Browning chief. [volume] (Browning, Mont.) 1941-1953, 1949-03-11
This was my answer:

"Dear Sir: have your letter
saying that you wonder which
Is the most dangerous, tho
truck driver 1 referred to or an
idiot with vast radio audience
and also that you have heard
ME few thousand times. am
glad to note we have SO much
in common"
My reference to Taft which so
Infatuated the letter-writer was in
connection with an implication that
Senator Taft IS the Republican
party in the Senate as it exists to-
day. This situation may change,
though there are no present indi-
cations it will. Taft rides the ele-
plant, regardless of who happens
to play the calliope.
And paradoxical1y enough 1t will
be Senator. Taft, the strongest fig
ure in the senate, arch-Republican
symbol of reaction to his enemies,
who probably will be a powerful
factor in the enactment of more
than one of the so called Social
service laws which are a vital
part Of the administration program.
Housing and federal aid to educa-
ton are two measures which might
be named. And although the Taft
Hartley act will have a new name,
the imprint of its senatorial sponsor
will not be entirely eradicated from
Its structure when it comes out of
the hopper.
Taft was able to drag out the
labor bill hearings for two weeks
longer than was originally planned,
and l would not be surprised if these
lines appear in print before his
gently-led filibuster against the re-
peal is over, or at least long over.
But that does not mean Taft or his
party controls the senate.
AS this was written a theory was
abroad that the Republican STRAIT
egg had developed to the point
where, if the party would keep its
young Turks in line-the So
called liberal Republican senators
who tried and so dismally failed to
curb Taft's power-they could count
on enough votes of the southern
senators on most controversial is
sues (unless these issues step on
the toes of southern traditionI to
wrest control from the Democrats.
In fact, the expounders of this
theory were only little while
ago pointing to defeat of the bill
to exempt the tax on the inaug-
uratiOn as proof that the fate
of the Democrats in the senate
was pretty dark one. They ex-
plain d it was symptomatic
when Al Republicans voted
against the measure, and found
to their surprise and pleasure
that they were able to get six
Democrats to join them, thus
providing majority and de-
feating the measure.
That made things look very SIM
pie. But there is another side to that
story: That vote backfred and hurt
the R e u b | c ms more than it
helped. It did more than little to
create Democratic solidarity, and
the really deep-dishers on Capitol
Hill are predicting that the Demo-
Gratis are going to achieve enough
unanimity from now on to main
tain their majority on major issues.
There will be, of course, matters
where members of both parties
will desert because the issue in
volved is such that the particular
state or area from which the SEN
ator comes has an interest which
conflicts with the majority of his
party.
There will be some issues in
which Democrats will join Republi-
cans as well as vice versa. And, as
1 said earlier, there are some
things that don't appear on the sur
face.
The burden Ct the attack
against the Democrats, whether
you call them New Dealers,
Fair Dealers, or Trumanites,
is that they seek government
control of business.
Now / believe most Republican
leaders have the brains to admit
(and if they haven't they can expect
to be defeated, just as the liberals
and conservatives were beaten in
England) that the best way to kill
government control-the antithesis
of free enterprise because it is gov
eminent monopoly-is to kill priv
ate monopoly. The latter is two
edged sword against free enter
prise. First, private monopoly kills
competition. Second, it opens the
way to government ownership.
Today the intelligent leaders of
the COP have to admit what | am
sure they believe at heart, namely,
that they will have to let the federal
government do certain things for
the people, if private enterprise
cor'f ar u,pr'f do fh1eo +hi,1e