w 0 9 " The Michigan Daily-Sunday Page 4-Sunday; March 30, 1980-The Michigan Daily primaries Life, liberty, and the pursuit of a new par Umontunea from Page 3) the president's warning that "defeat of this plan would leave the country vulnerable and defenseless against a (gasoline) supply interruption," the House of Representatives rejected the plan 246-159. One-hundred and six Democrats voted against the ad- ministration. Carter then held an angry White House news conference to accuse House members of "burying their heads in the sand." As he stood behind his desk in the Oval Office, Carter told reporters, "I was shocked and I was embarrassed for our, nation's government. This question indicates, and I hate to say this, that a majority of the House of Representatives have been willing to put local or parochial interests ahead and let political timidity prevent their taking action in the interest of our nation." Carter thus sent a blatant message to the Congress controlled by his own party-come up with your own damn plan. ST WAS A NASTY confrontation, but the gas rationing debacle wasn't the only embarrassment orthe beleaguered administration that gasoline-dry summer. That same mon- th that the rationing plan was defeated, the House Democratic caucus voted by a two-thirds majority to condemn the president's planned decontrol of oil. The leader of the House anti-decontrol movement was the 35-year-old liberal Toby Moffett. Said another Democratic congressman, Rep. Edward Markley, of the, vote, "This is a complete repudiation of the president's position." The reforms of the nominating system, instituted by the McGovern commission, were supposed to open up the process to the people. But taking the nominating process out of the hands of the party leaders has had, unfor- tunately, some negative results. One of those is Jimmy Carter. A lot can be said against the old closed system that selected the nominee in smoke-filled rooms. But when all is said and done, it cannot be ignored that the party leaders, when picking a nominee, did often look for qualities and qualifications that the general electorate has tended to ignore. A candidate can, as Carter did, win the party nomination by stressing personal appeal and relying on grassroots organization in the primaries. But he may be totally unqualified for the presidency in terms of experience or some of the political alliances necessary to govern. The party leaders, when they were handpicking the nominee, at least took such qualifications into account. For example, most political historians agree that in 1952 Adlai Stevenson-who was drafted by the party leaders-was infinitely more qualified and would have made a better president than Estes Kefauver, who won the majority of state primaries. Another result of the proliferation of state primaries is that the nominatingw process has been stretched into a long and gruelling war of attrition. In 1980, at last count, 33 states and Puerto Rico have held or will be holding Democratic primaries. There are 35 Republican primaries. Such an abusing six-month ordeal tends to dissuade many qualified candidates-who would make good presidents-from even entering the fray. In 1976, for instance, Walter Mon- dale bowed out of the presidential sweepstakes after admitting he didn't have the endurance for a long, drawn- out primary race, sleeping in cheap hotels and constantly on the stump with barely enough time for dinners. His fellow democrats all agree that Mon- ,dale would make , an excellent president-the proof of that being in that they unanimously endorsed him for Vice-President in 1976. But why should qualified, experienced can- didates like a Walter Mondale be ex- cluded from consideration merely for not wanting to subject themselves to the masochistic primary ordeal? The primary process also does a disservice to qualified candidates who would like to maintain a job while run- ning for president-and the classic example is Tennessee Senator Howard Baker. The characteristics that go in- to making a good United States Senator-hard work, diligence, atten- tion to legislative detail-are the same characteristics that handicap a presidential candidate under the more "democratic" primary system, a system that requires full-time cam- paigning for six months. Now a system that left the nominations in the hands of party stalwarts would have taken into account Senator Baker's qualifications as well as Bush's organization or Reagan's charisma and deep baritone. - By most accounts, Baker was perhaps the one Republican in the 1980 primary race most qualified to be president. tie wa ainree-term Republian Senator from a heavily Democratic state, the minority leader of his party, and almost always at the forefront of all the major issues. He was intelligent, affable, and able to build a bipartisan political alliances. (For in- stance, he worked with his Democratic president to pass the Panama Canal treaties). Yet Baker became an early casualty of the 1980 sweepstakes, not for lack o qualifications, but because he had not been devoting his full time to cam- paigning. While Baker was in Washington, working on legislation, George Bush and Ronald Reagan were spending all their time in Iowa and New Hampshire, organizing the the troops and making personal appearances which, in primary states, is more im- portant than qualifications. B ESIDES EFFECTIVELY eliminating many qualified contenders from the ranks, the breakdown of our political parties' power has put America's governmental machinery at an im- Primaries to * A halt to nuclear power; " A reduction in military spending; " Lower unemployment rates; " Increased support of human rights both domestic and foreign, including aid to the Equal Rights Amendment, civil rights, and affirmative action; * Stable prices for food, fuel, housing, and medical care, primarily through price con- trols; and, most importantly, " Public control of the energy and other major industries. This control, members stress, should be as decentralized as possible, such as through local com- missions. Members assure observers, however, that they have a magic solution which will build a platform from such ambiguous planks: the party's founding convention in. Cleveland, in two weeks. At the three-day convention, not only will the party adopt platforms, but it will also nominate can- didates for U.S. ,president and vice- president for the 1980 election. With the GOP and Democratic primaries already in high gear, it would appear almost too late for another candidate (a virtual unknown in political circles) to join in the race. But this fact does not sway Citizens Party members, whose ranks have already swelled to include the likes of Grey Panther Maggie Kuhn and author Studs Terkel. Names of potential nominees are already being bandied about. The one most frequen- tly heard is Barry Commoner, a Washington University of St. Louis professor of en- vironmental science, director of the univer- sity's Center for the Biology of Natural Systems, and, not coincidentally, one of the party's more well-known members. A veteran of numerous newspaper and television interviews, Commoner already has some of the prestige needed by poten- tial presidential candidates; he would therefore appear to be the logical presiden- tial nominee for the fledging, publicity- hungry party. And Commoner himself says he would run if nominated, although he refuses to name any potential running mates. Like the loyal party member he is, Commoner prefers to leave such decisions up to the party, a la former President Jerry Ford. "It's not up to me. We're not an elitist party," Commoner insists. "It's different,"' he adds, skillfully turning the conversation away from his own aspirations, and back to the party and its goals. Despite Commoner's unwillingness to speculate publicly on the identity of poten- tial vice-presidential candidates, his most likely -and thus far, only, opponent for the presidential nomination has no such qualms. Larry Manuel, an electrical engineer from Oakland, Calif., generously says he would like Commoner to be his run- ning mate in November. His ultimate goal, Manual says, is to run as many candidates as possible, and. have the top vote-getter become president, the second winner become vice-president, and the remaining candidates to become Cabinet members. This method, Manuel says, will ensure that the Citizens Party ticket will not be split between Commoner's supporters and Manual's supporters. And yet a split in the party voting is exac- tly what may occur, especially as the disparity between the two candidates' plat- forms becomes more apparent. Above all else, Commoner is a man with a specific purpose-the restructuring of American society. Running for president is, in his opinion, the method by which society can best be reshaped. He firmly believes in running a Citizens Party candidate, whether it turns out to be he or someone else. "We're not interested in making gestures or making people feel good," he says. Despite the great odds against the election of a Citizens Party president, Commonerw and his colleagues believe that running a candidate will demonstrate the need for societal changes to the nation's elite. "The issue is to run as hard as we can and get as many votes as we can," Commoner says. The goal percentage of votes to attain appears to be five per cent, "If we get 'X' per cent of the vote in 1980, we'll have a foot in thedoor in redefining political objectives in the future," says John Lippert, an organizer of the party's Detroit branch. "Some people say 'X' per cent is five per cent. I don't know if we can get five per cent. I don't know if the Citizens Party candidate can win in 1980. But a long-term party is needed. If not the Citizens Party, it'll look very much like the Citizens Party." Commoner is perhaps best-known for his policies on energy and environment-a distinction which does not please him. "Broad policies must come from a basic economic analysis," he says, which in turn can be related to "current events." Commoner calls President Carter's recently-announced budget-balancing plan "disasterous. It has nothing to do with in- flation." He claims "falling productivity" is at the heart of the nation's eco- nomic ills. For, instance, Commoner cites an increasing military budget as one cause of declining economic output. Accor- ding to Commoner, "building tanks does no good," because they are useless items; he advocates altenatively a "sharp cut in the military budget." On the issue of energy, Manuel advocates the "direct collection of solar heat." Although pressed, Manuel offers little fur- Commoner offers a solution to the situation of the 50 hostages in Iran, which he says would be morally right and would probably result in the Americans' freedom. His answer is to make public the history of America's involvement with the regime of the deposed shah. "We should make a.clean breast of it," he asserts. The differences in ideologies of the poten- tial nominees represent a choice party mem- bers will have to make both in candidates and philosophies of the party itself. Because despite all attempts to present a unified stance,. the party is split into two factions, each seeking to guide it toward a distinct strategic cour- se. One faction of the party, headed by Commoner, favors building a party by run- ning candidates. The opposition advocates building a grass roots organization, specializing in projects geared toward aiding specific groups, such as minorities. Lippert cites plans such as working toward "Puerto Rican self-determination or 'Washington' D.C. statehood." Manuel is an opponent of the Commoner school. "I'm a reformer," he says. "I'm more specific (than Commoner) in how to restructure the government," he adds, a strong assessment for an unknown. Ironically, the rift widens somewhat because Commoner and his allies refuse to recognize and deal with those differences that currently exist. "Everyone miscon- strued the issue," Commoner insists. But others in the party don't see the situation in quite the same light, although assessments of the problem's seriousness vary. "There's a difference of opinion," Univer- sity junior Phil Kwik, a member of the par- ty's Ann Arbor chapter explains mildly. Kwik adds that he hopes the national con- vention in Cleveland will straighten out the situation. According to University Associate Math Prof. Art Schwartz, another member of the natural one "i the party misha promising a c platforms. Several nam vice-presidenti suggestion is r the presidentia names were sp possibilities inc Senator Julian Lucius Walker, Ku Klux Klan m+ Delegates wl convention Apr ty caucuses th state caucus w College in Detr states to get on expects the pari 35 states. The M deadline of May in order to get o primary, 3,500' ty, in order for ballot. Party r that problems Cullough Act, say is designed ballot. Under third parties fo questions pert Republicans; t may favor the November balls the party in Au ple of residents ward. Because] of taking kickb area will proba office. Accordir voters may sy they will not be to unseat Diggs Party membi to make inroa tions. "'There i in the state i University soi member of the In any ever committed to party to save A porate giants, and Republica: ch for greate moner made noted: "We ha to restore the life, liberty, piness.. . to c more just, a ha neath the la despite the infi a single unifyi bers which per his speech bes the ability, bu future; to tak resources, our and economic Whether part this sef-impos seen. Barry Commoner By Adrienne Lyons It began as a dream, the epitome of what a democracy should be. The its founders began to attempt to mold it into a tangible reality, complete with form and content. But almost a year after its inception, the Citizens Party has remained little more than a colorful dream, without substance, and without life. Party members say tiey are commited to answering a cry in the country for an "alternative" to the Democratic and Republican Parties, as well as building a lasting party for today and the future. "It is not a third party, for we reject the relevance of the two existing ones," one press release reads. But despite their own cry for "relevan- cy," party members persist in speaking in terms of increased "social control" and "economic democracy." Fine terms, no doubt, unless you stop to consider their vagueness. Most party members recognize the use, or overuse, of these "catch-all" phrases. They will readily admit to a lack of specificity inh Adrienne Lyons is the Associate- Editor of the Daily's Sunday Magazine. the party's platforms. A refreshing change from the Democrats and Republicans, who claim to have all the answers for the nation's ills? Perhaps. But more realistically, this vagueness is the key to this new party's problems. When it was formed last May by a small group of persons. that included some noted liberal philanthropists. the Citizens Party dedicated itself to the principles of "social change," or public control over private cor- porations, which they claim make the major economic decisions affecting the country. Members say they are a socialist party, but because of the poor track record of socialist parties in this country. they at- tempt to masque their orientation under the all-encompassing umbrella "Citizens Par- ty." Since its birth, the party's platforms have grown little. According to Bert DeLeuw, the party's national field director in Washington, D.C., the only solid platform the party has thus far is a 21-part plan detailing the party's position on the draft issue. Asked to describe the plan, DeLeuw simply replies, "Well, we're against it." Pressed for elaboration, DeLeuw dodges the, question, rather unskillfully, finally mum- bling, "We're against it." A lack of firm positions has not prevented the party from making statements about the issues. For instance, the party's members believe in: PAS04 0C 2000 f $Of- O.OiM ther explanation of his stance. Commoner, too, favors a transition to solar energy, but his plan includes the use of grain and wood alcohol, which Manuel claims is merely a short-term solution to the problem. But Commoner says gasohol, an agricultural product, would also increase farmer productivity, and therefore further stimulate the economy.In his recent book, The Politics of Enetgy, Commoner in- dicates this plan is not only environmentally sound, but also onethat would decrease the nation's need for both domestic and foreign oil. Commoner says 'he finds few other energy policies feasible. Gas rationing, for instance, is nothing more than "the long ap- proach. You've got to make fuel available as cheaply as possible through constructive steps to solve problems, rather than putting Band-Aids on them." Like the new economic proposal, Com- moner says he finds the president's foreign policy "disastrous." "Carter should have published an account of (the U.S.'s in- volvement with) Iran," Commoner adds. "What's worse is we're making the same mistake in Saudi Arabia. The Carter doc- trine is a guarantee of war over Saudi Arabia." Ann Arbor branch, the party is aivided into "the left and not-so-left wings. The party will never coalesce," Schwartz says, "but it's unified in that the country is run by a few mega-giants and no one is for that." However, the question remains of exactly how much control the federal government should have over the party's proposed programs. As Schwartz says, "You'll never want private armies." Disagreements are also cropping up at local party levels. Kwik says Ann Arbor chapter members are undecided whether or not to focusrecruiting efforts on students, who are among the most transient members of the community. The Ann Arbor chapter currently has 16 members. It appears there is little the upstart Manuel can do to halt the surging tide of Com- moner's influence and power within the par- ty. Many members, including Schwartz, are unaware of Manuel, and essentially believe .the Citizen's Party elected Commoner even before it was fully formed. According to Schwartz, it was partly this half-promise of Barry Commoner as a presidential can- didate that "galvanized the movement. "Commoner would ne the best candidate, most likely," Schwartz says. "He's the