Revolt Against Eisenhower Spreads

Press, Volume XCV, Issue 28266, 2 May 1957, Page 11

Revolt Against Eisenhower Spreads

(Specially written for “The Press”) V by FRANK OLIVER}

(Rec. 10 p.m.) WASHINGTON, May 1.

There can be no doubt in the mind of any unprejudiced observer in Washington that a spirit of revolt is steadily spreading, through the Republican Party—a revolt against the President and his policies.

It is being called everything from a revolt to a "fundamental challenge to the President,” and it is affecting all sections of orthodox Republicans in Congress. President Eisenhower still retains his popular support throughout the country. He is still the most popular American alive, but he is losing ground with his party in Congress where his influence is visibly declining. Ever since his first election, a handful of Rightwing Republicans in the Senate has presented a consistently critical view of the President and his policies, but now the questioning and spreading of the revolt has seeped clear through the Centre section of the party in Congress and even into the Liberal wing. This is less due to anything the President has said or done than to the fact that he served his purpose last November (or almost served it, for he failed to sweep his party into a Congressional majority). Now a spirit of independence is abroad again in the party and the Centre and Right have drawn together in a common questioning mood.

A typical example of the manner in which the Right and Centre have combined is in the revolt against the budget. During his first term, Mr Eisenhower’s Congressional popularity enabled him to isolate the extreme Right-wing that never liked him, buttnow it is the small band of faithful Eisenhower Republicans

who are being isolated by a combination of the Right and Centre. Some comments coming from the Centre and Right lately are that the heart and core of the party is disappointed by the Administration’s domestic policies, that the Administration is subverting the American economy, and that it has betrayed public trust. Senator Knowland, the leader of his party in the Senate, has "pledged” to cut a minimum of 3000 million dollars from the Budget. Senator Knowland is credited with a determination to keep the 1960 national convention out of the control of the Eisenhower Republicans, where it definitely rested last August.

A “New York Times” writer goes as far as to say that, it is clear on the basis of private comments that dozens, if not scores, of Republicans in Congress who would not have dared think of a break with Mr Eisenhower last autumn, are now nearing the point of being perfectly prepared to do so.

The first noticeable change in the Congress-Executive relationship was in February when the Senate took an unconscionable time to pass the Middle East resolution and it has come to a head over the Budget. What looked like serious Budget trouble in February is now being termed grave trouble. The attack on the Budget from the Right and Centre in effect constitutes an attack on all Eisenhower policies, for they all hinge on the Budget.

The President’s star is definitely declining in Congress,/ and in some other quarters as well. A recent cartoon shows the Treasury Secretary (Mr George Humphrey) with some senators in a duckblind all with guns trained on the President, who is marked “modem Republic xnism.” Mr Humphrey is definitely leaving the

Cabinet, and the Secretary of Defence (Mr Charles Wilson) is said not likely to be far behind, while Mr Dulles lately has been wondering out loud whether he ba* not stayed round too long. The President still could exercise considerable influence in shaping the future of his party, in the view of some observers, who wonder however if he will. His test still is how to make the Republican Party responsive to modern-day needs and the aspirations of the people, and he long ago promised to bring the best men into the government. But his record in the use of his appointive power is at odds with this. He is apt to appoint executive aides on the basis of one Liberal, one Right-wing. There is little sign of his appointing those young modern Republicans he has spoken about so often. Back to Taft? One test will come when Senator Knowland retires from the Senate. The President could yet find a Senate leader he wants, but whether he will is doubted. He has three years in which to appoint to important posts men born this century who could take over from those born in the nineteenth, and create the image of a young party of ideas and vitality; but it cannot be done at the end of his second term. Meanwhile the Congressional revolt goes on. -The party obviously thinks Mr Eisenhower’s coat tails are of little value next year or in the 1960 election, and the party looks to be on its way back to the Republicanism of Robert Taft.