Evening star., 1936-04-29
The Two-Thirds Rule.

The edict of the Roosevelt Democratic
high command that the two-thirds rule
for nominating presidential and vice
presidential candidates in the party's
national conventions must 60 is rather
formally announced by Chairman James
A. Farley of the Democratic National
Committee. The two-thirds rule is as old
as the national political conventions OF the
Democratic party. 1t was adopted when
Andrew Jackson, at the close OF his first
term in the White House, decreed that
a national convention should be called
to nominate in this case a vice presl-
Dental candidate, Martin Van Buren, of
New York. Van Buren,, who had been
Secretary of State in the Jackson cab
met, was Jackson's choice as his sue
cessor. The vice presidency was to be
the stepping stone. The old method of
nominating candidates by action OF the
State Legislatures was abandoned be-
cause the Legislature of Jacksons own
State was opposed to Van Buren,. In
that convention, called to nominate Van
Buren along with Jackson, the two
thirds rule was adopted and has con-
tinued in effect ever since.
The two-thirds rule, under which a
candidate for the Democratic presiden-
tial nomination must have two-thirds
of the votes cast by the delegates attend
ing national convention in order to
become the party standard bearer, is
without real rhyme or reason. 1t has
caused the Democrats no end of ouble
on several occasions. The argument ad-
vanced in support of the two-thirds rule
is that a presidential candidate should
be able to command the goodwill and
support of two-thirdS of the delegates.
This would show the party we'll united
back of him. AS matter of fact, the
two-thirds rule has caused some terrible
intra-party battles, which left serious
wounds. The Madison Square Garden
convention in 1924, which fought through
more than hundred ballots before the
nominations of John w. Davis and
Brother Charles Bryan were finally
made, is case in point. In Baltimore
in 1912. the party was torn by dissen-
sion over Champ Clark of Missouri and
Woodrow Wilson of New Jersey. Fortu-
nately for the Democrats in that year,
the Republicans engaged in an even
more fatal row.
The two-thirds rule has been carried
along from one Democratic National
Convention to the next, largely by its
own inertia and through the belief Of
the candidates and their friends that
they might reap some benefit, perhaps,
through deadlock in the balloting.
There has been a theory, too, on the
part of southern Democrats that the two
thirds rule offered a veto power to be
used against an aspirant for the presi-
dental nomination who might be hostile
to the interests of the South.
A President of the United States is
elected by majority of the electoral
votes of the States. 1t is reasonable that
he should be nominated by a majority
of the delegates to the national political
convention of his party. The majority
rule has obtained always in the national
conventions of the Republican party.
The followers of President Roosevelt
just before the opening of the Chicago
convention in 1882 declared for abroga-
tion of the two-thirds rule and for a
majority rule to nominate their candi-
date. AS matter of fact, they had the
votes in the convention to put through
such a change in the rules. The plan
was abandoned, however, when some of
the older Democratic leaders supporting
Roosevelt urged that, if carried through,
it might cause great bitterness. This
year, Roosevelt is without opposition, in
a practical sense, for denomination.
Chairman Farley and others argue that
the time is ripe for abrogation of the
two-thirds rule. Perhaps they are look
ing to the future. 1t may be easier to
nominate a Democratic candidate of
their liking in 1910 under a majority
r,,1o