Opinion articles written by students Sam Reed and Sam Hunt for the November 4, 1966 issue of WSU’s student newspaper the Daily Evergreen represent their opinions of that year’s national and state elections from the perspective of the WSU Young Republicans and the WSU Young Democrats. Sam Reed ’63, ’68 is now Washington’s Secretary of State, and Sam Hunt ’67 is a state representative for Olympia and surrounding areas. Read more about them in “Civility in Politics and Campaigns.”
You can also view the original page from the 1966 Daily Evergreen in PDF format.
Daily Evergreen, November 4, 1966
A Republican Speaks
(Editor’s Note: This is the fourth of a series of pre-election political articles written by Sam Reed representing the WSU Young Republicans.)
By Sam Reed
In the course of this four-part pre-election series, the positive facts stated In the Republican column and the negative allegations stated In the Democrats’ column have stirred a wide response on the WSU campus.
On the Republican side, it has been demonstrated that Governor Evans has provided such outstanding leadership that he definitely deserves to have a positive, supportive legislature to replace the negative, obstructionist Democrats. He also deserves to have Republicans elected to the courthouses, so the county governments will work with him rather than against him.
Nationally, Lyndon Johnson and the rest of the Democrats—who were swept into office in ‘64—have found their appeal slipping away as the American people have become more and more disillusioned with their uninspiring leadership.
The Republican governors have established such an outstanding record in state governments (especially when compared to the mediocrity of Democratic governors), that it looks like Republican candidates could win in Oregon. Nevada, New Mexico, California, Alaska, Wyoming, Colorado, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island, Maryland, Georgia, Arkansas, Arizona, Nebraska, and Minnesota. These governorships are crucially important for building party strength (as has been seen in Washington) and for proving the competence of state government as a viable partner in the federal system.
The great prospects of the GOP in the Congressional, gubernatorial, legislative, and courthouse races is even continued to the precinct committeeman level. In King County (Seattle), for example, there are Republicans filed for 1,665 positions with 592 being contested. The lethargic Democrats, on the other hand, have 1,210 precincts in King County without even one Democrat filed.
Two years ago, Nov., 1964, many writers were composing obituaries for the Republican Party. Now, two years later, the following comment by Tom Wicker, the Washington correspondent for the New York Times, is quite typical: he suggested the possibility of the GOP taking “a great leap forward… a running jump into the future . . . with attractive young men like Governers Chafee, Love, and Evans, Mayor Lindsay, or Mssrs. Percy, Taft, and Brooke. Against the increasing tired and frozen appearances of the Johnson Administration and its unpopular leader, the mere appearance of such candidates, together with their youth, might provide something of the fresh breeze that John Kennedy once brought to American politics.”
All over the nation, the Republican Party has taken the initiative and has become the innovating force in local, state, and federal politics. Their three main areas of growth have been among the youth, the intellectuals, and the cities.
There has been a great surge in party identification and activity within the academic community. This is partly due to their disenchantment with Lyndon Johnson but due in a greater degree to the Republican willingness to seek out new ideas, re-examine old assumptions, and not only welcome academicians but strongly encourage their participation on position papers task forces and such.
Tired of the Democrats who have been offering the same solutions for decades, the American people will go to the polls next Tuesday and vote for the youth and dynamism, the fresh and imaginative thinking, and the intelligent and inspiring leadership of the Republican Party.
A Democrat Speaks
(Editor’s Note: This is the fourth of a series of pre-election political articles written by Sam Hunt representing the WSU Young Democrats)
By Sam Hunt
During the last few weeks the Republicans and Democrats have presented some of their basic philosophies in the Daily Evergreen. We did this in an effort to stimulate interest among the students of WSU and to try to present our parties’ views of the issues in the campaign. In this article we will sum up the ideas and statements we have presented here.
In the first article we showed how the Republicans are trying to buy the election in some areas of the state. I mentioned the race for the 15th District in Yakima County where “Spike” Spanton spent $3000 while running unopposed in the Republican primary. He is trying to defeat incumbent Democrat Bob Kuil, and it is estimated that Spanton will spend around $10,000 in an effort to buy a job that pays $3,600 a year. Spanton is against all federal aid and is in favor of large reductions in government programs and spending at all levels. Without positive programs how do Republicans like Spanton propose that we progress? And to what groups will Spanton owe his reactionary alligence for all of the money they gave him? We must elect Democrats who are willing to take a chance and propose progressive programs. Remember, the only way the turtle moves ahead is by sticking his neck out.
The second pair of articles dealt with state platforms. We see that the Republicans have finally followed the lead set by the Democrats many years ago by advocating a state income tax. The Democrats come out in favor and actively support such things as a $2.00 per hour minimum wage, federal aid to education, revision of the state constitution, state aid for transportation to reduce de facto segregation in our schools, and many other badly needed, progressive programs.
In the third issue we were to discuss the Congressional races. The Democrats showed how the congresswoman in this district is often flirting with the far right. She claims to be for education but voted against the National Defense Education Act (loans to needy college students) in 1958; she voted against the School Construction Assistance Act of 1960; she voted to recommit (kill) the 1963 Vocational Assistance Act; in 1963 she voted against a bill to provide loans for college housing (residence hall) construction; she voted against the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act; in 1962 she voted to eliminate the student loan provision from the Academic Facilities and Student Assistance Act and also voted to recommit (kill) the whole bil1. No wonder the Republican article didn’t mention Mrs. May or her voting record. The Republican Party has tried to hide her reactionary record during her eight unproductive years in Congress. Mrs. May’s Democratic opponent, Gus Bansmer, will work for education and progress.
Lack of Ideas
In these articles the Republicans have shown their great lack of ideas and programs. Moderate Republicans mention a few Republican governors who they try to generalize into being the whole party. Unfortunately the GOP is not the party of Rockefeller, Scranton, Hatfield and Smiley; it is the party of Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, Samuelson, May, and Powers. Remember how the moderate Republicans refused to support the national ticket in 1964? Much as they try to hide it, the Republican party is still the party of Goldwater–the negative, veto party.