OCR Text |
Show ! Itruekart'H Washington Digest MIXTURE OF RELIEF CASH AND POLITICS DANGEROUS ' Candidates Methods of Influencing Voters Scored by Washington Observer; Suggests Return to Election of Senators by Legislatures By WILLIAM BRUCKART WNO Service, National Press BIdg., Washington, D. C. ' WASHINGTON. I had finished reading my evening paper a few nights ago when I found myself quite down in the dumps. The news of the day was disturbing. It was vicious news In its implications. On page one, there was an account ac-count of the bitter factional fight within the Democratic ranks in Tennessee. Ten-nessee. Sen. George Berry was - 'seeking re-election rather, renomi-, renomi-, nation and Senator McKellar, his icolleague, was fighting tooth and nail to prevent It Party control in the state was the objective, and Marshall's Apology Thomas R. Marshall, Vice President of the United Slates in the Wilson administration, admin-istration, once said: ' have only one apology that I know of to make for my political life. I apologize to the American people for having been in favor of the election of United Slates senators by the people." There, thinks William Bruckart, is the key to today's to-day's problem. Let state legislators pick U. S. senators, sen-ators, he says, and we'll be rid of the demagogue who is elected by his ability to promise more than the opposition. op-position. there were countless charges of the use of money, federal relief money, state payroll money, other money. There was, likewise, a fight going on next door. In Kentucky, Gov. "Happy" Chandler was seeking the Democratic nomination to the senate sen-ate and Sen. "Dear Alben" Barkley wanted to be renominated and reelected. re-elected. Also, the New Dealers in Washington, from President Roosevelt Roose-velt on down wanted Senator Bark-ley Bark-ley sent back, and the President had gone into Kentucky to tell the voters vot-ers of his views. Again: money, federal relief money, state payroll money, charges of attempted trades of federal judgeships so that there would not have to be a bitter primary pri-mary fight like that which came. Mr. Hopkins' Idea on Relief Voles Backfires Here in Washington, there was the greatest spender of all time, Mr. Harry Hopkins, head of the Works Progress administration and professional profes-sional reliever of destitute persons whether they are politicians or the poor, popping off another idea. Mr. Hopkins was saying that 90 per cent of the relief clients would vote for President Roosevelt for a third term. It was a statement that immediately im-mediately caused a backfire from Capitol Hill where Senator Sheppard of Texas was saying, as chairman of the committee investigating the use of relief money in politics, that there must be something done about such methods of influencing voters. In another place. I read how Governor Gov-ernor Earle of Pennsylvania was calling the state legislature into special spe-cial session there to enact law3 that would prevent a grand jury from investigating in-vestigating some of the governor's acts. The call for the special session ses-sion had been preceded, of course, by a terrific political fight over the Democratic nomination for United States senator in Pennsylvania, which was won by Governor Earle. The governor preferred to have the investigating done by members of the state legislature, if there was to be an inquiry, rather than by an independent in-dependent group. The only way to prevent it was by a law taking away the authority of the courts and the grand Jury. There were other states involved, " too. Senator McAdoo, who is seeking seek-ing renomination as the Democratic senatorial candidate In California, was under fire. Some of hts campaigners, cam-paigners, tt was charged, were using us-ing coercion 83 well as federal relief re-lief funds, while out in South Dakota opponents of Governor Eerry, now the Democratic nominee for the United States senate, were bringing forth a new set of charges. They informed the senate committee here that the Farm Security administration administra-tion in South Dakota had been sending send-ing out a pres3 release that had nice lhin(!3 to say about Governor Berry. The press release was two years old, of course, but the FSA was mailing out many of them to voters and paying no postage on thern. It was another case of using the franking privilege, said tho accusers. ac-cusers. Politics Hit New Low With No Change in Sight It was enough to make one sick at the: stomach; here w;is politics In a nr-w qu;igrnlre, and no signs to indicate in-dicate that It is not a permanent condition. What, I thought, Is going go-ing to ho the type of men coming into the Unilerl Sl.-1l.e3 r.enate with sijeh background an lbe,f.' stonca indie in-die a led T And then, rather In disgust with the whole thing, I turned to a new book. The volume is titled "Notable "Nota-ble Virginia Bar Addresses." Among the 27 speeches listed there, I decided to read that by tha late Thomas R. Marshall. His address, ad-dress, like all of the others, was intended in-tended to preach good government and the obligations of the lawyer as well as the layman. In reading that speech, I came across this passage: "I have only one apology that I know of to make for my political life. I apologize to the American people for having been in favor of the election of United States senators sena-tors by the people. My reason for it was different from the reason of many men. I had gotten tired of voting for some old rum-nosed Democrat Dem-ocrat for the legislature in Indiana because a United States senator depended de-pended on him for election; and I thought that I could raise the grade of legislators in Indiana by letting the people elect the United States senators. Now, it was an altruistic movement to make that change in the organic law of the United States; but, ladies and gentlemen, when it has resulted in the spending of half a million dollars to elect a senator, I want to know if the old fashioned government would not have been better." Answer to' Today's Problem Given in 1920 And right there, I believe, is the guts of the present day problem. Mr. Marshall had held many elective elec-tive offices and the speech from which I quoted the above passage was made while he was vice president presi-dent of the United States. He was an observer and a student of politics. poli-tics. He saw in 1920 where we, as a people, were going and I have no doubt that he could have predicted exactly the present circumstances. ' When Senator Norris of Nebraska, once a Republican, then a Demo- crat, and now labeled as something j else, drove the constitutional amend- , ment through congress and cleared the way for direct election of United Unit-ed States senators, he accomplished : two things. (1) He made it possible possi-ble for the purest type of demagogue dema-gogue to win elections by his ability to "promise" more than the opposi- : tion, rewards, political patronage, pork barrel returns to the state and (2) he assured that vast sums of money can indeed, must be used to influence elections. And, in amplification am-plification of the second item, he made it possible for any administration, administra-tion, any dominant party, in control con-trol of the federal government to build up national and state ma-chinesjointlybyusing ma-chinesjointlybyusing federal money. Too Many Senators Out for Greatest Amount of Swag I grant that corporations, "vested interests," formerly had too much to say about the election of United States senators by state legislatures. But of the two, I have come to the conclusion that we had a better na- j tional administration and particularly particular-ly a better senate under that condition condi-tion than under the system where every voter cast3 a ballot directly for a United States senatorial nominee. nom-inee. That is why 75 per cent of the present senate members are nothing more or less than salesmen who are trying to collect for their states the greatest amount of swag which they can put over with their brother senators. That is why, too. day after day, we have watched cliques formed and trading done over legislation in the senate. The senators either are trying to make good on demagogic promises or they are building a storehouse to be used in the next campaign. Senator Norris may have thought he was performing a great service Ao the American people and he may have felt that he was building a monument for hi3 name, but I am firmly convinced he did quite the contrary. For, be it known, were it not for Mr. Norris' monumental amendment to the Constitution of the United States there could hardly be such an outrage committed as that by Mr. Hopkins. It must be remembered that Mr. Hopkins never nev-er was elected; he i3 an appointee of the President of the United States and Is responsible to him alone. So when Mr. Hopkins flirts with a state electorate, there can be no other interpretation placed upon his action ac-tion than that he Is using the influence influ-ence available as a result of his dictatorship dic-tatorship over relief distribution. It all depends, of course, upon how one views the functions and purposes of the United Stales senate. sen-ate. If one wants the senate to be Just a glorified house of representatives, representa-tives, able to maintain itself solely on what pap It is able to lay In the laps of voters then, we ought to keep the present system. If, however, how-ever, otic believes oa I do that the senate Is comprised, or should be, of senators of the United States Instead In-stead of senators of a slate variety unconcerned with the Union of states, then there could well be repeal re-peal of the amTiflirient. Wrslern NowjpapT Union. |