Page 7


‘a maverick for the senate’ * * Archer’s Stand As the Senate campaign nears its close, we reaffirm our strong conviction that the mapwe have endorsed is the most outstanding and the most able candidate in the race. We urge all Texas liberals who are faltering in their final choice to rally now behind Maury Maverick Jr. It has not been a happy experience, though as a lesson in the hard geometry of provincial politics it has been an enlightening one, to see the disagreement in liberal ranks during this campaign. Henry Gonzalez is a fine and courageous leader, a man who deserves the admiration he has inspired. When this race is over, we will join again in our common hope for a better and more humane and more civilized Texas. But the Observer, as a journal for liberalism in our state, would have failed in its responsibility had it not chosen, out of a large and confusing field, the one candidate it sincerely considered to be most worthy, all factors considered, of liberal support. We have been more and more impressed, as this campaign has progressed, by the eloquence, the toughness, the simple human compassion, and the dogged political courage of Maury Maverick. He has gone into. West Texas and spoken the truth about the oil majors. He has gone into East Texas and spoken the truth about race. He has travelled the Houston boatdocks saying he is proud of labor’s endorsement, pledging he will continue to work for organized labor so long as organized labor continues to work for the betterment of the greater society. He has defended, forthrightly and without equivocation, the $1.25 minimum wage, medical care for the aged under social security, aid to depressed areas, urban renewal, equality and opportunity regardless of race. Time and again he has declared his sympathy for the revolutionary and reforming impulse in the underdeveloped and impoverished areas of the world. With the Kennedy program having caught the imagination of a nation glutted with private indulgence, Maverick has stood firmly behind the young president. There is evidence that his firm stand has, in some instances, induced others in the campaign”moderates” like Wilson and Wrightto acknowledge its persuasiveness and endorse two or three of the more tepid Kennedy proposals. Maverick’s campaign has been good to watch. It has been good for the state of Texas. Between two men of equal principle, the argument of better .political chances in an election most assuredly has its place, and Maverick has an excellent chance of reaching a second primary. In the last several weeks, labor support throughout the state has grown stronger and more effective. Outstanding intellectuals like Dobie and Webb have joined his cause. His persistent slogan, “A Roosevelt, Kennedy, Yarborough Democrat,” has been making it proper impression. Maverick stood a somewhat suspicious sixth in a Belden poll taken in late February. Two weeks later, in another professional poll sponsored by the Will Wilson forces, he had jumped to fourth, ahead of both ‘Wright and Gonzalez and only four percentage points behind Wilson. Two more weeks have passed since then, and his campaign has been growing stronger every day. The neanderthal Tower, the. “millionaire’s conservative” and racebaiting Blakley, the drab and unimaginative Wilson, are all cutting deeply into the conservative vote. Wilson has been slipping, and Tower and Blakley have been knifing into one another’s strength over which of the two is the “true conservative.” Let those who believe, as Wilson does, in standing still, and let the Towers and the Blakleys who think it now possible to return to the snug 19th century America of the village blacksmithy, support the myths and share the votes. Maverick’s chances may yet depend on the support of those liberalsin good faith either undecided until now or previously more sympathetic toward other candidates who will pause for a stern evaluation. With so much at stake in this race, with the solid chance that we can send to the Senate a man who, with Ralph Yarborough, would give Texas one of the outstanding senatorial delegations in the nation, we urge the wisdom and the necessity of rallying now behind Maury Maverick. Archer Fullinghim, poet laureate of the Big Thicket and editor of The Kountze News, wrote this week on the Senate race: 11 The truth is that the voters have little choice between Tower, Blakley, and Wilson. All are conservatives and all are opposed in whole, as Tower and Blakley are, or in part, as Wilson is, to President John Kennedy’s program for schools and medical aid to the aged. Wilson has been extolled by conservatives for upholding what they call the “Texas position”. Don’t think the Houston Chronicle would ever come out for Will Wilson as it did, if it were not certain that he would vote against the Kennedy program. THE ONLY CANDIDATE in the race who will tell you exactly how he will vote is Maury Maverick of San Antonio, who describes himself as a “Franklin D. Roosevelt, Ralph Yarborough, John Kennedy Democrat.” The way I see the race now differs sharply from the outlook several weeks ago. Then I predicted that Wilson was in the lead. The way I see it now, Wilson is slipping and slipping badly. He’s too much like Tower and Blakley. Wright doesn’t say anything that you can remember. Stop right now and see if you can peg Wright. See if you can remember anything positive he has said. Just anything. THE ONLY bright, definite color in the race is the positive, dynamic program of Maury Maverick. His personality and political philosophy stand out above all others. averich’o exceant Chance5 001 Weeh `It’s Not Much’ It was a good week in the legislature, the best of the session. The conservative tactic to delay all tax measures, hence building up pressure for one giant tax bill which could only be a sales tax, met with total failure. They chose to fight the partial deficit-retiring program in all earnestness; perhaps their decision was a major mistake. For they sent Bell, Jarvis, Atwell, and Ehrle to the microphone, they warned of dire consequences, and they were roundly beaten. In a column in the February 25 issue, former Observer editor Ronnie Dugger, referring to Sen. Henry Gonzalez, said he had voted with the people every time with the exception of one time when he “ducked an issue on loan sharks.” Sen. Gonzalez has asked for the date and occasion. Mr. Dugger and Sen. Gonzalez met in the Dallas airport just after the col Published by Texas Observer Co., Ltd. Entered as second-class matter, April 26, 1937, at the Post Office at Austin, Texas, under the Act of March 3, 1879. APRIL 1, 1961 Willie Morris Editor and General Manager Bob Sherrill, Associate Editor Sarah Payne, Office Manager Ronnie Dugger, Contributing The crowning irony, of course, as any straight-speaking member of the House will tell you, was Mr. Ehrle’s swift defense of small Texas business against the large interstate corporations. He accused Eckhardt of selling out to the big-boys up East. He produced a set of figures on his “small drug company in Childress, Texas,” which left everyone slightly confounded. He refused, and wisely so, to yield for questions. It was a most curious performance. umn appeared. Mr. Dugger, who told the senator he had a strong personal recollection of the instance, was under the impression the matter had been cleared up. Sen. Gonzalez, however, asked this week for verification. If and until documentation can be supplied, we offer our apologies to Sen. Gonzalez and ask our readers to disregard the statement. Published once a week from Austin, Texas. Delivered postage prepaid $5 per annum. Advertising rates available on request. Extra copies 15c each. Quantity prices available on order. EDITORIAL and BUSINESS OFFICE: 504 West 24th St., Austin, Texas. Phone GReenwood 7-0746. HOUSTON OFFICE: Mrs. R. D. Randolph, 419% Lovett Blvd., Houston 16, Texas. The little orphan girl hurried through the falling snow, her ragged coat wrapped tightly about her to protect her from the gnawing wind. The cathedral loomed suddenly in the darkness, and there was the sound of Christmas music and of bells. The little girl went inside and quietly lay all her cherished belongings there near the altar. a popular Christmas tale The Citizens for a Sales Tax have swept Texas. Chairman Tom Sealy and lobbyist Searcy Bracewell have told us, in warm, glowing terms, how the simple, average citizen of our state has chipped in with his modest $1 contributions in order that a general retail sales tax, with or without exemptions on food, medicine, and clothing, might become a reality. We can see it now, the vast pilgrimage to the Citizens for a Sales Tax office in the Perry-Brooks Building in Austin. A little orphan girl from El Paso quietly opens the door and with muted footsteps walks over to Tom Sealy’s desk, leaving her nickels and pennies; an old-age pensioner from Kerrville nervously, eyes averted, places a crumpled dollar bill in Sealy’s hand ; the wife of the migrant worker from Brownsville, after a hard day’s journey on Greyhound, unties a soiled old handkerchief containing four bright, shiny . quarters. “It is not much,” she says, “but it may help just a little.” Some 2,500 persons, Sealy says, have contributed their one dollars to the cause”although, of course, there were a number of larger or combined contributions.” In the sales tax hearings this week, members of the House tax committee persistently asked Sealy where the organization has gotten most of its money. He would not answer. Jim Cotten wanted to know if he and Bracewell’ were getting any money for their lobbying. He would not answer. Although they brought in utopia and the war heroes, the Citizens were plainly the losers under those hot volleys. The committee registered its point well : a general retail sales tax would hit the lower income groups proportionately harder, in many instances considerably harder, than it would the $10,000-plus brackets. Let these lower-income people with their large families feel the tax, Rep. Harding said; after all, they do crowd our schools and our welfare rolls. When the Citizens finally admitted that their tax was, indeed, regressive, the admission came as no surprise. Fairness in taxation is, after all, a most ill-conceived doctrine. Ap o/09,y THE TEXAS OBSERVER c ‘141W rl1 n e It s i t