|
This article was originally printed in a Newspaper for collectors of political memorabilia.
End of the Line for the New York Liberal Party?
by John E. Vargo
 he Democrats' hopes of retaining control of the U.S. Senate and taking over
the House were not the only casualties of the 2002 off-year elections.
Another casualty was the Liberal Party of New York State, which was at the
time nearing its 60th anniversary. Collectors are probably most familiar
with the Liberal Party because of the buttons and other materials it issued
for presidential candidates, including Franklin Roosevelt, Adlai Stevenson,
John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson.
The immediate cause of the party's demise was quite simple. Under New York
election law, it would continue to have a line on the state ballot only if
its gubernatorial candidate in 2002, Andrew Cuomo, received at least 50,000
votes in the general election. Cuomo, who had halted his campaign in early
September when it became clear he would not win nomination of the Democratic
Party, fell well short of that mark. According to the party's Web site, efforts
are underway to revive the party, but it's anyone's guess on whether those efforts will succeed.
In a number of respects, the Liberal Party was a unique phenomenon in American politics,
and this is an appropriate time to take a look at the party's role in national and state politics,
and its material legacy. The focus of this article is on the formation of the party in 1944
and some of the materials issued in its earlier presidential campaigns. Perhaps a collector
who specializes in New York State political memorabilia will be interested in doing an article
that discusses the Liberal Party's many efforts over the years in state and
local campaigns in New York and its more recent history (as well as corrects any errors made
in this article!).
LIBERAL PARTY BASICS
There are several points that are critical to an understanding of the New
York Liberal Party.
First, the State of New York is one of the few states - as a practical matter,
it may be the only state - that allows "fusion" candidates, that is, candidates
who are the nominee of more than one party. Thus, for example, in each of the
fifteen presidential elections that occurred between 1944 and 2000, the Liberal Party
had a nominee on the ballot, and in fourteen of those elections, it was the Democratic
candidate for president. (Perhaps more to the point, in those fourteen elections, the
New York Democratic Party and the Liberal Party shared the same slate of presidential
electors.) The one exception to the party's support of the Democratic presidential
nominee was in 1980, when the party selected independent John Anderson over President
Jimmy Carter.
In state and local campaigns, however, the Liberal Party was nowhere near as uniform
in supporting Democratic candidates, and thus demonstrated that it was very much a genuine,
independent party. At times the party nominee was the Republican candidate (for example,
Senator Jacob Javits in 1968 and 1974, Senator Charles Goodell in 1970, and Mayor Rudy Giuliani
in his campaigns of 1993 and 1997), and at times the party has fielded its own nominee
(for example, Franklin Roosevelt, Jr. for governor in 1966, Mayor John Lindsay in 1969, and
Senator Javits in 1980, when he was not the Republican nominee).
Second, probably the key reason for the success that the party enjoyed in the past
is that there were a significant number of liberal-minded voters in New York who did
not wish to affiliate with or support the New York Democratic Party. Their objections
to the New York Democratic Party concerned primarily the party's Tammany Hall legacy of
bossism and corruption in the party. Basically, the Liberal Party provided these voters
with a way to vote for meritorious Democratic Party candidates, who were also on the ballot
as the Liberal Party candidate, without associating with the Democratic Party.
Finally, it's also important to know that at least in the first couple decades of its
existence, the Liberal Party was very much a creature of labor unions, and particularly
the politically active Internal Ladies' Garment Workers Union (ILGWU). Indeed, David Dubinsky,
who headed the ILGWU until the mid-1960's, should probably be considered the father of the
Liberal Party.
In 1995 the ILGWU merged with the Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers to form UNITE,
the Union of Needle Trades, Industrial and Textile Employees. Anyone knowledgeable about
Liberal Party history probably saw some irony in the merger, because as we shall see, a
major reason for the party's formation in 1944 was a conflict between the ILGWU's Dubinsky
and the then-head of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers Union. The head of the ACWA at that
time was an individual who was, like Dubinsky, a giant of union political action, Sidney
Hillman - yes, the Sidney Hillman of "Clear Everything with Sidney" fame.
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LIBERAL PARTY IN 1944
Those familiar with New York politics in
the FDR era are probably aware that in 1944, there was already a third party that could
serve as a home to liberal-minded voters who did not wish to affiliate with the New York
Democrats. That party was the American Labor Party, which had been formed in 1936 to help
in the re-election campaigns of FDR and New York Governor Herbert Lehman. Why, then, was a
second liberal/labor-oriented party established only eight years later?
 The reason, briefly stated, is that in 1944, a question arose on the future direction of
the ALP, and Hillman and Dubinsky, who were powerhouses in the party, were on opposite
sides of the question. The Hillman forces prevailed in the ALP state primary that took
place in March 1944, whereupon the Dubinsky forces left the ALP and formed the Liberal Party.
The specific question that arose in 1944 was whether union leaders in New York who were
pro-Communist would be allowed to play a role in the ALP. Hillman's view was that they
should be allowed to play a role, and Dubinsky's view was that they should not.
Because the issue was resolved in a primary, the dispute was a very public one, much
to the chagrin of FDR and those who were preparing the fourth term campaign. The campaign
committee of the Dubinsky forces was named the "Liberal-Labor Committee to Safeguard the ALP",
and the 7/8" celluloid "Roosevelt Liberal Labor Comm." picture button (Hake FDR 139) was
probably issued by that organization.
Just to clarify what was at issue, it should be understood that Hillman was not a communist
in any sense, and both he and Dubinsky were aware that the American Communist organization
was, in fact, merely a puppet of Moscow. Nevertheless, Hillman wanted the pro-Communists
to be part of the ALP in 1944, because he was concerned that the presidential campaign in
New York would be close and believed that their involvement might help secure the state for
FDR. Hillman also believed that he and the other non-communists in the ALP would be strong
enough to prevent the pro-Communists from ever dominating the party. It also has to be
remembered that at that time, the Soviet Union was a key ally of the United States in the war
against Nazi Germany, and there were hopes that once the war was over, the Soviet Union would
join with the U.S. and Britain in establishing an era of world peace and freedom.
Dubinsky, on the other hand, saw the pro-Communist union leaders as a far more sinister,
ruthless and malignant force. His view was that if the pro-Communists were allowed into
the party, they would come to dominate it, and they would use the ALP as a tool to support
whatever Moscow wanted.
Dubinsky's autobiography tells of a little-known episode from the 1940 presidential
campaign that underlay his concerns. In the period of late 1939 to mid-1941 when the
Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact was in effect, Moscow ordered the American Communists to
oppose FDR because of his anti-Nazi, pro-British stance. As part of that effort, they made
a strong effort to deny FDR the ALP nomination when the party met in September 1940.
They did not have the votes to stop the nomination, and so instead they made a concerted
attempt to break up the meeting with shouting and rioting. Dubinsky and the other pro-FDR
leaders were able to secure the ALP nomination for FDR, but only after moving the session
from the meeting hall to their hotel lobby and calling in police to take away those who were
trying to disrupt the meeting.
The vital importance of the ALP nomination to FDR's 1940 campaign in New York is evident
from the election returns. FDR received over 400,000 votes on the ALP line, far more than
his overall margin of victory over Willkie in the state, which was about 224,000 votes.
There are at least two ALP buttons - litho picture buttons (Hake FDR numbers 147 and 148)
- that are attributable to the party's efforts in FDR's behalf in 1940.
Hillman's strategy for ALP involvement in the 1944 presidential campaign in New York worked.
The ALP provided nearly 500,000 votes for FDR - a number which was well in excess of his
overall margin of victory over Dewey in the state, which was about 316,000 votes. The Liberal
Party had provided 329,000 votes for FDR. On the other hand, it could be said that Dubinsky's
concerns about the ALP were confirmed in later years, as the ALP supported Henry Wallace's
third-party bid in 1948, and from there went into oblivion. Of course, it's impossible to say
for certain whether the ALP would have taken that course if Dubinsky and the other non-communists
had not left the party in 1944.
....next page
© 1997-2007 Moon Productions. All rights reserved. Page design by
www.moonproductions.com.
|
