Evening star., 1948-07-08
New. Dealers Efforts
To Ditch Truman Seen
As Political Mystery
President Has Followed
Left Wing Position on
Bio Issues Since 1945
Bv David Laurence

ne DlRgeSt mystery III pOllIlCS
today is why the New Dealers want
to ditch President Truman and give
the nomination next week to some
one else.
The President has done exactly
what the New Dealers wanted him
to do on major issues ever since he
took Office in April, 1945. He vetoed
q tax-reduction bill three times and
said it was intended ito benefit the
rich" which is the basic argument
of New Dealism.
Mr.. Truman vetoed the Taft
Hartley act and has consistently
denounced that law ever since 1t
was passed over his veto.
Mr.. Truman urged continuance
of price control to fight imitation.
which is exactly what the New
Dealers urged.
Mr.. Truman advocated Federal
housing and, by messages and state
ments, championed the New Deal
position on that issue.
Mr.. Truman advocated "clvil
rights" legislation, which is what
the New Dealers advocate.
New Dealers Unsatisfied.
There has not been an important
issue involving New Deal philosophy
in which Mr.. Truman has not been
on the left wing side. Yet he
doesn't seem to have satisfied the
New Dealers.
It has been said that those who
sponsored the Eisenhower draft
have done so because they felt Mr..
Truman couldn't win. If the pres
ent occupant of the White House
with his record on New Deal issues
cannot be expected to win, what
New Dealer can win on that same
record?
Entirely apart from these domes-
tic issues, Mr.. Truman has made a
significant record on matters OF
foreign policy. He has been firm
against Russia when both major
parties demanded firmness, He
has supported and obtained from
Congress the adoption Of the Euro
pean Recovery Program. He has
wobbled on some issues but on the
whole he has been answering in
his support of the United Nations.
What other position would the New
Dealers have wished him to take?
The truth is that the attitude OF
the Truman Democrats in the
North is puzzling. There is an un-
der5tandable basis for the opposl-
ton in the South. The civil rights
issue there is traditional. But in
the North it is surprising that any
one who has had the temerity to
take such a liberal position as Mr..
Truman has on the civil-rights is
sue should now be faced with
revolt from the camp of the So
called liberals" themselves.
The argument that MI. Truman
cannot win the election and that
Gen. Eisenhower would surely win
implies that the Truman record Is
not sufficiently strong to appeal to
the country and that some other
candidate who doesn't run on that
record might win. If that be the
reasoning of the New Dealers, it is
tantamount to saying they are
afraid to put to test of the elec-
torate the main points in the Tru-
man record, which are identical
with the New Deal point of view.
Strange Alliance.
Whichever way the problem is ap-
preached, it leaves the New Dealers
In an awkward and embarrassing
position. They are urging the Presl-
dent to withdraw merely because
they don't think he is strong cam
didate. Issues and principles are
not mentioned for the very good
reason that, on the record, the Pres
tdent has been consistent defender
of the New Deal faith. The labor
union leaders especially owe him a
debt of gratitude for his stubborn
fight In the face of popular de-
mand for a revision of the Wagner
Labor Relations law.
Unless all out-and-out New Deal
er like Justice Douglas is named,
there is no point in abandoning
President Truman for a "compro-
mise On the record, he is entitled
to the nomination. If the Demo-
cratic Party feels, however, the New
Deal can be better expounded by
Justice Douglas, that's understand
able, but up to now no New Dealer
has expressed himself on such an
issue.
1t is the idea of winning by any
means and at any cost-even to the
dumping of the man who made the
record in a most difficult postwar
period-which puts New Dealers IN
the North and conservatives in the
South into a strange alliance. It's
a mysterious kind of situation that
brings two such opposite forces to-
gether in the party to try to deny
nomination to a man who was
given by fate the chance to serve a
term of four years minus only three
months.