Revolting Conclusion

The seven Senators who drifted into the office of Vermont's George Aiken one morning last week hardly looked like mutineers. New York's freshman Senator Kenneth Keating paused to adjust his red bow tie for photographers; California's Tom Kuchel blinked into the TV floodlights, turned on a grin. New York's Jake Javits volunteered that he would be the notetaker. Then, with doors closed, they compared notes on their efforts to stir up a revolt of the Senate's liberal Republicans (TIME, Dec. 29). When they came out into the blaze of photography 2 1/2 hours later, they had their rebels' choice for the key post of Senate Republican leader--and some glum afterthoughts about his chances.

Out of Sympathy. The liberals considered three candidates to oppose Illinois' Everett McKinley Dirksen, the conservative heir apparent to retired William Fife Knowland. The three: craggy, independent George Aiken, genial Tom Kuchel and Kentucky's courtly John Sherman Cooper, onetime (1955-56) Ambassador to India and a strong booster for Eisenhower foreign policy. Vermonter Aiken, who had masterminded the revolt, refused to run. Explained he: The Republican hierarchy would be top-heavy with New Englanders (New Hampshire's Styles Bridges is already policy chairman); Massachusetts' Leverett Saltonstall is conference chairman; he himself had work enough in the Foreign Relations Committee and as senior Agriculture Committee Republican. Left unvoiced was a more compelling reason, which he had confided to close friends. Like liberal Republicans inside President Eisenhower's Cabinet (TIME, Jan. 5), Aiken is out of sympathy with Ike's current "hold the line" budget philosophy, has no enthusiasm for implementing it as minority leader: "I just felt that I could not carry the Administration's banner."

In an effort to mollify the liberals, the G.O.P. conservatives had all but accepted Tom Kuchel for the second-ranking post of minority whip, so Kuchel bowed out for the leadership. Unanimous nominee: John Sherman Cooper. But of 34 Republicans in the new Senate, the liberals could depend on only twelve sure votes out of the 18 needed to win the day at this week's party caucus.

Out of Sympathy. With whispers abroad on Capitol Hill that Conservative Boss Styles Bridges was luring the uncommitted toward Dirksen in exchange for choice committee seats, the political mutineers at meeting's end could sense their desperate straits. Some shrugged off defeat, insisted that they had won after all, by demonstrating that the G.O.P. has a hardy core of liberals. Others held out hopes that a last-minute spread of the rebellion would save them. "All is not lost yet," said one bravely. "I think a lot of Senators are hearing from the grass roots about this right now."

But win or lose, the so-called Eisenhower Republicans had learned one thing in their brief uprising: they could count on no help whatever from Dwight Eisenhower. In fact, word seeped out of the White House that the President's inner circle was furious that the anti-Dirksen forces had had the temerity to call themselves Eisenhower Republicans at all.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.