Sen. Thomas Kuchel and his regrettable war on California conservatives

Senator Thomas Kuchel was in the center of the political maelstrom threatening to engulf the California Republican Party in the 1960s.  Appointed to fill Richard Nixon's vacancy in 1952, Kuchel quickly made enemies on the political Right when he labelled John Birch Society members, "fright peddlers, from the simple simpletons to the wretched racists." (Political chickens coming home to roost)

Sen. Thomas Kuchel

In the 1962 governor's race between former Vice-President Richard Nixon and Democratic incumbent Pat Brown, Kuchel was accused of failing to fully-support Nixon.  In Kuchel's defense, however, that might have been a two-way street.  When asked about supporting Kuchel's re-election effort, Nixon replied, "[I am running] independently of candidates for national office." (Political chickens coming home to roost)

Anti-Kuchel feelings were exponentially inflamed in 1964, when Kuchel (erstwhile chairman of California campaign for Goldwater's primary foe Nelson Rockefeller), refused to support Sen. Goldwater--even after he had secured the Republican nomination!  The same year, Republican senatorial candidate George Murphy received similar treatment from Kuchel on the the grounds that Murphy would not repudiate the John Birch Society.

While Kuchel was cold-shouldering Murphy and campaigning against Goldwater, four men (Francis Capell, Norman Krause, Jack Clemmons, & John Fergus) with ties to the right were putting together their own hit job.  What purported to be an affidavit signed by an L.A. police officer began to circulate claiming that Kuchel was arrested in 1949 in the midst of a sex act.  This prompted a libel suit, which the senator won.(Kuchel receives accusers' apologies)


In the 1966 gubernatorial primary, Kuchel broke with custom (and perhaps formal rule) by endorsing, pre-primary, the liberal former mayor of San Francisco, George Christopher.  The Christopher endorsement itself might not have been that big of a deal, had Kuchel not taken the extra step of attempting to slander Reagan's campaign and supporters by warning:

...within our California Republican Party is a fanatical, neo-fascist, political cult, overcome with a strange mixture of corrosive hatred and sickening fear, recklessly determined to overcome our party or destroy it. (Demos hail Kuchel decision not to run)

The senator's impolitic (and perhaps envious) public stabs at the Reagan camp prompted Robert M. Smith, national chairman of Republicans for Ronald Reagan to sound off with a public statement of his own:

On behalf of our membership and supporters, I wish to strenuously object to your statement...which you have directed to the conservative Republicans in California.

If you are to look for a destroyer of the Republican Party you have but to look to your own voting record in the Senate to see who is in the mainstream of the party.

We resent your use of the office of U.S. senator as a platform from which to blacken the name of loyal Americans and fellow Republicans. (Local group raps Kuchel)

Things finally came to a head following Reagan's primary victory in June, when Kuchel seemed...less-than-congratulatory.  State GOP chairman Gaylord Parkinson had had enough. He fired off the following open letter to Kuchel:

As you are aware, there is a widespread anti-Kuchel feeling as the result of your lack of support for the Nixon ticket, the Murphy ticket, the Goldwater ticket and now your pre-primary endorsement in the gubernatorial race…Frankly, Tommy, it is my candid opinion that you have a lot of fences to mend in this state…I am concerned about this and am doing everything I can do to bring all elements of the party together…We have invited you to attend every State Central Committee meeting and you have attended none…In the Navy, when general quarters are sounded, every man is expected to go to his battle station, whether he likes the war or the direction the vessel is going.  To me, a general election is a call to arms for the hole [sic] party to stand behind the candidates freely and openly chosen by the party.  Your failure to endorse the California Republican ticket in the face of a preprimary endorsement of one of the candidates will be a disappointment to me and all loyal Republicans.  I hope you will see fit to change your mind. (Parkinson warns Kuchel: Board GOP bandwagon)

Kuchel's reply to this missive?  "Who the hell is Parkinson?"(Political chickens coming home to roost)

Well, Kuchel may not have known who the hell Parkinson was, but I suspect he found out in 1968 when he was successfully primaried by the conservative candidate Max Rafferty.  Rafferty, unfortunately, lost to Alan Cranston in the general election; And Thomas Kuchel went back to practicing law until his retirement in 1981.

As Hawkeyes caucus, the RSS Ronald Reagan encourages remembrance of Reagan’s primary style.

The more I learn about Reagan’s political history, the more I realize how the Republican party continues to fight the same internal battles that were going on when the Gipper first came to prominence.  In February 1966, liberal Republican senator Thomas Kuchel came out in support of Reagan’s primary opponent George Christopher.

Kuchel stated at a news conference Christopher is an outstanding candidate who represents the traditional progressive viewpoint of the Republican Party.

“[Christopher] was progressive,” said Kuchel.  “He demonstrated a keen interest in health and welfare problems.  He supported the rapid transit program.

It surely will not escape the keen reader’s attention that Kuchel’s verbiage and favored policies could be applied to today’s Obama campaign (e.g., progressive, rapid transit/high speed rail, health/Obamacare, etc.)  What is perhaps more relevant for us as the actual voting for the 2012 primary begins in Iowa, is what Reagan himself had to say about this whole business of primary endorsements and intra-party mudslinging:

Our primary election is a valuable and integral part of the political system.  With this, of course, there is the right and indeed the responsibility of party members to make their own personal choices.  The candidate and his supporters must conduct themselves in a  manner which engenders no bitterness so that the nominee who heads the ticket will have united backing.  This is the way I intend to conduct this campaign.

Different take on Reagan’s transition to conservatism and Kuchel’s reasons for bowing out of the 1966 gubernatorial race.

Bacon, J.(1965, November 14). All the world’s a stage: More and more actors try politics. Toledo Blade, B3.

In an article largely focused on the then-emerging trend of actors seeking political office  James Bacon not only mentioned Reagan’s obvious-yet-still-undeclared campaign for CA Governor, he matter-of-factly dropped two other comments that I’ve not heard before and that may supply fodder for future research/writing.  

The first was that:

Public opinion polls among Republicans have put [Reagan ] out in front as a GOP candidate for governor.  A poor second in the polls was GOP Sen. Thomas Kuchel who since has announced he’s content to stay in the U.S. Senate.

If memory serves me correctly, I thought all the “smart money” was prognosticating that Kuchel would “surely” defeat Reagan if only he would run.  This makes it sound suspiciously like Kuchel may have decided not to run precisely because he already knew there was a good chance he couldn’t beat Reagan.  If that’s right, it’s got to make you wonder even more about all the Republican big wigs talking about how people like Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum “can’t” beat Obama…about how we’ve just got to run Gingrich or Romney because they’ve got that elusive quality of “electability, a trait which--curiously enough--often inheres in Republicans who fail to get elected (e.g., John McCain)

The second interesting insight from Bacon was his suggestion that Reagan credited actor-turned-senator George Murphy for his conversion to the Republican party.

The rise of Ronald Reagan in politics reads like a movie script.  First he was a liberal Democrat and a militant leader during his long tenure as head of the Screen Actors Guild.  Then he switched to Republicanism.  “George Murphy made me see the light,” he says.

I’ve heard some speculation that Loyal Davis, adoptive father of Reagan’s second wife Nancy, was instrumental in pulling Reagan into the conservative political fold…but I’ve never heard Murphy mentioned in this regard.  This might be an interesting rabbit trail to pursue.  Can anyone else out there shed light on the Murphy-Reagan connection?

News Archives: Point of view takes odd turn

Talley, H. (1965, September 22). Editorial: point of view takes odd turn. Gadsden Times, p. 4.

This editorial commented on the oddity of Republican Clare Booth Luce praising William F. Buckley (then candidate for mayor of New York City) as “brilliant, witty, courageous, honest and articulate," even as the (ostensibly) Republican Senate Minority Leader, Thomas Kuchel was slandering Ronald Reagan as the leader of a fascist hate group.

The irony, as Helderman and Talley pointed out was that Buckley and Reagan had, “an almost identical political philosophy…How does it happen, then, that Buckley wears a halo and Reagan wears horns?”  

News Archive: Local group raps Kuchel

n. a. (1965, September 22). Local group raps Kuchel. The Owosso-Argus Press, p. 16.

This reports on a telegram sent by Robert M. Smith, national chairman of Republicans for Ronald Reagan, to Sen. Thomas Kuchel following the latter’s thinly-veiled slander of Reagan.  It read in part:

If you are to look for a destroyer of the Republican Party you have but to look to your own voting record in the Senate to see who is in the mainstream of the party.  We resent your use of the office of U.S. senator as a platform from which to bblacken the name of loyal Americans and fellow Republicans.

News Archive: Demos hail Kuchel decision not to run.

n. a. (1965, September 21). Demos hail Kuchel decision not to run. The Miami News, p. 9A.

In late September of 1965, California Democrats were breathing a collective sigh of relief when liberal Republican senator Thomas Kuchel announced he would not run for the governorship.  This left Ronald Reagan the odds on favorite to win the GOP primary.  All the “really smart people” concluded this would increase Brown’s chances for reelection.  Supposedly, the Brown camp wanted to run against Reagan.  Speaker of the California Assembly, Jesse Unruh (D.) proclaimed the Kuchel decision, “drastically increases the Democrats’ chances of keeping the governorship.”

In Obamaesque fashion, Kuchel decided that rather than simply bowing out of the race, he would toss a needlessly-alienating verbal grenade into the primary conversation:

…within our California Republic Party is a fanatical, neo-fascist, political cult, overcome with a strange mixture of corrosive hatred and sickening fear, recklessly determined to overcome our party or destroy it.

Reagan’s ability to slough off veiled personal attacks and stay on message was evidenced in his response, in which he agreed with Kuchel on the evils of neofascism and communism, noting that he was “unalterably opposed to either.”

Reagan vs. Kuchel: What Did the “Experts” Know, and When did They Know it?

Chances are pretty good you’ve never heard of Thomas Henry Kuchel.  But in the summer of 1965, he was the senior senator from the state of California.  What’s more, some saw him as, “near to a sure thing to beat [Democratic Governor Pat] Brown as is possible in American politics.” 



             

Sen. Thomas H. Kuchel 

pic courtesy of http://rpmedia.ask.com/

Kuchel was a man alternatively described as “liberal” or “moderate” depending upon who is writing about him.  He first joined the Senate in 1953, when Governor Earl Warren appointed him to fill the vacancy created by Richard Nixon’s election as vice-president of the United States.  Kuchel went on to win his own elections in 1956 and 1962.  As Senate minority whip, he co-managed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  

Kuchel seems to have had a very complex (some might say, “dysfunctional”) relationship with fellow Republicans.  In 1958, he supported conservative Senator William F. Knowland’s attempt to oust liberal governor Goodwin J. Knight in the Republican primary.  In 1962, he refused to endorse former Vice President Richard Nixon in the gubernatorial race against Pat Brown.  By 1964, Kuchel rebuffed Knowland when asked to endorse the Republicans’ conservative presidential nominee, U.S. Sen. Barry Goldwater. 

Gov. Edmund "Pat Brown

pic courtesy of http://upload.wikimedia.org/



Following the crushing electoral defeat of Goldwater by Lyndon Johnson, there was discussion afoot that Republicans might not have much of a future—and they surely wouldn’t if they continued to follow the “now-discredited” path of Goldwater conservatism.

Back in California, the supposedly disheartened conservatives seemed to be anything but.  In fact, Holmes Tuttle, Henry Salvatori, and other conservative Californians with deep pockets, believed that while they had lost the presidential contest, they had perhaps uncovered a “diamond in the rough” in actor Ronald Reagan. 

Over the previous ten to twenty years, Reagan had slowly morphed from a New Deal Democrat into a Goldwater conservative.  Indeed, though Reagan was well known nationally from his acting days and his stint as a goodwill ambassador for General Electric, it was his speech on Goldwater’s behalf at the 1964 Republican convention which made Tuttle, Salvatori, and others begin to see Reagan as more than just a pretty face.

Much early handicapping of CA’s 1966 gubernatorial race held that Kuchel would easily defeat Brown, whereas Reagan would lose.  One polling report stated that:

...while a good many people think [Reagan] would be an "excellent" Republican choice for governor, a much larger group feel he would be a "poor choice."  By contrast, Senator Kuchel is very seldom rated a "poor choice," and is much more likely to be rated a "good choice" than is Reagan.

The California Poll of August 11, 1965 concluded that:

…if Kuchel were running against Brown now, the Senator would be preferred over the Governor by a margin approaching two to one…Today’s Poll highlights  a dilemma for Republican leaders.  Should they back Kuchel who has the best chance of winning the governorship, facing the fact that if he wins in November of 1966 he would have to resign his U.S. Senate seat before taking office and give still-Governor Brown a chance to appoint a Democrat to fill his unexpired two years?  Or should they back Reagan…on the gamble that the governorship could be won without Kuchel, thus placing Republicans in all three top state offices?

As it turned out, one month later Kuchel decided not to enter the primary race for governor, and then refused to support Reagan in the general election against Brown.  The Democrats rejoiced at this—confident that Brown the “giant slayer” who had beaten back Knowland and Nixon would trounce this upstart actor.  As it turned out, Reagan defeated Brown by over one million votes, and carried all but three of California’s counties.
 

And the moral of the story for we beleaguered conservatives in 2011?  Be extremely cautious of voting against your conscience in the primary because one candidate or another is labeled “unelectable” by self-appointed wizards of smart.  Reagan was unelectable too.