Victoria Advocate from Victoria, Texas • 4

THE VICTORIA ADVOCATE How Far Out Front is Mr. Nixon? WEDNESDAY, JULY 12, 1972 This Strange Political Year EDITORIALS By DAVID S. BRODER Los Aiwtln TlfflM WaMiington Port Newt Servlct McGovern's Big Need MIAMI BEACH Among the dire predictions heard in this convention city of calamity for the Democrats if George McGovern is their nominee, there is one quiet voice of dissent worth heeding. It belongs to a McGovern man, whose views undoubtedly are colored by his personal allegiance. But this man is neither propagandist nor a personal publicity seeker, and his private advice to journalistic friends not to go overboard in predicting a I 1 important to remember that many do not) as a man whose main drawbacks are his inexperience in large governmental matters and the impracticility (or idealism) of some of his proposals.

He has yet to establish the sense of authority people want to see in a president On the other hand, despite all the talk about abortion, marijuana and amnesty, the only people so far who think of him as a "radical" are hard-core republican voters and his' whole political history in South Dakota indicates it will be tough for Republican propagandists to hang the radical tag on this soft-spoken minister's son. Among the voters who know him, McGovern has the considerable advantage of being thought of as honest, outspoken, warm, concerned and most Important different from the mine-run of politicians in Washington, including the President. He is seen as an advocate of change which most people want, without being able to define it and yet as one who embodies the old virtues of trustworthiness and character, to which many of those seeking change say America must return. Neither man fully meets the voters' supreme desire for a president who can heal America's internal wounds and unite its people, but McGovern may well come as close to it as Mr. Nixon.

on the American gravy train, there's no better place for a candidate to be than back there with them. Third, and most important, the McGovern man argues that Mr. Nixon carries as many liabilities into the campaign as does his likely challenger and may have more trouble than McGovern in erasing them. The critical arjumption here is that, overriding all of the specific, major issues of the campaign the war, the defense budget, tax reform, welfare, busing, unemployment, inflation and the rest will be the single question most of the millions of largely skeptical cynical, alienated voters will ask: Which of these men cares about me and my family and will look out for our interests as president? In these terms, neither McGovern nor Mr. Nixon is the ideal candidate for 1972.

The President is seen as a competent, strong, even bold leader, particularly In international affairs. But a political motive is ascribed to almost every action he takes, including his summitry; he is not presumed to be a truth-teller, nor one concerned about the everyday problems of working folks, nor one who puts the needs of the many ahead of the wealthy and powerful few. McGovern, on the other hand, is regarded by those who know him (and it's his party is unlikely and victory is not out of the question. This remarkable conclusion rests on three main propositions, the first being that the current public opinion polls exaggerate Mr. Nixon's lead.

The 15-point gap they are reporting is, in part, a recognition gap, with Mr. Nixon far better known than his likely challenger. Almost one-third of the gap closes, for example, if any well-known Democrat's name is added as the McGovern running-mate, bringing in a constituency of his own. As the campaign develops and McGovern becomes his standing should improve. Also, the 10-12 per cent of the voters now undecided in a Nixon-McGovern race are not likely to split the same way the committed electorate divides.

Looked at as a separate group, the undecideds are more unhappy with the current political situation, more inclined by habit to vote Democratic, than any other group in the electorate. McGovern would have a chance to gain the lion's share of the undecided. Second, this argument contends that this year there is even more advantage than usual is being the underdog in the race. At a time when a large majority of the voters feel they are riding in the caboose Republican landslide I is being noted carefully, because candidate would help McGovern, Scammon thinks, by cutting deeply into the Nixon vote across the country. But he does not think a Wallace third party try is at all likely this year, not only because of.

his physical condition as a result of the assassination attempt, but because of more fundamental political factors. According to Scammon, Wallace, like Kennedy, is looking to 1976. Both see their opportunity four years hence. Both are preparing the ground for a make or break effort then. Denied the nomination now, Wallace will protect 1iis credentials as a national Democrat for 1976.

Kennedy would not want further to besmirch his opportunity for the top place next time, should McGovern fail, even with his help. On the issues, McGovern needs a disastrous slip in the economy, that would be readily felt by the housewife and the worker, to make them forget his "wild" proposals. He would need a return of the labor vote, which as of now prefers Mr. Nixon, especially on national defense. And he is circumscribed by his own economic program.

It would raise a question of credibility, should he modify his views too widely. Maybe McGovern's hordes of bell-ringers can change all that. They are his best bet in the big election, to make try for the sweep he made of the primaries. It won't be easy. With George McGovern'i sweep of getting his delegates seated at the Miami Beach convention, there now seems little doubt that he will emerge as the Democratic nominee for President.

But Senator McGovern will need help, lots of help to have any hope of election, the experts are convinced. Richard Scammon, an authority on American voting, has been widely quoted for telling a group of reporters at breakfast recently that he sees "a disaster of the order of Goldwater" as a distinct possibility for the Democrats with McGovern as their nominee. At the same time, Scammon told his hearers, "We can't forget that there are about twice as many registered Democrats as Republicans in this country, so Senator McGovern might be able to pull it off somehow." To "pull it Scammon felt McGovern needs help, plenty of help, even with a two to one advantage in party registration. First of all, McGovern needs Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts as a running mate to "help him with the Roman Catholic vote." If convinced that the election is lost, without him on the ticket, Scammon thinks Kennedy can be persuaded despite his many disclaimers this year.

George C. Wallace as a third party Broder this man, in a year of epidemic political miscalculations, has been right far more often than most in his forecasts. Whatever one's personal judgment, his views are worth recording at this point, because they contrast so sharply with most of what is being said and written here. He believes that a Nixon-McGovern contest would prove to be a very close one. The Democrat might not win; the historical odds against unseating an incumbent president are formidable.

But a severe embarrassment for McGovern and A Face in the Crowd mm. Much Ado About Nothing We have seen over the Dast few Texan Plays A Key Role in Major Party Cooperation By JACK ANDERSON fell McClurt SyndiMtt MIAMI BEACH While the two parties bristle and brawl for the presidential campaign, they are cooperating secretly to make America's political processes work. The Democrats, for example, quietly intervened to bring the homeless itepuoiicans io tMmim Miami Rparh when I I San Diego fell through as the GOP convention site. The Republicans, in return, have scoured the countryside for office trailers at a rental rate the bankrupt Democrats can afford. On sport.

Such vicarious enjoyment as chess games provide, comes from leisurely study of the move-by-move account, not from watching Fischer knit his brow in thought or lick his chops in fiendish anticipation of crushing an opponent's ego. Maybe at some future time there will be enough fans around to support chess in the fashion to which Fischer would like to be accustomed. But right now there are not. And no exploiting capitalist is getting rich on Fischer's talent. This makes it doubly unfortunate that London investment banker James D.

Slater saw fit to add $125,000 to the world championship purse. For Fischer's threats to quit the match bordered on extortion and his bluff should have been called. This would have been painful for Iceland whose costly preparations for the match Fischer held hostage. But it would have put Fischer, a fatuous, graceless man, in his proper place, that of someone who happens to be a genius at a trivial pastime. Now, though, we have the confrontation.

Fischer has at times tried to make his match with defending world champion Brois Spassky a Cold War kind of crusade, good old American versus godless Russian Communist. But he was not so dedicated to the crusade that he was willing to wage it for a mere $100,000. He was not so proud that he would not apologize to the Russians to save the match and his money. And he was not smart enough to realize that if he had just quietly won the championship, he would have earned the respect and, probably, the financial rewards he demanded so prematrely. Go, Boris.

days the creation of something new in chess, the Fischer gambit. This is where you threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue and-or pick up your chess board and go home unless you can have your own way. A true inspiration to the youth of America, Bobby Fischer has shown us that these tactics work in this greed-smudged real world. Fischer's performance, the prelude to the world chess championship match in Iceland, should not have surprised us. He has, after all, never said he was sensitive, poised, considerate, modest, generous, admirable or intelligent.

He has said only (though many, many times) that he is the best chess player around, in Brooklyn, the United States, the world and, presumably, the universe. Let us assume that he is right. The next question is, so what? Fischer seems to be operating under the belief that because we pay our athletes and entertainers outrageously large sums of money, we should do the same for chess players. From his point of view this is reasonable, of course. But from everybody else's it is super -arrogant nonsense.

That we are foolish enough to sanction paying Tom Seaver $125,000 a year to throw baseballs is no justification for our being foolish enough to sanction paying Bobby Fischer $200,000 for shoving a bunch of toys around for a month For one thing, there is the two-wrongs-don't-make-a-right theory. For another, there is the fact that chess is not, either historically or intrinsically, an interesting spectator i I Anderson the QT, the Republi cans have even helped the Democrats get ads for their convention program from GOP fat cats. Their unusual cooperation springs from an amazing friendship between two political arch-rivals. They are GOP Vice Chairman Dick Herman, a conservative Omaha trucker, and financier Robert Strauss, the It Doesn't Happen Too Often, But Here It Is How to Beat City Hall down-to-earth Democratic treasurer. They have been conferring closely since February when they cautiously came together at Ford Motor headquarters in Washington to discuss corporate ads in the convention programs.

At first the two men circled each other like jungle cats, but gradually they relaxed. Then, suddenly, the impulsive Herman turned to their Ford hosts. "Say, have you got a private office we could borrow for a moment?" While the motor men blinked, the two political rivals ducked into a private conference room and shut the door. "Let's quit messing around. Bob," said Herman.

"Let's get together and do it!" "Fine," said Strauss. "That's fine with me." Strauss thrust out his hand, and the two men shook. Their first accomplishment was a joint telegram from Democratic chairman Larry O'Brien and Republican chairman Bob Dole soliciting funds for the convention programs. The pair also brought together a dozen Democratic and Republican ad men for a secret lunch meeting at Washington's huge Hilton hotel. Over melon cup and baked chicken, the Democrats and Republicans compared notes.

To the astonishment of all, the GOP representatives found themselves eagerly suggesting ways for the Democrats to meet their staggering convention deficits. Herman and Strauss afterward put their staffs to work listing corporations to hit up for ads. Some outraged GOP hardliners thought the use of traditional GOP contributors by the Democrats was going too far. But the GOP's Bob Dole brushed aside their objections and the secret collaboration went on. The cooperation paid off for the Republicans a few weeks later when the arrangements to hold their convention in San Diego began to sour.

Strauss immediately phoned his GOP friend. "Do you have any interest in Miami Beach?" Strauss asked. "I don't think so," said Herman uncertainly, "but don't count It out." "Well, you've got my standing offer to help," Strauss assured him. After a mid-April meeting with San Diego representatives, Herman decided that problems with labor and the facilities made San Diego impossible as a convention tite. The ITT subsidy offer also had tainted the San Diego site.

At seven o'clock the next morning, Herman and hit top aide, Jim Gale, were on the way to Miami Beach to meet with Mayor Chuck Hall whose elderly constituents were already lest than enthusiastic about the Democratic convention, fearing a repetition of th 1968-style violence. The last thing they wanted was another political convention. Worried by Hall's reaction, Herman hastily called Strauss In Dallas where the financier was golfing. "You can play things like golf," said WASHINGTON It is not often in our town perhaps especially in our town that anybody beats City Hall. We are ordinarily captives of custom and precedent, and one such tradition is that on Capitol Hill, what the Big Mules Want, the Big Mules get.

But on June 28 a Timely Quotes notable event oc curred. Under thee Undersecretary of the Treasury Edwin S. Cohen, 5 feet 2. urging of a little- known congressman from upstate New York, Samuel S. Stratton, former There is considerable research to indicate that, in general, tall people have a great economic advantage over short people and are far more successful as leaders in the business and political world.

I have maintained, therefore, that the tax law should provide compensation for the inequities thrust upon the short people of the world I would draw the line at a height of 5 feet 6 inches and provide half rates for those below that level and the regular rates for those above. The motion picture theater is a central place where the values and views of life of young Americans are shaped, and we think we ought to be in that arena. -The Rev. Kenneth Curtis, on the decision of the American Baptist Convention to distribute commercial films. Mayor of Schenectady, the House rebelled against its leadership on the matter of a major provided a brassy cover-up for elaborate plans then hatched by the leadership.

In the name of serving the tourists, it was proposed to create whole acres of additional space' an auditorium, a cafeteria, other restaurants, galleries of bathrooms, truck platforms, bus loading facilities, suites of hideway offices and meeting rooms. Preliminary plans went forward. The idea was to confront both chambers with a fait accompli. Hollings and Stratton had nothing on their side but right They made the point reasonably, that the Capitol never was intended to serve as a convention and tourist center. It is a working, functional seat of our legislative branch.

Visitors are welcome, but they cannot take the place over. They argued, with telling effect that a valid need for meeting rooms could be met simply by a reallocation of existing space. They contended, perhaps with some exaggeration, that usable new space under the proponents' plan would come to a staggering $368 a square foot Finally they urged considerations of history and aesthetics. It worked. Firmness, good tempers, and a reasoned case prevailed.

The Big Mules probably will haul up their project again they didn't get to be Big Mules by giving up but for this much of a victory, the taxpayers owe Hollingi and Stratton their thanks. KOpa trick extension of the Capitol building. For the Comparison for a McGovern Campaign 'Goldwater of the By JAMES J. KILPATRICK Wojninolon Star SynOiciH time being, at least, this misguided project is suspended. Stratton, perhaps to his own amazement has licked City Hall.

The upset victory would not have been possible, of course, if South Carolina's able and underestimated Ernest F. Hol-lings had not already won a key battle in the Senate. In an adroit maneuver, Hol-lings succeeded in nailing a blocking amendment to the legislative branch appropriations bill. His amendment provided that no funds could be spent either for final plans or for the initiation of construction "until specifically approved and appropriated therefor by the Congress." The question on the House side was whether the Hollings ban would survive. Pulling the other way, against Hollings and Stratton, were all the top members of the Big Team.

On the Senate tide, the extension project had the support of Vice President Agnew, Majority Leader Mansfield, and Minority Leader Scott. In the House, proponents included Speaker Albert, Majority Leader Boggs, Minority Leader Ford, and such barely less impressive potentates at Mahon, Poage, Tatman, Holifield, Hayt, Staggert, Blatnick, Colmer, and Mills. These gentlemen bold the power to bind and loose, and 99 times out of a hundred their wishes prevail. But on the they called the roll up yonder, it wat 197 for Stratton-Hollings and only 181 for the Big Mules. The majestic west front of the U.S.

Capitol will be preserved. It will not be destroyed, transplanted, expanded and prettified with picture windows not for a while, anyhow. At least $30 million, and more likely $50 million, will not be spent. Where Hollings comes from, such a triumph it known as a great day In the mawnin. The leadership richly deserved the rebuke It conduct wat arrogant as Its case was weak.

The controversy began tome teven or eight years ago, when we first began to hear stories that the west front the tide that looks down the Mall toward the Whit House wat crumbling and "in danger of toppling." In the course of time the stories proved, If not wholly false, at least vastly overblown. The old wall indeed has cracked, but competent engineer! say it can be restored and made permanently secure for perhaps is to 120 million. The Jericho threats and warnings WASHINGTON It means little to characterize the front-running Democrat, Sen. George McGovern, as the "Gold-water of the left." But a comparison of their campaign situations does offer some instructive insights. In 1964, Sen.

Barry Goldwater won the Republican presidential nomination because a sub stantial proportion of i the GOP leadership wanted him. I nil supvi i in- eluded a crucial By BRl'CE BIOSSAT NMIWr EnttrpriM Allocation together, and no one of them could even muster impressive support. They had glamor and high visability, but it was misleading. It never translated Into votes and delegates to stop Goldwater. Meantime, Goldwater, aided by cadres of dedicated young activists who put together a superb organization, piled up an enormous delegate lead in the non-primary states.

Hit late-hour primary victory over Rockefeller in California really wat hit only good one, yet In the circumstance! It wat all be needed Set McGovern's effort beside all this. He, too, hat those dedicated cadres, who in fact are more numerous and more skillful by far than those laboring for Goldwater in 1964. Beyond that parallel, however, differences begin to appear. Helped by multiplicity of candidate! who have divided the vote, McGovern hat won'lO primaries against Goldwater's unimpressive handful. Together with the delegate harvests produced by the cadres' In the non-primary states, McGovern victoriet have put him near nomination.

Yet the successes cannot conceal tome glaring gapt Unlik Goldwater, McGovern has not won to hit side large elements of hit parly'i establishment Far from being ready to try something new, at were the Taft conservatives in 1964. the standard Democratic leaders for the most part are bitterly opposed to McGovern. While the moderates were saying in 1964 that Goldwater wat a loser, bit conservative backers were not convinced. Their counterpart! in the Democratic center today loudly proclaim that McGovern It a loser-" too radical," too thinly based for all his victories and his delegates. The votes cast in 1972 gives their argument lupport Generally speaking, the crowded Democratic presidential field that has helped McGovern get on top In-some primaries has also assured that his voting percentage would be just a modest part of the whole.

And he hat won tome light-vote primaries almost by default Again, though the Republicans have nothing comparable to labor's muscle and money for campaigning, It it not insignificant the the potent labor Democrats are not with McGovern force. McGovern'i men think the twarmi of young activism who got him this far can get him past President Nixon, too. Maybe. But Goldwater't activists found winning an election much harder than getting the nomination against an unorganized opposition. McGovern may find it the same.

He may need more than lip service from labor's troops. i nerman wim moc me. "Youve got a horns." Herman explained this predicament, adding that be had his eye on Miami Beach. Straust replied slyly: "We may have a home, but we don't have any money to pay for It Let's get together and do some planning." Straust wat as good at his word. He contacted hit friend, Florida Gov.

Reubin Askew, who promised to offer Miami Beach police and other support for the Republicans. With Askew and Straust behind him, Herman made a crucial presentation to 75 stata and city leaden in Miami Beach. The Floridiant balked but finally gave the go-ahead on May 1 Three weeks later, Straust and Herman brought together 40 tuff to coordinate such probleut at Iran-porutlon, rooms, seats, omce traiLrs, TV facilities and the like. After the meeting, at the eyes of old party hacks popped, the DemoTata and Republicans threw each other a cocktail party In the hotal'i CiGI roofh. I THE VICTORIA ADVOCATE PuM WMdcvry morning cp( Dec 25 br the Victor Advocate PuttnNng Ill East Constitution Victoria.

Ttwt TM. TtKphonS7S-MS1 Morrrt Rotwrtt, Editor Mid MMitfar John H.Uuk Jr. Mnm Manar Jamas W. Rach, Man flnf latter Jtoy OriiMt, Editor at tt Editorial Pto Oydt a. Urn.

Advartttlns OVacter Otartey a. Meter, OMtifiad Manaaar S. O. Hall, OrcalattoR Manaaar Raymond Krowtol, Camaotinf ttaani tvft. Richard Marto, Pms Rwm Sua.

StcondOas poMagt paid at Wtorla, Ttxat Dallwtd by carrtor: Or yaar S37, on month K.onwMttSonn. Ollvtradby mail: On yar (21X1 ana monm 23, tlx monrhs til W. Fortlgn rates fumlanad en raquad. Malt tub-acrlption payabtt In advanca. Tha Aatociated Ptm it aMtited axdutivaty to ma uta for rapuMication af all Ina local rwwt prlnttd In tnlt nawipapar at wtN at alt AP nawt onpatchat.

parry element, ibh- style conservatives who truly belonged in the center. Though these forces deplored what they saw at excesses of zeal among Goldwater'! far rightwtog backers, they were weary of moderate candidates. These they taw at "me-too" imitators of the Democrats. There was. of course, much opposition to Goldwater from the moderate or progressive wing of hit party.

The key figures were governors like Nelson Rockefeller of New York, William Scranton of Pennsylvania, George Romney of Michigan, Mark Hatfield of Oregon. Jui one trouble. They could never get.