Sell the Sizzle

For two decades a supersalesman named Elmer Wheeler has made a handsome living advising U.S. businessmen: "Don't sell the steak--sell the sizzle!" This week, with the congressional elections of 1954 just a week away, there were clear indications that the Republican Party had paid too little attention to that sales formula.

A striking example showed up baldly in the "major issue" of the campaign. Still riding the ghost of the "Hoover Depression," Democrats have made much of unemployment in the U.S. in 1954. It is an economic fact that the Eisenhower Administration has been more successful than the Roosevelt or Truman Administrations ever were in maintaining, without controls, a high level of employment and steadying the U.S. economy in time of peace. But it is a political fact that the Republican Party is not getting much if any credit for this achievement.

In January 1939, after six years of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, there were 11,984,000 unemployed in a total U.S. work force of 55 million. Nevertheless, F.D.R., a great exponent of sizzle salesmanship, claimed (and got from millions of voters) credit for reducing unemployment. In 1944, when unemployment reached a record low of 440,000, there were nearly 12 million men in the armed forces. By early 1950, with no war to hop up the economy, the number of unemployed under Harry Truman's Administration had climbed back to nearly 4,700,000. This month, in a work force of 65 million, the number of unemployed is 3,000,000. Few economists believe that the U.S. (or any other nation) can maintain "full employment"--i.e., an unemployment figure below 2,000,000 or 3% of the labor force--without chronic inflation or war or severe regimentation of business and labor.

The campaign season's major speech on the economy was delivered last week by Treasury Secretary George Humphrey before a Manhattan dinner of the Investment Bankers Association--not necessarily the best possible forum from the viewpoint of influencing voters. Humphrey had an impressive array of economic facts; he made the point that the Eisenhower Administration has succeeded--where the Truman Administration faile--in stabilizing the U.S. dollar. But the Secretary's presentation had a dry, uninspiring tone; his speech was briefly reported on the financial pages.

Organized & Dull. In defense and foreign policy there is a similar contrast between the Republican product and the Republican sales pitch. A recent Gallup poll shows that 64% of U.S. voters feel that the defense position of the U.S. is better now than it was under the Truman Administration. The Republican campaign has done little to capitalize on this highly favorable voter conclusion.

The major speech on defense was delivered last week by Secretary of Defense Charles Erwin Wilson before 1,200 members and guests of the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. Implicit in what he said was the fact that, under Old Soldier Dwight Eisenhower, the U.S. is steadily building a more powerful and more efficient defense force. But the steak Charlie Wilson served was cold. Said one member of the World Affairs Council: "It was a well-organized speech." Sighed another: "It certainly was dull too." Rudimentary political considerations would have dictated that Eisenhower, not Wilson, make the defense-budget speech.

Recent months have seen a series of favorable world developments directly connected with U.S. foreign policy, e.g., the end of the oil dispute in Iran, the easing of tension around the Suez, the settlement on Trieste and the London pact. Last week Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was in Paris for the final signing of the historic agreements negotiated three weeks ago in London. At week's end he sent a jubilant wire to the President: "I am happy to inform you that everything . . . has been signed, sealed and delivered. I know you will rejoice with me that the unity and freedom of Europe to which you contributed so indispensably, seems likely now to be preserved."

This historic message was sent off quietly by the Secretary of State from his hotel in Paris, was received and read by the President at a small gathering of Pennsylvania Republicans in Gettysburg. Next day the President decided to hold a special Cabinet meeting to hear Dulles' report. With an election a week away, the Paris achievement could have been given a lot of sizzle. It deserved better treatment: it could have been the peg for an immediate, politically potent radio-television report to the people.

Accentuating the Negative. From every corner of the U.S. come unmistakable evidence that Dwight Eisenhower is still an exceedingly popular President. Many Democrats, as well as practically all Republicans, are attempting to ride his coattails. But there are few indications that U.S. voters have been sufficiently sold on the proposition that they should give the President a more Republican Congress.

Last week the tone of the campaign still permitted Texas' Senator Lyndon Johnson to argue that a Democratic Congress would be good for Ike. Expressing mock surprise that the President was supporting Republicans after so many of them had "failed to support" the Administration program, Johnson cracked that "President Eisenhower will have no one to blame but himself" if a G.O.P. Congress is elected. Cried Lyndon: "That man is a glutton for punishment."

In a column last week, Joseph Alsop, who considers himself a leader in the fight against McCarthy, wrote: "One of the real achievements of the Eisenhower Administration, apparently, is curing the national neurosis that was produced for so long by McCarthy's demagoguery, the Truman Administration's maladroitness and the foolish wartime misjudgments of the Communist Party's character." Coming from Joe Alsop, this is quite an admission. Are the Republican orators calling attention to their party's achievement in belling the McCarthy cat? They are not--and many of the intense anti-McCarthy votes are going Democratic on the ground that McCarthy is a Republican. Meanwhile, much of the hard-core McCarthy following is against Eisenhower because of what his Administration did to their hero.

In U.S. politics, most issues except war or a major depression are made, not born. The party in power has an obvious advantage in being able to frame and develop the issues. Almost without leaving their desks, the President and his Cabinet officers in State, Treasury and Defense could have built a dramatic national campaign around the Eisenhower Administration's accomplishments.

The irony of 1954 is that as the election neared, most observers predicted a Democratic victory, although all the events and all the decisions of the past three months--the successful record of the 83rd Congress, the bolstering of the economy, the reduction of unemployment, the strides in foreign policy--were events and decisions favorable to the Republican Party.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.