Passion, Pageantry & Platform

It was a big political week--like in a big political year. Pageantry ran high, and so did passion. Big names were on the line; big decisions were made, at the polls and in convention halls.

In California, Richard Nixon, the man who lost the presidency by the barest of margins, ran with the same intensity for the right to run for the lesser office of Governor. In Massachusetts, the Kennedy family, unafraid of the slings and arrows from lesser breeds, proudly ran its youngest son through a convention gauntlet, and saw him emerge the victor. The loser was kin to the Speaker of the House, but no matter--the Kennedys know how to win and patch up. In Connecticut, always considered a bellwether state, no fewer than six Republicans spent lavishly of their blood, sweat and cash, and fought through eight ballots at a party convention for the chance to be the man who might beat a Democratic Governor in November.

But there is more to politics than men and elections and victories. There are principles, and stands, and statements of belief. In a pragmatic America, these principles and beliefs are usually stated--in fact, acted out--in the day-to-day clash of men in Congress, where votes are cast, as well as speeches made. But every once in a while there is a need for a summing up, or a restatement of belief. Not immutable principles or irrevocable doctrines, but some facts and opinions to fuel the arguments and feed the discussions in the immediate future.

Such a time had come for the Republican Party, whose Congressional members felt that there was altogether too much attention, publicity, image-building and all that jazz emanating from the skilled practitioner in the White House. What the Republicans did, naturally, was to set up a committee. It consisted of six Senators and six Representatives, and was led by Wisconsin's energetic Congressman Melvin R. Laird, 39.

A skilled veteran of four Republican Convention platform fights, Laird drove the committee hard in twice-weekly meetings. He solicited the views of top Republicans in and out of Congress, showed a 4,000-word draft to Dwight Eisenhower, accepted some of Ike's ideas verbatim, followed the ex-President's advice to cut the document to 2,500 words.

Laird's statement had the conventional weaknesses of party platforms in America.

In its attempt to embrace all Republicans, it included bland statements that could be subscribed to by a lot of Democrats and all members of the Motherhood Party. It came out foursquare, for instance, for "a thorough overhaul of the tax system to encourage production, build jobs, and promote savings and investment." But it also articulated issues that Republicans of all stripes can stand on against the Democrats in 1962--and beyond. Among them: BUDGETS: "The economic responsibility of government requires a halt to the upward spiral of federal spending, especially for nondefense purposes. This responsibility requires more than lip service to a balanced budget and reduction of the federal debt." LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS: "Government should exercise impartiality and forbearance when the immediate economic interests of management and labor come into conflict. We want government to be pro-business and pro-labor." FARM SCANDAL: "The present farm problem in large part was created by government. Problems of surplus must be met ... by adjusting price supports to permit the development and growth of markets and to remove incentives for overproduction." MEDICAL CARE : "We reject attempts to run a legislative bulldozer through the structure of voluntary health insurance and private medicine. Effective tax relief for medical and hospital insurance should be given to all. We support government action to increase the coverage of voluntary insurance plans and to help older citizens having difficulty meeting the costs of adequate coverage." COLD WAR PROPAGANDA: "America should take the offensive in psychological warfare through an information agency more willing to attack Communist weakness and to speak affirmatively, not apologetically, of freedom." "The current Administration," said the statement, "has shown little understanding of or concern for, institutions that buttress freedom at home--separation of powers, checks and balances, state and local responsibility, and a free competitive economy . . . The Administration's lack of sympathy toward a free competitive economy has been made plain by many of its principal advisers. They have expressed the pessimistic theory that the economy can attain a satisfactory rate of growth and avoid mass unemployment only through heavy-handed direction and control by government."

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