Evening star., 1951-06-03
Economic Advisers Out
Of Place at Denver
Writer Declares They Should
Avoid Political Activity
By Erank R. Kent

At the recent meeting Of the DEM
ocratic National Committee in Denver
there were in attendance two non
member officials whose presence would
seem not only unnecessary but fairly
open to criticism
The two officials are Leon Keyserling,
chairman of the Presidents Council Of
Economic Advisers. and Averell Har-
riman. whom Mr.. Truman has made his
special adviser on foreign affairs.
Take, first, the case of Mr.. Keyserling.
1t will be conceded that politics and
economics should not be naked. Clearly,
economists have no business in active
politics and politicians are certainly
misplaced as economists Unhappily. in
trying to be both Mr.. Keyserling is not
making success as either Since he
succeeded the able and nom partisan DR..
Edward Nourse it has been charged.
first, that he is not in the top rank of
the economists of the country; second.
that as an old New Deal jobholder his
economics are favored with the New
Deal theories. Perhaps this does Mr..
keyserling an injustice, but there are
many who feel that way These cite
as sustaining their view that, since
the national emergency arose, while
Mr.. Keyserling has given the President
and the public much economic advice
he has not included economy in
non-defense expenditures among his
recommendations.
In fact, on at least one occasion he
insisted that non-defense expenditures
had to go up along with defense expen:
ditures Nearly every other authority
puts first on the list of any anti-infiation
program rigid reduction in the former.
1t Is reported that at Denver, while Mr..
keyseriing talked great deal, no word
escaped him concerning economy-no
word of commentator for the blueprint
OF Senator Byrd to save 81 billion, or
OF former President Hoover's chart to
save SIS billion, or of the estimates Of
various national business organizations
placing the possible savings at SO billion.
Then take the case of Mr.. Hartman
who, 1t is said, was present for the first
time at meeting of the committee.
Mr.. Hartman is an able man, of high
character. and it seems regrettable that
he should permit the President to make
him seem partisan Democratic politi-
clan.
Mr.. Hartman was criticized for this
and his presence at Denver last week
has revived feeling Of resentment OF
course, the thing that lends color to
the charge of improperly is that Mr..
Hartman is one of the leading apostles
OF bipartisan foreign policy. The
President has made frequent appeals
for bipartisan support and some of the
strongest arguments have come from
Mr.. Hartman. 1t is now argued that
the bipartisan policy is not promoted
by the presence of its leading advocate
at completely political gathering
where the main business is denunciation
of the Republican Party and its leaders.
In extenuation it is declared Mr.. Har-
riman went to DenveE - 4 substitute
for Secretary of Statc Dean Acheson.
But this hardly seems valid excuse.
In the first place with the feeling against
him so strong Mr.. Acheson'S attendance
would have been unintelligent. In the
second place, there seems nc reason for
sending Mr.. Hartman as q substitute.
No one had to explain the administra-
tion'S foreign policy to that committee
which is completely under control and
would indorse any and all administra-
tion policies. That is what it was there
for. Whether it was at the request Of
the President or of his intimate Kansas
City friend, National Chairman William
M. Boyle. the Denver visit of Mr.. Key
serling and Mr.. Hartman seems mis-
take. Sending the Presidents chief
economic adviser and his chief foreign
policy adviser to a partisan, political .
committee meeting is not an ideal way
to further national unity in crisis.