University Daily Kansan Thursday. Oct. 21, 1954
Reprints—
Time Looks at Election Sees Democrat Vote Gain
(Editor's Note: This editorial is reprinted from the current issue of, TIME magazine.)
In a littered office at Republican national headquarters one day last week, a worn GOP tactician looked up from his master list of congressional districts, nervously reshuffled the foot-high pile of reports on his desk and breathed: "Thank God it isn't next week." Only a few blocks away at Democratic national headquarters, a party tactician juntily swung his feet up on his desk, carefully straightened his tie (miniature dogs—in honor of Charlie Wilson—on a black background) and sighed: "Oh, if it were only next week."
Almost everywhere that politicians gathered, the tactician's agreement was accepted as political fact: if the election were held this week, the Republican party would lose control of the House of Representatives, and perhaps of the Senate. Explained a Washington pundit last week: "Lots of voters still like like but feel quite free to vote Democratic—out of vague protest against something-or-other."
Widespread among voters was the feeling that this election did not matter much. The shift—if there is a shift—would probably be by a narrow margin. Since neither Democratic nor Republican congressmen have been obedient to party discipline, what difference would it make which side had a numerical advantage?
This line of reasoning missed some basic facts about contemporary U.S. politics. More than ever before congressmen and congressional candidates are trying to read the public mind, rather than to persuade the voters that such-and-such a course is right. A Democratic victory that included the re-election of liberal Paul Douglas, for instance, would be interpreted by scores of ear-flapping congressmen of both parties as a sure sign that the nation had swung leftward again. Similarly, the defeat of such Eisenhower Republicans as New Jersey's Clifford Case together with victory for right wing Republicans would reopen the split in the Republican party, which this campaign has done much to heal. Facing the voters, the right-wing Republicans struck their flags and yelled to President Eisenhower for help. If his coattails pull the party through with majorities in both houses, there is not going to be much future argument about who's in charge.
After the election it will be clear that every shade and nuance of the returns will bear heavily upon future policy. Eisenhower and the 83rd Congress swung the nation off one course, started it on another. But it is by no means committed to the new direction. It can swing back, or it can fall into a two-year interlude where the President is relatively helpless and Congress breaks into four warring groups: right- and left-wing Democrats, right- and left-wing Republicans.
Presently, voter apathy is so thick it can be cut with a knife. A recent Gallup poll found that only 21 per cent of voters had given "quite a lot" of thought to the coming election, while 19 per cent had given it "some" thought and 60 per cent "little or none." A year from now it may be hard to believe that the nation did not realize in advance that the 1954 election would set the political scene for 1956 and beyond.
Life can be beautiful. Maybe. But not for the bleary-eyed college student who considers the end of November too far away for a vacation. Besides, what would be wrong with turkey in October?
Burke, Bender Battle Over Taft's Senate Seat in Ohio
(Editor's Note: This is another in a series of articles on next month's key Senate elections.)
The two Ohio senatorial candidates are battling for the two remaining years of the term of the late Sen. Robert A. Taft, each hoping to benefit from the popularity of two political figures.
Thomas A. Burke, Democratic senator, and George H. Bender, Republican representative, are matched in the Ohio senatorial race Nov. 2, which will play an important part in the fate of the next Congress. Sen. Burke is filling out Sen Taft's position until the election as an appointee of the Democratic governor, Frank J. Lausche.
Sen. Burke is attacking the Eisenhower administration in his campaign while riding on the coattails of the governor, who has won by large majorities in the otherwise Republican state. Gov. Lausche is running for his fifth term.
Rep. Bender, serving his seventh term in the House, is strongly backing the President's program, referring to his voting record of the past two years. A strong admirer of Sen. Taft, he hopes to draw his support from the late senator's popularity.
Ohio has not elected a Democratic senator since 1934 (Alvin Vic Donahey), a fact which seemingly gives Rep. Bender the edge. Added to this advantage are the records of past elections in the state. Sen. Taft was elected in 1950 by a 430,000 majority, attributed to his sweeping of Ohio's labor vote. Sen. John Bricker was re-elected in 1952 by a 315,000 majority.
Political leaders are not certain how much help Gov. Lausche will be to Sen. Burke. Gov. Lausche has made no statements in regard to the Eisenhower administration in his gubernatorial campaign, while Sen. Burke has spoken against the GOP rule. It is said that Gov. Lausche has his eye on the Democratic presidential nomination in 1956 or that he will run for the Senate.
Both candidates are complaining of the disinterest on the part of the voters, and are seeking methods to get campaigns under way.
Sen. Burke is being supported by both the CIO and AFL. In 1950 the union bosses fought Sen.
Taft's nomination, but apparently failed to influence the workers themselves, who voted strongly for him. Because of this union failure, it seems likely that the labor officials will not fight so strongly against Rep. Bender.
Sen. Burke does not have the campaign experience of his opponent, but possesses a strong personality and is said to make friends easily. Rep. Bender's backers claim that their candidate has the most followers and are counting on the Ohio voters to support Mr. Eisenhower.
Rep. Bender is a handshaker and a lover of party rallies, bands, and speeches. He was elected to the Ohio Senate at the age of 22. During the present campaign he is staking everything on Mr. Eisenhower's policies.
In contrast to Rep Bender's experience, Sen. Burke's political career has been confined to Cleveland, where he served four terms as mayor, a record for that office. Although a popular mayor, he announced just before Sen. Taft's death that he would not run again and would retire to private life.
In the last session of the 83rd Congress Rep. Bender voted in favor of each significant issue except the atomic energy bill of July 22 and the omnibus farm bill introduced Aug. 9.
The atomic energy bill was an amendment authorizing the Atomic Energy commission to produce electric power and other forms of energy from nuclear fission and requiring that preference be given to public bodies and co-operatives in disposing of excess power from AEC plants. The bill was passed by a close margin—45 for and 41 against.
The omnibus farm bill, amended by Sen. Andrew Schoeppel (R.-Kan.), supported five basic commodities on a flexible scale ranging from 82.5 per cent to 90 per cent of parity in 1955. The bill was passed, also by a close margin—49 for and 44 against.
Preinduced
Both candidates live in Cleveland. Sen. Burke's father was active politically, serving as Cleveland's coroner. Sen. Burke will be 56 next month. Nancy Neville.
Nancv Neville
William Fell. Compton college, ran 100 yards in a football uniform, carrying a ball in 10.6 seconds. Glen Davis, Army, accomplished the same feat in 10.8 seconds while he was a member of the Los Angeles Rams.
WATERBURY, Conn.—(UP)—When Mrs. Henry G. Roberts celebrated her 105th birthday she was asked which president she liked best. Mrs. Roberts, who has lived during the terms of 25 presidents, answered, "All the Republican ones."