The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1928-01-05

Utl Ddlly 4NSWSs
Former Governor Clifford PinchOt
of Pennsylvania Wants To Make
Certain That Corruption At Elec-
tions, Such AS Existed In His Own
State During the Campaign Last
Fall, Will Not Again Occur and
Suggests A Remedy For Such An
Evil.
Mr.. BENZ. H. Sincell, Editor,
The Republican,
Oakland, Md.
Dear Mr.. Sincell:-
Now that the exclusion of Ware and
Smith from the U. S. Senate is as
sured, the next step is to make certain
that no such corruption of the ballot
will occur again.
We need to set by law limit to
the amount of money that can be
spent in an election for national
office (such as Senator or Congress
MANI, and any candidate whose cam
paign expenses go beyond that limit
should forfeit HIS election. To make
that workable every candidate should
be required to appoint an agent (and
sub-agents if necessary through
whom and through whom alone all
campaign expenses would be paid.
Nobody else should be allowed to
spend a cent under severe penalties.
In that way all the money would
pass through the hands of one man,
and the total cost of any campaign
could be actually known and effec-
lively limited.
But what should the limit be? OBJ
viously, money enough to conduct a
campaign in Nevada, with less than
100000 people, or in Michigan, with
100000 would not get far in Penn
sylvania with 10,000,000. Obviously,
again, the limit must be fixed at so
much per inhabitant or per voter and
not at so much per State.
The present limit set by Federal
law is in fact no limitation at all, for
it allows unlimited spending for pos
tage, printing, and most other items
of campaign cost.
The Pennsylvania Committee of rs.
non-partisan body, appointed to
consider the whole problem of clean
elections after certain frauds by the
Ware machine became known, last
year recommended for primary cleo
lions limit for all expenditures of
every legal sort equal to ten cents
for each vote cast by the candidates
party at the last general election for
any office in the candidates district.
That would result in Pennsylvania.
for example, on the basis of the cleo
ton in which Ware ran, in limit of
$4,000 in a primary campaign for
the United States Senate.
The same general principle of limi-
tation, if not the same specifice limit,
can be applied, of course, to general
election as we'll as to primary.
The amount of the limit is very i'm
portant. If the number of cents per
voter is too large, the purchase of
elections will not be prevented. If it
lis made too small, an independent
candidate could seldom or never win
against an organized machine. Since
it costs five cents to send one letter
to one voter, the limit of ten cents
would not appear unreasonably high.
The punishment for exceeding the
limit should be loss of the election.
If any candidate Cor his authorized
agent) spends money beyond the legal
limit, or for any purpose not allowed
by law, his nomination or election
should be void. The point is to make
any candidate who cheats lose the
office ne cheated to get.
If candidate is guilty of fraud or
of conniving at fraud, in that case
also he should lose the Office he cheat
ed to get. That will be far better
deterrent than merely putting some
crooked minor election official in jail,
desirable as that is also.
Other things are necessary, such as
requiring all contributions and ex-
penditures larger than, say, $500 to
be made by check; preventing num-
Der of candidates running together as
one ticket from spending more than
one candidate running alone as one
ticket; and complete publicity of cam
paign expenses.
But the main thing is to make buy
ing or stealing elections improbable.
A man who buys or steals votes to
win an election should lose it even
if he wins.
A bill embodying the foregoing
principles is in preparations and will
shortly be introduced in Congress.
If you care to do so, l would be
glad to have Won make any use Won