Evening star., 1952-06-11
Vote of No Confidence

The Senate was fully justified in rejecting
President Truman'S request for legislative
authority to seize the steel mills and change
wage rates and working conditions
Mr.. Truman is Just about the last person
who should be given any discretionary authority
In this dispute. He has played politics with it
from the beginning. He has revealed himself
as an extreme partisan He has done everything
In his power to discredit the law that he is
supposed to administrative Taft-Hartley Act
And by virtue of his own bunglng, dispute
that should have been settled months ago has
now developed into one of the most difficult
and dangerous strikes in recent history.
The Presidents message was designed to
put Congress on the spot. It was more of
political harangue filled with distortions of fact
than a good-faith appeal for legislation And
1t proposed nothing that could be expected to
lead to a settlement, unless it would be settle
ment on terms dictated by Mr.. Truman In the
past he has repeatedly indorsed the full recon-
mendations of the Wage Sterilization Board
which included the union shop And Philip
Murray, taking his cue from the President has
stated time and again that the union would
not accept less. Actually, during negotiations,
the parties were close to agreement, with the
union shop being the major If not the only
issue standing in the way of settlement. Mr.
to Congress. He preferred to stick to his role
as special pleader for the union.
He made one statement, however, that is
incontrovertibly true. The issue, he said, is
squarely up to Congress- That is a fact and
Congress must face up to it.
The Senate has sought to meet the issue by
adopting the Byrd amendment requesting the
President to invoke the Taft-Hartley Act If
this procedure had been adopted at the outset
as it should have been, it might have been
successful But as of this late date it is of doubt
full value.
Mr. Truman although the Constitution
directs him to take care that the laws be faith
fully executed, has done everything in his power
to discredit this statute. He has repeatedly said
that it would be unfair, harmful and futile. To
invoke the law he says, would be to take sides
with the companies and against the workers.
He has expressed doubt that the courts would
issue an injunction under it, and he has even
pointed to the one case in which the law was
successfully flouted. In short, he has come very
close to inciting the steelworkers to defy an
effort to apply the law to them.
In these circumstances, it is at least doubtful
that the Taft-Hartley Act can bring any lasting
solution. Perhaps it ought to be tried, there
being no other readily available means of coping
with the situation. But Congress cannot forever
dodge the obligation to deal effectively with
strikes which undermine the national welfare
and safety. A Taft-Hartley injunction at this
time might bring 80 days of grace. But there
will not be any real relief from these intolerable
Shutdowns until Congress musters enough polit-
ical courage to forbid strikes in essential indus
tries, while providing fair and effective machn-
cry for settling the disputes that are bound to
arise.