Early experiences with the Congress have led me to some strange and unexpected conclusions. Surface indications to date are that the individuals from whom I had expected the greatest amount of opposition and with whom I would find cooperation to be difficult have shown a contrary attitude. Senator Taft1 has been the model of cheerful and effective cooperation--so has Senator Bridges, Capehart, Dirksen and others of this general group.2 In the House Joe Martin, Charlie Halleck and John Tabor have been most helpful, and while these men have not been classed in the public mind as the extreme conservatives, neither have they been known as members of the more liberal wing of the party.3 At the same time, I have found in the Senate that some of my best friends have either been extremely sensitive or have become rather temperamental. Frank Carlson4 so dislikes a particular individual that I want to give an important post in government to that I have to withhold the name of one of the men who could do one of our toughest jobs in admirable fashion, Saltonstall has been very fearful and ineffective in handling cases of cases of men who have to dispose of large amounts of stock in order to qualify for office.5 While in every case the men I have named have been quite willing to comply with the provisions of the law6 (and I am referring to interpretations given by some eminent men such as John W. Davis)7 I have found that some of our senatorial friends are so politically fearful that they carry the meaning and intent of the law far beyond anything that could be considered reasonable.
The result is that sooner or later we will be unable to get anybody to take jobs in Washington except business failures, college professors, and New Deal lawyers.8 All of these would jump at the chance to get a job that a successful businessman has to sacrifice very much to take. Reasonable sacrifices are, of course, to be expected; in fact the government can scarcely afford to allow anyone to occupy an important post unless he did have to sacrifice very materially in order to take it. But it is the carrying of the practice to the extreme that will eventually damage us badly, unless we get some logical breaks in the Senate in the handling of these cases.
All of my early Cabinet meetings have revealed the existence of a spirit of teamwork and of friendship that augers well for the future. Everybody is working hard and doing it with a will. At the moment my two slight worries involve Weeks of Commerce and Durkin of Labor.9 The former seems so completely conservative in his views that at times he seems to be illogical. I hope that I am mistaken or if not, that he will soon become a little bit more aware of the world as it is today.
Mr. Durkin seems to me to carry a bit of a chip on his shoulder. Whenever he presents anything in the Cabinet meetings, it is with an attitude that seems to be just a bit jeering. Again I hope I am mistaken.
Naturally, in both cases I shall do the best I can in personal conversations to eliminate what I think I see in the two of them. It is the kind of problem I have often had before, and I am by no means discouraged. It is merely that I want this team to function better than any I have ever had around me before. All other members of the Cabinet, including Lodge, Stassen, Dodge and Mrs. Hobby,10 are performing exactly as I expected and I am delighted with them.
The White House and Executive staff is rounding into shape rapidly and I believe is going to function exceedingly well. Most of the members are individuals who have been together for a long time,11 and it should be a much easier task for them to develop a real team than it is for the Cabinet.
In certain positions of government it has been difficult to find the right people to take over the responsibilities. Arthur Flemming, President of Ohio Wesleyan University, is the only man I know that could fulfill the responsibilities devolving upon the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission12--at least the responsibilities that I intend to place on that officer. Yet there are a few people on the Hill that have a curious notion that Arthur Flemming is a bit of a New Dealer. Actually I find him a very distinct middle-of-the-roader--as well as a brilliant and devoted man. But I have had to come to the conclusion that I cannot use him except in posts where no Senate confirmation is required. I had the same experience in my hope of sending Val Peterson to India as Ambassador, when one Senator defeated the idea.13 This difficulty springs from the fact that the Republicans have been so long in opposition to the Executive, Republican Senators are having a hard time getting through their heads that they now belong to a team that includes rather than opposes the White House. Senator Taft has grasped this fact more quickly and more definitely than have any of the others and I repeat that--to date--he has been a model team mate.