quarters near army camps and naval stations.

To obtain an absentee ballot under the New York election laws, a wife must certify in person mat she will be unavoidably absent from the state election day because of duty or obligation imposed by business or professional activities. While it is reported most election boards are interpreting this provision liberally and tend to accept applications for absentee ballots, in the case of wives who have given up apartments or homes to live near their husbands it is held they are no longer residents. Thus, they are ineligible to vote.

Residence requirements in this state are one year in the state, four months in the county, city or village and 30 days in the election district.

americavotes1944

Heffernan: Has the Democratic Party no Mirabeau?

Some years ago, when President Roosevelt proclaimed himself the Master, and the dictatorial trait in his character began to manifest itself, my comment was a quotation of the servant of Louis XVI of France to his royal master: “It is not a riot, sire, it is a revolution!”

Now Mr. Roosevelt, for whose election Sidney Hillman’s CIO Committee on Political Action is prepared to spend millions of dollars, is styled the Commander-in-Chief, a title which he has a right to assume with respect to the Army and Navy but which none of his predecessors cared to accept in place of the honored one of President of the Republic.

There have been leaders of the Democratic Party which his Communist and New Deal adherents captured who have tried to prevent his leading us, in the words of John W. Bricker, down the road to state socialism. Farley tried it, Carter Glass tried it, John Garner tried it and Senators Wheeler and Byrd tried it.

But the claptrap of the New Deal political bravos, the prizes offered to labor in the form of a temporary orgy with paper money, backed by the taxing power of an administration that will tax to the bone; all these have prevailed. Mr. Roosevelt, his health permitting, will be the candidate again. And the public opinion polls recently published indicate that he has an edge on Governor Dewey, the presumptive Republican nominee.

And once more from that tragic story of the French Revolution which was the first step in the downward road to the abyss in which unhappy France now finds herself, I quote from what Malouet of the dying Mirabeau:

He was on the point of rendering great service to the state: shall I tell you how? By confessing to you his faults and pointing out your own; by preserving to you all that was pure in the Revolution and by energetically pointing out to you all its excesses and the danger of those excesses; by making the people affrighted at their blindness and the factious, at their intrigues.

Has the Democratic Party no Mirabeau?

Völkischer Beobachter (May 28, 1944)

Sensationeller Entscheid des US-Senats –
Ein Rüffel für Roosevelt

Lissabon, 27. Mai –
Roosevelt mußte in einem aufschlußreichen Einzelfall vor streikenden Arbeitern kapitulieren. Er erhielt gleichzeitig von seinem eigenen Senat einen Rüffel, da das juristische Untersuchungskomitee des US-Senats nach den nun abgeschlossenen Untersuchungen über seinen Verfassungsbruch durch die militärische Beschlagnahmung des Chikagoer Großwarenhauses Montgomery Ward & Co. entschied, daß der US-Präsident künftig seinen Exekutivbefehlen den Beweis der Verfassungsmäßigkeit hinzuzufügen hätte. Danach muß Roosevelt fortan bei jedem Exekutivbefehl die entsprechende Ziffer der US-Verfassung oder eine diesbezügliche Kongreßverfügung angeben.

Dieser Entscheid hat in den Vereinigten Staaten großen Staub aufgewirbelt. Die Angestellten des Warenhauses Montgomery hatten seinerzeit die Arbeit niedergelegt, da die Gesellschaft sich weigerte, einen abgelaufenen Tarifvertrag mit einer Gewerkschaft wieder zu erneuern. Der US-Präsident stellte darauf kurzerhand den bestreikten Betrieb unter Militärverwaltung, um die Wiederaufnahme der Arbeit zu erzwingen. Seine Anordnung stand jedoch im Widerspruch zu der Verfassung der Vereinigten Staaten, nach der Roosevelt zu diesem Vorgehen gegen einen Privatbetrieb, um den es sich bei dem Montgomery-Konzern handelte, nicht ermächtigt war. Es bleibt dahingestellt, wie weit der US-Präsident sich nun dem Entscheid des Senats fügen wird.

Die Republikaner sehen in dieser Schlappe Roosevelts eine hervorragende Chance für sich und wollen sie für ihre Propaganda zur nächsten Präsidentenwahl ausnützen. Sie kündigten in sensationeller Aufmachung die „Photographie des Jahres“ an. Das Bild soll einen alten Mann darstellen, der, grimmig dreinschauend und mit gefalteten Händen, von zwei US-Soldaten aus seinem Konzern herausgetragen wird. Der alte Mann ist Sewell Avery, der Vorsitzende des von Roosevelt vergewaltigten Montgomery-Ward-Konzerns. Er wurde gewaltsam aus dem eigenen Betrieb entfernt, da er sich weigerte, der Entscheidung, des Kriegsschlichtungsamtes nachzukommen.

Dieses Bild soll nun allen Amerikanern ein warnendes Beispiel dafür sein, was sie von Roosevelt in Zukunft zu erwarten haben, nämlich: Vergewaltigung, rücksichtslose Unterdrückung und unverschämte Einmischung des New Deal in die Rechte des amerikanischen Bürgers. Die Republikaner wollen diesen Propagandafeldzug unter dem vielsagenden Motto führen; „Dasselbe kann dir passieren.“

Um den skandalösen Zwischenfall in Chikago will die Republikanische Partei in Ihrer Wahlpropaganda weitere Punkte gegen Roosevelt konzentrieren wie etwa die Unzufriedenheit der Hausfrau über die Art der Rationierung, die Einstellung der Farmer gegen die übergroße Bürokratie, wie überhaupt das entsetzliche „Durcheinander und Querschießen bei den Kriegsanstrengungen in der Heimat.“ Ganz scharf wendet sie sich gegen die Untüchtigkeit der künstlich aufgeblasenen Roosevelt-Verwaltung, die den Krieg nur verlängere.

The Brooklyn Eagle (May 28, 1944)

americavotes1944

Rooney, Nolan push campaigns for Congress

By Joseph H. Schmalacker

Rival candidates in the special election for Congress from Brooklyn’s 4th Congressional district continued to step up their campaign activities yesterday against a background of doorbell-pulling and house-to-house canvassing to arouse voters for the balloting June 6.

William G. Nolan, the candidate nominated by the Republicans, came out with a statement through Republican county headquarters in which he asserted that “three terms of jitterbug government have convinced the electorate of the great need for more intelligent administration in Congress.”

Meanwhile, John J. Rooney, the Democratic-American Labor Party candidate, who is an assistant district attorney, announced the personnel of his campaign committee. The chairman is M. Henry Martuscello, also an assistant district attorney.

‘One project to another’

Defining “jitterbug government” as “the combined operation of the present administration in hopping from one project to another, without rhyme or reason; unsuccessful conduct of hundreds of bureaus and agencies, and the socialization of the country’s economic life,” Nolan’s statement added:

My opponent carries the banner of 100% New Dealism to a frantic pitch, but I take pleasure in refuting many of his utterances which are distorted and misrepresented.

Naturally, we are all interested in and wholeheartedly support all labor and social gains, but constructive government should come from the people by due process of legislation and Congressional action, rather than by executive order and bureaucratic decree.

Serving for Rooney

Named to Rooney’s campaign committee were the following:

Mrs. Christopher Barry (Bay Ridge civic worker), Louis C. Andreozzi (assistant district attorney and chairman of the 76th precinct CDVO), Mrs. Mary Tonry (past president of the Ladies Auxiliary Division No. 1, of the Ancient Order of Hibernians), Mrs. George J. Joyce (wife of Justice Joyce of the City Court), Al Torre (sport promoter), Mrs. Mary McQuade (active in women’s fraternal organizations), Joseph J. Glatzmayer (vice president of the Harbor Carriers of the Port of New York).

Also, Mrs. Katherine Neary (president of the women’s unit of the Catholic Circle), Anthony F. Crissalli, Mrs. Mae Burns (past county president, Kings County Ladies Auxiliary, Ancient Order of Hibernians), Walter T. Thomas. Mrs. Mary Sloan (president Women’s Federal Jurors Association, Eastern District), Mrs. Mary B. Sessa, Michael J. Daly, Jacob Hertz (president of Congregation Baith Israel Anshei Ernes), and Joseph P. Clavin (past president of the St. Patrick Society of Brooklyn). Mr. Daly becomes vice chairman of the committee and Mr. Hertz was named secretary.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties are concentrating their campaign activities on direct meetings with the voters. The campaign will conclude with a series of rallies during the current week.

The Brooklyn Eagle (May 29, 1944)

americavotes1944

Newsmen predict Governor Dewey has 50–50 chance with FDR

By Joseph H. Schmalacker

Albany, New York –
Governor Dewey’s White House qualifications and prospects, the question of his press relations and other subjects were put under the microscope here today in a poll of newspaper correspondents who have reported his activities since he assumed office Jan. 1, 1943.

Eight overall questions were submitted confidentially to 26 of his newspaper associates on Capitol Hill by John Mooney, legislative correspondent of the Albany Knickerbocker News. Twenty-three replied.

The 1944 national campaign’s $64 question – Dewey’s chances against President Roosevelt – found none of

However, most of the writers believed Dewey would poll a larger popular vote than Wendell L. Willkie received as the 1940 GOP nominee, thereby establishing an unwritten consensus that a Roosevelt-Dewey race would be a closer one, possibly of the photo-finish variety, than the campaign of four years ago. While none of the correspondents would predict Dewey’s election, their combined opinion is that his chances of defeating Roosevelt range up to 50%.

The correspondents stated they were convinced Dewey would be nominated and that, in fact, he is practically the nominee now.

Most of the replies expressed belief Dewey’s age (he is 42) was an asset rather than a liability for the Presidency. The dissenters said, “Age is important from the dictatorship angle. Age, experience, temper a man, make him less impetuous, more tolerant.”

With three exceptions, all the correspondents declared Dewey’s record as Governor has been a good one, although some assorted adroit publicity and headlines had overemphasized certain features.

In the critical category, it was said Dewey “neither pioneered nor advanced social legislation,” and that he had been fearful, rather than forceful, in certain respects. One objection raised was that he was “opportunistic” and “dictatorial.”

The correspondent’s consensus, with a few exceptions, is that Dewey has maintained press relations ranging from “friendly” to “cordial.” Three replies objected Dewey was not sufficiently frank and free at his press conferences.

Among the Republican Governor’s presidential assets, the poll listed: His records; his buildup; that he symbolizes the vast body of anti-New Deal sentiment and political philosophy; public acceptance of his current views on foreign policy; his showmanship and radio personality; his appeal to women voters (an important factor this year); his own vote-getting ability as Governor of New York, pivotal in the national picture; the pronounced GOP trend with Dewey riding the crest of that wave; “untainted as a politician,” and because his silence to the day of his nomination will make it possible for him, if he can do it, to make the issues of the campaign rather than to trail always on the defensive.

His major weaknesses in the national arena as seen by the reporters: His vacillation; past statements, and present inexperience in foreign affairs; “certain pressure and lobby groups behind him;” his reckless audacity; “all his talk about the tired old men will go out the window when they begin to show him the tricks he doesn’t know;” that he is not intimately known to any of the major figures on the international stage; President Roosevelt; the war.

americavotes1944

Dubinsky backs Roosevelt for another term

Boston, Massachusetts (UP) –
President David Dubinsky of the International Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union (AFL) endorsed a fourth term for President Roosevelt today.

Addressing 800 delegates representing some 305,000 members at the Garment Workers’ 25th Annual Convention, he called for government cooperation with industry in providing employment “for the great many millions who will lose their jobs on the day of the final armistice.”

Praising the New Deal as a “progressive national administration,” he said “Franklin Delano Roosevelt must and will be reelected President.”

He said:

Those who raise the cry of dictatorship expose their lack of faith in our government and in the democratic processes of government.

Address by Ohio Governor John W. Bricker
May 30, 1944

Delivered at the Governors’ Conference, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Bricker

Our representative system of government has responded amazingly to the crisis of war. The dictators have said that the democracies were decadent. They had proclaimed to the world that a free people could not be welded together into a strong, united and determined nation. American ingenuity has belied their accusations.

We have built, almost overnight, the mightiest Army and Navy in the world. American industry and agriculture, in spite of burdensome restrictions, have worked a miracle of war production. The American people are actuated by a single-minded determination to win this war. There is every evidence that we are now ready to strike decisive blows both in Europe and in the Pacific.

We cannot safely predict the length of the war. But I think it is the part of wisdom, in developing our post-war plans, to assume that the Axis powers may see at any time that they have nothing to gain by further resistance.

We may suddenly be confronted by problems of converting our economy to peacetime production and providing jobs for our returning soldiers. There is much to do. Nothing would be more encouraging to the American people than some substantial progress in the solution of our fiscal and taxation problems. These problems have confused enterprise and dampened the spirit of our people for more than a decade.

For six years, I have attended these conferences. At every meeting we have been considering the encroachment of the national government on state and local authority. We have had to fight our own government to keep our own rights. At this time of crisis there should be complete unity of purpose in all segments of our governmental authority. On the federal plan, we have built and produced mightily. We are serving America’s best interests when we battle to maintain it. This issue of centralized bureaucratic power as against a larger degree of local autonomy cuts across our fiscal and tax policies.

In considering our fiscal policies I am guided by two basic objectives. The first is the preservation of our federal system of government. The truth is that the states are threatened by an ever-growing centralization of power in Washington. The threat is so serious that today we face the question whether the states will remain active, cooperative and equally sovereign members of our governmental system, or whether they will be reduced to provincial administrative units with little or no self-government.

Indeed, the issue reaches to the very heart of the American form of government. Shall government be kept close to the hands of the American people and ever responsive to their guiding will, or shall it be completely usurped by an already highly centralized national authority which is ever growing more powerful? Shall the people preserve home rule or shall they sit passively by while it is being strangled to death? This is the issue to which the people must be constantly alert. To settle it, there must be a sweeping change in many current philosophies of government.

My second objective is that we must devise a system of taxation and adopt a scale of rates that will revitalize our entire economic machinery. To that end we must provide the necessary incentives for investment in industry and for production by management and labor. Before the war, our economic machinery was virtually on dead center because of unbalanced budgets, severe taxation and the overwhelming threats of higher taxation and restrictive legislation.

If government is to encourage, rather than hinder, full production and high employment, it must devise a system of taxation for the long run, not for the short pull. It must understand that frequent changes in fiscal policy throw our economic machinery out of gear and cause confidence to give way to misgiving and uncertainty. Government also must understand that if risks are to be taken, there must be a fair balance between opportunity for reward and hazard of loss.

In order to grasp fully the immediate and far-reaching significance of state and local fiscal policies, it is necessary to bear in mind certain trends which have been changing our public fiscal policies.

From the founding of our nation until the early 20th century, ours was essentially an agrarian economy. Most individuals felt far removed from the federal government – even from state government. Their governmental relations were primarily with the township or town and the county.

The federal government was concerned mainly with foreign relations, especially foreign commerce. At home it had the job of maintaining a small army and navy and improving internal waterways. Its financial requirements were easily met by indirect taxes, largely customs, and a few internal revenue duties of a sumptuary nature.

With the closing of the geographical frontier and the rapid growth of cities, the Machine Age was upon us. Soon a wider view was taken of interstate commerce. More businesses were held by the courts to be carrying on interstate commerce and hence came within the purview of Congress.

Thus began the more minute federal regulation of business which involved the organization of new federal agencies and the expansion of old ones. This led to the search for new sources of revenue. The income tax amendment was ratified in 1913 and immediately a new federal tax was imposed. World War I brought death taxes to the federal system. The Depression of the ‘30s saw the introduction of many more new taxes, such as those on payrolls, and the extension of old ones.

These developments had an adverse effect upon state and local governments. Confronted with their own increased financial responsibilities resulting from the Depression, they found their tax resources being cut into very severely by the revenue demands of the federal government. Nevertheless, they have continued, without forethought, to go along with a trend which, if continued, will lead to the loss of their financial independence. Our federal system is founded upon the necessity of maintaining strong, independent state and local governments. They cannot be destroyed without also destroying freedom. As Dean Pound said:

All experience shows that a domain in continental extent as always been ruled as an autocracy or as a federal government.

Or as Woodrow Wilson was moved to say:

The history of liberty is the history of the limitation of governmental power, not the increase of it. When we resist… concentration of power, we are resisting the processes of death, because concentration of power is what always precedes the destruction of human liberties.

It is true that now the states and local governments generally are in a relatively good financial position. Many states have accumulated surpluses. This present condition has resulted from more efficient and economical operation of state and local governments. It also resulted from the rise in the national income which started in 1939 and which was accelerated by the war in Europe, the defense program and, finally, our war production. Notwithstanding this condition, however, we should not be oblivious of the underlying currents which are inevitably washing away the very foundation of our state and local governments – their traditional financial independence. The time has come for the adoption of fiscal policies which will preserve that financial independence.

Attention should first be directed to the mainstay of local governments – the property tax. This has been severely reduced by the purchase of more and more land by the federal government, thus withdrawing it from the state and local tax rolls. As of June 30, 1937, it was estimated that total federal real estate holdings, including the public domain, were 395,000,000 acres. This was more than 20 percent of the total area of the country. If taxed at local rates, this federally owned property would have yielded some $91,000,000. That amount exceeds all collections from property taxes in 1939 in 34 of our 48 states.

Since Pearl Harbor, there has been, of course, further substantial acquisition of land by the federal government and its instrumentalities. The Defense Plant Corporation, for example, by December 1943, had acquired more than 10,000,000 acres and 20,000 city lots.

To make up the loss in revenue, instead of permitting the states and local governments even a limited exercise of their own taxing power, the federal government devised the scheme of “payments in lieu of taxes.” Adherence to this policy will help to destroy the financial independence of local governments.

Appropriate authorization for the local taxation of federally owned property, with proper restrictions, would help to maintain their financial independence. Even more important, all this property acquired for the conduct of the war, not needed for our permanent post-war military needs, should be returned to private ownership as soon as practicable after victory, thus restoring it to the local tax rolls.

The next threat to state and local governments to which we should direct our attention is the recent expansion of what might be termed the subsidy theory. This means that more and more functions of government heretofore locally administered and financed are becoming centralized. Changes in economic and social conditions obviously require, from time to time, a reallocation of governmental functions. But this should be done only when such a change results in greater benefit to the public at large with no loss in democratic control of the revenue raising and spending activities of the government assuming such function.

In 1932, federal subsidies to the states amounted to $217,000,000. By 1937, the figure had more than doubled. In 1941, it was more than triple, reaching $744,000,000. But this is not all. In 1941, in addition to the $744,000,000 granted to the states, over $95,000,000 went to local governments. Of all taxes collected in the United States in 1932, the federal government’s portion was 22 percent, leaving state and local governments 78 percent. In 1939, before World War II started, the share of state and local governments had dropped to 62 percent of all taxes, the federal government’s share having jumped to 38 percent.

Make no mistake about it, the most effective way to abolish the independence of state and local governments, and with it home rule in America, is by taking away their financial independence.

Coincident with the centralization of more and more of the taxing power in the federal government and the increase of federal subsidies to state and local governments, a similar trend has been going on within the states. There has been a steady expansion of the state taxing power with increased subsidies from the states to local governments.

It is perfectly natural that extension of the subsidy program should have some support from state and local officeholders. It is always more agreeable to a local official to have money to spend for the benefit of his constituents which he gets from the state capital or from Washington than it is to have to raise it by taxing his constituents who elect him. The same may be said of state officials with respect to federal grants. But we must realize the implications and results of this trend. State and local governments become a sham and a pretense if they cannot support themselves and must go to another government for handouts.

An excellent illustration of extending the subsidy theory info more and more fields has been the recent proposal of the federal government to subsidize the public schools of the nation. By dangling federal money before the eyes of the public schools, a very attractive lure is presented. But the difficulty is aside from the loss of financial independence, that there results a proportionate surrender of the states control over their educational systems. When an effort is made to change the government of a country, one of the first steps is to take over the education and training of the youth of that country. This is what Hitler did in Germany. I am opposed to the dictation of our educational policies from Washington.

The question then is: What is to be done in the face of these trends? I offer three recommendations.

First, it is essential that the strictest economy in government be practiced. This applies particularly to the federal government. Unless federal expenditures are limited to absolutely essential items, it is inevitable that the federal government must ultimately preempt the entire field of taxation, leaving nothing for state and local governments, have repeatedly pointed out that we may expect no substantial curtailment of federal expenditures until we abolish our present bureaucracy and return to a responsible cabinet government. There is a limit to the tax burden which our economy can bear.

Second, the states working together, the local governments working together and the two groups working with the Congress should take immediate steps toward appropriate segregation of tax bases, preserving appropriate fields of revenue for the national, state and local governments. One of the most serious problems confronting not only national, state and local governments, but especially the taxpayers, lies in overlapping tax bases. Our tax structure now is only a planless patchwork held together by nothing more substantial than political expediency.

Third, whenever state governments reach the point where their revenues may reasonably be anticipated to exceed necessary demands for any material period of time, instead of increasing local government subsidies, they should repeal such taxes as will best open fields of revenue for local governments. During recent years, the present administration in Ohio, after paying off its inherited deficits, has been confronted with the constant demand from local governments that the state’s surplus be distributed to them. It was my position last year that had we not been confronted with the uncertainties of war and the necessity of providing for a much-needed post-war building program, we should have launched upon a state tax repeal program, rather than one of increasing subsidies to local governments.

Of equal importance to the establishment of fiscal policies to maintain financial independence of state and local governments is the shaping of those policies so as to aid and encourage rather than stifle and suppress American private enterprise. Sound governmental fiscal policies, national, state and local, are the foundation stones of a stable economy and American prosperity.

There is need for further cooperation between the states in extension of reciprocity provisions in tax statutes. In view of recent decisions of the Supreme Court, two or more states may now tax the same income, the same inheritance or the same property. The necessity for appropriate reciprocal legislation has become more pressing in order to avoid this form of double taxation. While in a sense multiple taxation has existed for many years, it is my position that there is no justification for the imposition of such inequitable double taxation as I have mentioned. Appropriate reciprocal legislation will also relieve not only business, but individual citizens from double taxation arising from questions of domicile.

I am convinced that constructive work along these and other similar fines will aid rather than hamper business, to which we must look for high employment. But if this program is to be effective, the federal government also must do its part. This means that recent fiscal and tax policies of the federal government must be completely overhauled.

The federal government should balance its budget at the earliest possible date. That would give more jobs than all the made-work the Government could possibly plan. Simplification and stability of tax laws are desperately needed. We are given little encouragement along this line now. Adherence to the principle that the taxing power exists primarily for the purpose of raising necessary revenue and should not be used as an undercover method of effecting social changes is also necessary.

Moreover, there is a vital need for a sane and constructive federal tax policy that will stimulate incentive and encourage venture capital. Federal taxes should be reduced as soon as possible after victory. Such action would enable business to map out constant fear of changes, and to provide jobs for all who wish to work.

The recent Baruch-Hancock report went even farther. It said: “Until it is definitely known that post-war taxes are to be reduced, the launching of new enterprises and the expansion of existing ones will be deterred.” Accordingly, it recommended “that a post-war tax law be drafted now, during the war, and put on the shelf to go into effect at the end of the war.”

This proposal points the way toward the kind of federal tax policy that will be needed for reconstruction and rehabilitation after the war. In my judgment, the pre-war federal policy of spend, waste, borrow and tax will wreck American economy if continued in the post-war period. A nation which builds its financial house upon shifting sands of deficit financing in peace times cannot survive as a nation.

Nor can such a nation be a powerful influence in world affairs. The United States must help solve such problems as currencies, credits, air rights, markets and international trade. So long as the world is inflicted with discriminatory trade agreements, quotas, cartels, exchange wars, barter systems and the like, there can be little assurance of an enduring peace. Collaboration between nations in solving world economic and monetary problems is just as necessary as collaboration in solving world diplomatic and political problems.

But for all these purposes America must be strong. To be strong, to be influential, to be helpful in the world, we must, above everything else, build our own house upon the solid rock of financial solvency, equity and justice. Our power to help others will be dependent upon the degree in which we strengthen private enterprise and preserve individual opportunity.

Let us then remember, as the guiding principle of domestic policy, that our state and local governments, as well as the national government, are essential to our federal system. The strength of America stems from the practice of representative government in the towns, the cities, the counties and the states of this nation. When state and local governments become paralyzed, the door is open to every form of absolutism and every form of demagogy. When local responsibility is destroyed, citizenship atrophies and dies. But when state and local governments flourish, when men and women practice representative home rule, the foundations of the Republic are secure. The more the history of the Republic is written at the crossroads and the less at the Capitol, the freer we shall be.

The Free Lance-Star (May 30, 1944)

americavotes1944

Dewey hits past foreign policy

Says America must no longer sit on the sidelines

Hershey, Pennsylvania (AP) –
Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York says Americans “must not again sit on the sidelines as mere observers and commentators” while new warlords grow strong.

The leading figure in the Republican presidential nomination picture told the 36th Governors’ Conference that “our foreign affairs must be so conducted that disasters like the present one will not recur… the people are determined to join in preventing future wars.”

Holding that civilians are “worried about inefficiencies and bungling” on the home front, Dewey said:

While there has been a maze of regimentation, some necessary, some inexcusable, our strength at home has come wholly from the genius of our free men in industry and the devotion of our workers and farmers to their jobs. Our success or failure after the war will depend on whether we, as a nation, take to heart the lesson the war has taught us.

If we permit the continuance of the regimentation which some so earnestly desire, we shall fail. We cannot practice in peace the centralization which brought totalitarianism to our enemies and be either free or successful.

Dewey asserted that in the pre-war years:

We had a 10-year depression, ended only by the feverish and deadly stimulus of war… no material reason was adequate to explain what happened.

The task of political leaders, he said, is to unify – “to keep and build our newfound faith in God.”