Evening star., 1951-12-30
Control Of the Senate
An Election Issue
Writer Sees Contest Result
VituI to New President
BY Fronk R. Kent

The practical politicians In both
parties as well as party leaders generally
are concentrating good deal of atten-
ton upon the probable control of the
United States Senate after the election
next year. This is logical and right;
for it is entirely clear that whether the
next President is Democrat or a Re-
publican, favorable party majority
in the Senate will be vital to him. With
out it. his administration easily may be
doomed to complete futility.
There are two clashing points of view,
for each of which plausible argument
can be made. The Democratic conten-
ton is that it is highly improbable, al
most impossible, for the Republicans to
gain control-eyen though they should
elect their presidential candidate. For
example, it Is pointed out that of the 80
or one-third of the Senate member
ship of 96-Who must be elected, the
Republicans now have 10, the Demo-
Gratis 13. To organize the next Senate
the Republicans must not only hold all
these 10 but win seats now occupied by
Democrats. The Democrats now have SO
Senators, the Republicans 46.
A real reason for doubt Of Republican
chances is that only of their 10 seats,
occupants Of which must come up for
reelection, are classified as safe
Maine, Vermont, Pennsylvania. New Jer-
sey, Indiana, Nebraska and North Da-
kota. The IL remaining, say the Demo-
Gratis, are concededly doubtful-Califor-
mia, Utah, Nevada, Washington Ohio.
Wisconsin, Missouri, New York, Massa-
chusetts, Delaware, Minnesota, Montana.
On the other hand, of the 13 Democratic
seats to be filed, 5 are from the South
and hence unshakably Democratic. OF
the others-Maryland, West Virginia,
Wyoming, Rhode Island, Arizona, New
Mexico and Michigan-the only ones in
which the Republicans have had any
success in recent years are Michigan
and Maryland.
In brief, the Democratic argument
runs that only Republican landslide
could give them Senate control. If
Republican should be elected President
in a reasonably close election he almost
surely would have to deal with a hostile
Democratic Senate. The Republicans.
of course, dispute all this very vigorously.
They concede the five unshakably Dem
ocratic seats IN the South, but that is all
they concede. With strong Republican
at the head of their ticket-either
Eisenhower or Taft-they claim there
will be no trouble at all in holding the
seats they now have and electing three
now held by Democrats.
Particularly, they assert. will this
become probable if Mr.. Truman is the
Democratic candidate for reelection.
For, it is pointed out Mr.. Truman as
proven in 1948, is clearly very much
weaker than his party. Usually, the
presidential candidate runs ahead of
the senatorial and House candidates
and is expected to pull them through"
In Mr.. Truman's case the reverse of
this was true in 1948 and will be even
more true in 1952-if he runs
AS to Mr.. Truman running behind
the senatorial candidates, this conten-
tion is fully sustained by the figures
There are several reasons-chief of
which is his long tolerance of the
revealed administration corruption -
why he should be weaker now than he
"dS 4O0I yCd4S dSO. NCI J1ltIe
are an increasing number of Democrats
who do not believe he will run again
and hope not. But. whether he does or
not, it is certainly true that the Demo-
cratic Senators who must run in 1852
do not expect Mr.. Truman to pull them
through"
In the Roosevelt campaigns. 1896,
1910, 1914, there was always a rush
to get on the ticket in the doubtful
States, because the Roosevelt popu-
larity was such as to make it seem like
a free ride. AS the saying went. they
could ride in on his coat tails. But
l948 convinced Democratic candidates
generally that in an election there are
no Truman coat tails. 1t was he and
not the State and congressional candi-
dates who had to be pulled through"
1t was he. not they. who ran behind.
Not many of them have forgotten that.