Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-01-14

Criticisms Of campaign expenditures
which have followed other presidential
elections are largely lacking in comment
on the new high marks set in the 1928
battle by both major political parties.
Neither side, it is conceded, has any
ground for condemning the opposition.
THE truth is" declares the Baltl-
more Sun, that the public generally
recognizes that an enormous amount
can be honestly expended in national
election in which thirty-f1ve million
voters take part. 1t Is chiefly concerned
in ascertaining how 1t is provided and
how it is used. If satisfied that the
sources of contributions are not obJec-
tionable and that funds are properly
expended, there is disposition to ignore
the claim that presidential elections are
being debauched. Such belief should
not, however, cause the slightest ceSsa-
ton of effort TO procure publicity that
will keep the Nation informed as to
what is going on about Hoover ana
Smith funds, as well as those OF lesser
candidates"
"Such large OUTLAWS of money In ma
tional campaigns are not healthy now
ever. contends the Lynchburg Advance,
quoting the total figure as about Sl2,-
600 900, and that paper makes the COM
ment on the real cost OF electing a
presidential ticket. mo figures are
available-and never will be-to snow
the bearing of these huge expenditures
ON the final result. In close States,
money may hare been a deciding factor.
but there is no way of knowing. This
much is certain, however: Thousands
upon thousands of dollars were wasted.
Enormous amounts of literature OF every
description were sent out by both par
ties. The cost was huge, but 1t IS our
honest belief that 80 per cent OF 1t found
its way to the waste paper baskets With
out being opened"
THE fact that the Democratic war
chest was unprecedentedly well stocked"
in the opinion of the Philadelphia Eve
ming Bulletin, robbed the opposition Of
a traditional weapon, the 'slush fund
charge In general the country was dis
posed to take the common-sense view
that a nationwide campaign with an
appeal to constituency of 36,0OO,00o
runs legitimately into substantial cost.
expenditure of which Is entirely proper
and unavoidable. Radio broadcasting,
for instance, cost the Democrats, &C
$500, 900, and the Republicans as much"
A tribute to the honesty Of the CAM
paign Is voiced by the Salt Lake Trlb-
une with the statement: ''Millionaires
gave largely of their means to the party
whose presidential candidate they IA
vored, but their contributions were
openly made and there IS not the least
suspicion they either expected or de-
sired special favors at the hands OF the
successful candidate at the time OF
making their subscriptions" The Bel
lingham Herald adds that 80 far there
has been no hint of scandal and little
general criticism" that possibly one
reason Is that the contributions were
by publicity and another that
neither party was in position to point
the finger of accusation at the other on
account of the high cost Of the cam
paign"
1.-The Democratic leaders have the
unpleasant task, which the Republicans
in an earlier campaign found demoral-
izing, of raising funds to meet a heavy
deficit" says the Buffalo Evening News,
observing that Mr.. Hoover had insisted |
on the budgeting system employed by |
President Coolidge in 1924, and that |
Republicans now make the gratifying |
exhibit Of moderate expenditures, bal |
anced books. no debts and substantial |
surplus" This result Is credited by the |
Columbus Evening Dispatch to the fact |
that the national committee did some |
thing out of the ordinary when 1t chose |
for It's treasurer a Cleveland banker"
X X
In the opinion Of the Charleston |
Evening Post 'the Republicans could as |
we'll have had 10 or IA or % millions |
II so much had been necessary to carry |
the election for them. They had only |
to make their wants known" continues !
that paper, land the money would como |
In. AS matter Of fact, there was |
doubtless expended In their behalf al J