The Stevenson Team

Little that anyone could say in print today could conceivably have any real effect on the outcome of the election. But for those Democrats who still think in terms of '48, it doesn't hurt to say a last word about their candidate, either by way of praise or mere factual interpretation of what Adlai Stevenson stands for.

All of the oratory now is behind us--even the get-out-the-vote pleas, surest sign that the campaign is over. The record of Eisenhower's four years in Washington has been painted in vivid detail by the party hucksters, and both good and bad images of the candidates have been fully articulated. But one aspect of the voting picture that seems to be missing is a clear public understanding of what a Stevenson Administration would mean in terms of policies and personnel.

Two basic areas of policy, for example, deserve special examination--the Democratic plans for running the economy and for maintaining military defenses. In the first area, key elements of the Democratic program involve increased federal spending for aid to the aged, a national health insurance program, and stepped-up grants to finance education. Yet the Democratic plans as outlined in Stevenson's New America statements do not contemplate their "traditional" method of running the economy--financing governmental services out of additional taxes or fostering an inflationary surge to increase consumer buying power. Instead, the Democratic candidate is counting on the country's "explosive prosperity" to provide the new revenues for his programs out of a broader tax base. He proposes to invest five percent of the nation's added wealth in social welfare programs, while keeping the economy relatively stable.

In military policy too, the Democratic stand needs clarification. Stevenson's recent expressed hope that the manpower draft can be ended would seem in complete contrast with his party's normal orientation toward a program of balanced military preparedness. But a professional army composed of 20-year men, on examination, actually seems more reliable than a conscript army. Such an army would be less costly and more effective, Stevenson feels, because it would not be crippled by the need to retrain completely every two years. In addition, a highly mobile professionalized land force would be better able to cope with the problems of limited wars like Korea without the constant pull of the mother vote trying to bring the boys home.

In these two policy areas, Stevenson has tried to polish up his party's ideological inheritance. No less apparent is the evolution of the type of cabinet member and personal adviser that Stevenson would bring with him to the White House. The candidate stands in the middle of two generations of party leaders. On the one hand are the hold-overs from the Truman Administration, older men mostly in their sixties who served in key posts up to 1952. On the other hand there is the candidate's planning staff, made up of young lawyers, governors, and senators in their forties who are latecomers to Democratic politics.

In this first group, the most powerful figure looms as Thomas K. Finletter, mentioned as a strong possibility for Secretary of State or Defense in a Stevenson cabinet.

Another elegible diplomat trained under the last Democratic Administration is George Kennan, former head of the State Department's policy, planning staff and architect of the containment policy, who could bring his highly professional outlook to the top post in the State Department. Or, by way of contrast, Chester Bowles, once Governor of Connecticut and Ambassador to India, is considered a possible Secretary of State who would be an active salesman for American democracy, particularly in Asia.

At the other pole are the young writers and thinkers who have made up the Stevenson entourage during this campaign. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., professor of History and Pulitzer Prize winner, would probably serve in the organizing months, at least, of a Democratic Administration. Stevenson's law partners William McCormick Blair and Willard Wirtz would undoubtedly wind up on his White House staff, along with campaign manager Jim Finnegan and press secretary Clayton Fritchey. Estes Kefauver, as Vice President, seems slated for the post of "super-Secretary of Agriculture" if he fails to make himself an effective leader of the Senate. And a newcomer but a long-standing personal friend of Stevenson--Dean Edward S. Mason of the Littauer Center--could serve as the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, where the influence of Professors John K. Galbraith and Seymour Harris would be strong.

Right now, these theorizings about the personnel in a Stevenson Administration are not very meaningful, particularly in view of the pollsters' predictions. But taken with an appreciation of the subtleties and objectives of the Stevenson program, they are a good indication of the man and the party that appear on the ballot today. For the wise selection of a President should involve an acceptance of the candidate's policies and his advisers, as well as an endorsement of his personality.