Stevenson has offered imaginative new programs in health insurance and social security, as well as education, while Eisenhower has been content with less in these lines than even Fortune Magazine. Further, in public power, he has repudiated a principle established by Roosevelt's TVA--the principle that a comprehensive federal power program stimulates much more private enterprise through low rates than it kills through government administration. By attempting to deny this principle through a "partnership" plan which combines private inefficiency with government expenditure, the President has thrown national thinking on this subject back some twenty years.

In the face of an atomic age, Stevenson's New America Reports have shown Americans a glimmer of things to come. His projects for federal aid on health and education and for the aged are soundly worked out. About his draft proposals there is some doubt. Stevenson may not have worked out an ideal defense program as yet. But his recent conjectures on the subject have raised a fruitful issue; he has awakened Americans to the realization that the two-year amateur soldier may not be fitted to modern atomic warfare tactics.

III. World Leadership

The most important role of the President in today's world is world leadership, and on this key issue the campaign must revolve. For despite the Republican orators, the world is neither peaceful nor prosperous. Over half the world still goes hungry every night, and rumblings in Asia, Africa, South America, and the Middle East are far from comforting. But comfort cannot be expected, for ideological, political, and economic revolutions are sweeping the world, and will continue to do so for decades. The question is, can America lead these revolutions, or must it sit by and watch until too late?

President Eisenhower has come to grips with some issues in foreign affairs, but he has made few advances over his Democratic predecessor. He has accepted the containment policy; he has tried, but failed, to make progress on disarmament; he has continued the economic aid program; and he has put forth an encouraging atoms-for-peace plan that, while it is just barely getting off the ground, is an imaginative response to the world's desire for rapid economic progress. But the President's foreign policy cannot be separated from that of his Secretary of State, and here the past four years can be chalked up as little but bluster, blunder, and an inability to see that the future requires change. Dulles' well-known verbal blunders have done a great deal to harm American prestige, but they do not fully account for the precarious position of this country's foreign power. What is demanded, and what the Eisenhower Administration has failed to provide, is a fundamental shift in American foreign policy. The times demand a new attitude toward China, one that will accept the fact that the most populous country in the world now has a Communist government; toward South America, one that will not end with resolutions but will provide real political and economic leadership; toward Africa, for no policy even exists at present; toward Africa, for no policy even exists at present; toward the Arabs, who desperately need effective tutelage in the workings of a democracy; toward Asia, where a responsible neutralism has met with little respect in Washington; toward Europe, where political and economic unity must come not as a reaction against the United States, but rather as a response to this country's urging.

In short, this critical time in history demands new ideas and new leadership. Stevenson in the past four years has shown that he understands this need, and he has pledged to meet every one of these issues squarely and imaginatively. His latest proposal for stopping H-bomb tests is an example of the new attitude that is so necessary. Stevenson is promising nothing but to try again, and for this the nation and the world should be thankful.

Because we believe Adlai Stevenson will provide the conscious world leadership called for by these troubled times, we endorse him for the Presidency.