of books; I write as one who has been deeply concerned about the government of this nation and of all nations. In 1960 I served as a county chairman for Senator John F. Kennedy and campaigned for him across the country. In 1962 I ran for Congress in Bucks and Lehigh Counties in Pennsylvania, and lost, in part because I was up against a long-term incumbent who knew precisely what was required to hold onto his seat in his district, and in part because my opponent had a registration superiority of about 20,000 votes, which is a good thing to have in an election. In 1964 I campaigned on behalf of President Lyndon B. Johnson in three states, and in 1968 I not only worked vigorously for Vice-President Hubert H. Humphrey in a frantic airplane caravan but also wrote his official campaign biography.
In 1967 I served as secretary to the Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention and helped engineer a revision which would bring Pennsylvania into the forefront of states insofar as a modernized, constructive constitution was concerned. In this enterprise I had the opportunity of working at close quarters with William Scranton, former governor, who provided our convention with the moral stability and leadership any such group requires; it was partly because of Scranton that Pennsylvania became the only recent state to achieve acomplete reform of its constitution, New York, Maryland, Rhode Island, and others having tried and failed. I speak favorably of Scranton because when the time came for the voters of our state to accept or reject the new constitution, Chief Justice John Bell, of our Supreme Court, and his associate, Justice Michael Musmanno, leveled blasts against it of such weight and fury that it would have been defeated had not Scranton addressed the people of the state in these measured terms: “The charges made against the proposed changes by Justices Bell and Musmanno are the charges of two distinguished, nit-picking elderly statesmen who are interested not in the welfare of the state but in their personal prerogatives. If you voters decide to throw out the splendid work we have done for you, the best revision I am sure that this state could have produced, then you are out of your minds.” I cite these extraordinary words because I believe they could serve as copy-texts in the months ahead when proposals to change our system of electing Presidents are brought before the people for their acceptance or rejection.
Finally, in 1968 I served as co-chairman of a special committee charged with submitting recommendations for the general overhaul of procedures by which the Pennsylvania legislature operates. I would hope that in the years ahead I would continue to find the energy to work in politics, for I consider it one of the most fruitful exercises of the human mind.
The following are the three basic principles which have governed my attitude toward the mechanics of government, it being assumed that other principles of similar weight—suchas justice, equality, economic stability, and a judicious respect for historical derivations—determined my attitude toward the moral aspects of government.
Legitimacy.
The more I see of nations and the manner in which they govern themselves the more convinced I become that a prime requirement of any good government is that it be legitimate, that its sources of power be clear-cut and aboveboard, that its citizens accept decisions as honestly derived. People must see for themselves that laws are honestly passed, that Supreme Court decisions are untainted, that Presidents are fairly chosen.
In ancient days it was a priestly prerogative and obligation to bear public witness to the fact that kings descended legitimately one from the other, and great effort was spent to trace out lineages or associations whose authenticity would be apparent to the nation and accepted by it. The fact that in a democracy we do not rely upon our priests to perform this necessary function means not that the function is
In 1967 I served as secretary to the Pennsylvania Constitutional Convention and helped engineer a revision which would bring Pennsylvania into the forefront of states insofar as a modernized, constructive constitution was concerned. In this enterprise I had the opportunity of working at close quarters with William Scranton, former governor, who provided our convention with the moral stability and leadership any such group requires; it was partly because of Scranton that Pennsylvania became the only recent state to achieve acomplete reform of its constitution, New York, Maryland, Rhode Island, and others having tried and failed. I speak favorably of Scranton because when the time came for the voters of our state to accept or reject the new constitution, Chief Justice John Bell, of our Supreme Court, and his associate, Justice Michael Musmanno, leveled blasts against it of such weight and fury that it would have been defeated had not Scranton addressed the people of the state in these measured terms: “The charges made against the proposed changes by Justices Bell and Musmanno are the charges of two distinguished, nit-picking elderly statesmen who are interested not in the welfare of the state but in their personal prerogatives. If you voters decide to throw out the splendid work we have done for you, the best revision I am sure that this state could have produced, then you are out of your minds.” I cite these extraordinary words because I believe they could serve as copy-texts in the months ahead when proposals to change our system of electing Presidents are brought before the people for their acceptance or rejection.
Finally, in 1968 I served as co-chairman of a special committee charged with submitting recommendations for the general overhaul of procedures by which the Pennsylvania legislature operates. I would hope that in the years ahead I would continue to find the energy to work in politics, for I consider it one of the most fruitful exercises of the human mind.
The following are the three basic principles which have governed my attitude toward the mechanics of government, it being assumed that other principles of similar weight—suchas justice, equality, economic stability, and a judicious respect for historical derivations—determined my attitude toward the moral aspects of government.
Legitimacy.
The more I see of nations and the manner in which they govern themselves the more convinced I become that a prime requirement of any good government is that it be legitimate, that its sources of power be clear-cut and aboveboard, that its citizens accept decisions as honestly derived. People must see for themselves that laws are honestly passed, that Supreme Court decisions are untainted, that Presidents are fairly chosen.
In ancient days it was a priestly prerogative and obligation to bear public witness to the fact that kings descended legitimately one from the other, and great effort was spent to trace out lineages or associations whose authenticity would be apparent to the nation and accepted by it. The fact that in a democracy we do not rely upon our priests to perform this necessary function means not that the function is
Similar Books
