 The Honored Watch is Long Jean. Long Jean watches have won ten World's Fair Grand Prizes, twenty-eight gold medals and more honors for accuracy than any other timepiece. Long Jean, the world's most honored watch, is made and guaranteed by the Long Jean Wittemaw Watch Company. It's time for the Long Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Long Jean Wittemaw Watch Company, maker of Long Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittemaw, distinguished companion to the world-honored Long Jean. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Long Jean Chronoscope? Mr. Donald I. Rogers, an editor of the New York Herald Tribune, and Mr. William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable A.S. Mike Monroni, United States Senator from Oklahoma. The opinions expressed are necessarily those of the speakers. Senator Monroni, our great chronoscope audience, remembers you, sir, as a very energetic young freshman senator who won a rather dramatic victory in Oklahoma last year. And first, I think they'd like to locate you in the political firmament. I believe you're a Democrat, aren't you, sir? Indeed I am, Mr. Huey. And do you call yourself a fair dealer? I wouldn't hardly call myself a fair dealer. I call myself a good Democrat. I vote with the Democrats generally, but time and again, I call them as I see them, and sometimes I can't go along. In general, however, you are a supporter of the administration. In general, yes. I think we're on the right policy to help this country find prosperity and peace. Well, I'm sure that our audience would like to have your reactions on the corruption issues, sir. Now, are you concerned over the corruption stories that are breaking daily in the press? Indeed I am. I think it's one of the greatest problems that this country faces is to continue to give efficient, honest government. And we cannot tolerate anything less. I think the important thing about the corruption that has been uncovered, that has been uncovered by Democratic Congress in both houses and that the committees that have been investigating have been chairmaned by Democrats. We're not sweeping the dirt under the rug. Do you think it's a problem of the country or a problem of the administration? I think it's a problem of both. I think you're always going to have a certain percentage of men of bad faith when you have large sums of money being handled and large problems to handle. The important thing is to prosecute those to the fullest extent of your ability and to be sure that any dereliction of duty is thoroughly cleaned up. You feel that the President has been prone to sidestep the issue? I don't believe he has. I think he's moved in just as strong as he can on this corruption. I think the changes that have been made and will be made will prove that we're going to clean this up just as fast as thoroughly as it can be done. Do you think perhaps, sir, that the situation reflects some laxity in the White House itself? I couldn't say that. There have been mistakes in appointments perhaps. And then I think the system probably is wrong. I think one of the things bad that concerns me the most is the things that are coming out about the Internal Revenue Department. I believe that the political appointments is the wrong system to trust to political henchmen the collection of 60 billions of dollars. I think it ought to be career work. Now, Senator Dixon of Illinois has stated on this show not long ago that he thought that there was some, he called it, collapse of conscience in the country or that the country was losing some of its capacity for moral indignation. Now, what are your views on that line, sir? Well, sir, I can certainly say, Mr. Hewitt, that the country is properly indignant, that Congress is properly indignant. And the fact that the important thing about this corruption issue is that it is being cleaned out and will be cleaned out if the country was tolerating it. The country just shrugged their shoulders and said, well, it's always going to be some of this and what can you do about it? That would be something to worry about. But the fact is you're out to get it and you're out to clean it up. Do you feel that this will have some impact on the forthcoming elections? Well, undoubtedly it will be a part of the campaign. It will be one of the things that Democrats will probably be called to account for. Work to their detriment. Unless the thing is properly cleaned up and I believe it will be properly cleaned up and the guilty people punished and the system that is wrong and by that I mean the system used by both parties and that's political appointments for internal revenue positions. Should be changed to civil service and career appointments. Now speaking of the next election, sir, I believe that you have just been had something to do with the investigation of the Ohio elections and the amount of money spent in the re-election of Senator Teff. Yeah, that's right, Mr. Young. Now, what conclusions have you reached after investigating that election? Well, this is not the first state we've been in. We've investigated several states, Maryland, Ohio, Iowa and several others. We've come to the conclusion that we've got to tighten up the loopholes in the corrupt practices act. It was passed in 1925 and the limits that fixed $10,000 for a state of New York or for the state of California, these tremendous, or Ohio, is entirely unrealistic in the light of today's demands and you're always going to have money spent in excess of those amounts unless you correct the loopholes and put a realistic limit in and make the candidate accountable for every dime that is spent in his behalf whether by satellite organization or whether by the candidate himself. You didn't investigate Ohio in a deliberate effort to discredit Senator Teff. Mr. Huey will say that it was a very fair investigation. In fact, we got more complaints from the Ferguson side because we investigated both sides. Tell me, how do you go about, or how would you go about amending the corrupt practices act to eliminate so much money being spent during election? Well, I think in the first place you ought to put a realistic limit on what can be spent to say $10,000 to win a Senate seat in Ohio is entirely fantastic. You didn't have television, radio. You didn't have colored printing or billboards or any of the things in 1925 that are mandatory to be used in a campaign today. Did you raise the ante? I'd raise the ante, probably to $250,000 or a half a million dollars if necessary in these big states and then require an absolute accounting for every dime that's spent whether by the candidate or by the satellite organizations that now spend money in his behalf ostensibly without the candidate knowing that it's being spent. Do you have any conclusions to the probabilities of 1952, sir? Do you anticipate a very vigorous campaign in 1952? Well, I think it would be one of the bitterest and perhaps one of the dirtiest political campaigns in history unless the Congress passes a new set of markers of Queensborough rules. We're going to have to have some pattern with which both parties can live by and observe. You think there may be, we may set a record in national expenditures unless something is taken. I think it would be easily possible I think of 1,200,000 being spent in the TAF campaign and by his supporters for other portions of the Republican ticket and perhaps 800,000 for the Democratic side. You get into pretty fantastic sums for one of the 48 states. Will we also set a national record in mud slinging? Well, I think that's liable to be one of the dangers and we're trying to work on this scurrility and defamatory statements. I think that is another danger that you can tear up the very fabric of government. Are you going to limit inside fighting of that nature? Well, we're trying to do it on Senate races by giving notice now in the Senate rules that a man's campaign, the type of campaign that he runs will be one of the matters in which he's judged for his qualifications to be a member of the United States Senate. Senator, you are from a border state so our audience tonight will be very much interested in your predictions for 1952. Now specifically, do you think the president will be a candidate to succeed himself? Mr. Huey, I don't believe he will. That's only a guess. No one has ever told me, but I've observed the political scene both as a political writer and now as a congressman and now as a senator. Then who do you think will be the Democratic nominee? Of course my guess is that Speaker Sam Rayburn will be the logical man to be the Democratic candidate. Why do you think Sam Rayburn will be the man? Well, in the first place, he's held the number two job in this country which his Speaker of the House is far more important than the Vice Presidency. Any man has ever served in the House of Representatives as a supporter of Sam Rayburn's and you've got hundreds of them throughout the country in all 48 states who believe in him and respect him. What about his political location? The Democrats haven't nominated the Southerner for president in many years. That's right, but Sam fortunately has demonstrated over the years that he's been Speaker of the House a complete fairness for both the North and the South and you can ask any man from New York or Connecticut or Massachusetts or any of the northern states has ever served in the House with Rayburn and you'll find that they'll say at all times that Mr. Rayburn has been extremely fair. Now as to political sentiment in your state, if the election were held today, sir, and the race were between Mr. Rayburn and Senator Taft, how do you think Oklahoma would go? Well, I really believe Oklahoma would go for Mr. Rayburn undoubtedly. Suppose the race were between Mr. Rayburn and Mr. Eisenhower, General Eisenhower. Well, Mr. Eisenhower would make a very, very hard candidate to beat. The only way you could beat him, perhaps, would be to connect him up with the Republican Congress that he'd have to work with during the four years if he were elected and run the Republican congressional record. Do you think that General Eisenhower will be a candidate? Well, of course there's been an awful lot of Congressmen and Senators and others trying to find out the answers to that question. My guess is that he will not be a candidate. I'd like one other observation from you, sir. Senator Smathers, a young man, like yourself, was on the other night. And we were talking about what the young Congressmen are thinking. Are you hopeful this year about what's going to happen to this country, sir? Yes, I feel a lot better about it as we finish this year than I did at the start. I believe we're beginning to see our way through this cold and partially hot war. You think 1952 will be a year of war, economy, and high taxes? Oh, indeed it will. We'll still have our restrictions on building and priorities and things of that kind. I don't believe you can get taxes any higher. I believe they've reached about the point of diminishing returns. Morals will be, though. Senator, as I understand what you've said then tonight, you are quite concerned about the corruption issue. You've been putting a ceiling on expended tours and you think that we're going to have a very hot presidential race in 1952. Thank you very much for coming up from Washington being with us, sir. Thank you very much. The editorial board for this edition of the Launcine Chronoscope was Mr. Donald I. Rogers and Mr. William Bradford Huey. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable A.S. Mike Monroni, United States Senator from Oklahoma. Here is a quick and easy lesson on an important subject. How to buy a Christmas gift watch. Just look at this enlarged Launcine watch movement. It's a beauty, isn't it? And yet, how can you and I be sure that it's a truly fine mechanism? Now, there is a way to judge any watch. And Launcine told you about it in this magazine, Advertisement, which you may have seen. Here is the advertisement and here is it is enlarged. Now, you can judge any watch by its record of honors and accomplishments throughout the world. And here is the Launcine record. At World Spares and International Expositions, Launcine watches have won highest honors in every single competition they've entered. The total 10 World Spare Grand Prizes and 28 gold medals. Inaccuracy competitions at the National Observatories, the record of Launcine watches is equally extraordinary. Since 1878. Prize after prize. And right now, the record for wristwatch accuracy at Nurchatelle Observatory is held by Launcine. And so it goes in every field of precise timing, a unique record of Launcine honors and achievements all over the world. Now, what does this record prove? It proves one thing very conclusively. Throughout the world, no other name on a Christmas gift watch means so much as Launcine. The world's most honored watch. And if you pay $71.50 or more for a Christmas watch, you're paying the price of a Launcine. So why not insist on getting a Launcine? The world's most honored watch. Premier product of the Launcine Wittner Watch Company. Since 1866. Maker of watches of the highest character. This is Frank Knight again, inviting you to join us every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at the same time for the Launcine Chronoscope. A television journal of the important issues of the hour. Broadcast on behalf of Launcine. The world's most honored watch. And Wittner, a distinguished companion to the world honored Launcine. Sold and serviced from coach to coach by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Launcine Wittner Watches. This is the CBS television network.