SENATOR’S CHOICE WILL KENNEDY INVESTIGATE THE WATERGATE SCANDAL?

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33037, 3 October 1972, Page 14

SENATOR’S CHOICE WILL KENNEDY INVESTIGATE THE WATERGATE SCANDAL?

(By

STEWART ALSOP

’ in "Newsweek." reprinted by arrangement)

WASHINGTON.—“Once to every man and nation,” James Russell Lowell pointed out, “comes the moment to decide.” Such a moment is now full upon Senator Edward Kennedy. A great deal, including the shape of the current Presidential campaign, and perhaps the shape of his own political future, hangs on his decision.

What he has to decide is this: whether to claim jurisdiction over the Watergate affair for his sub-committee of the Judiciary Committee and proceed to a nationally televised investigation of the whole smelly business.

Senator Kennedy is under intense pressure to seize the issue, from Senator McGovern, Lawrence O’Brien, Sargent Shriver and other McGovern campaign leaders. The reason is obvious. Watergate provides the only visible way. to turn the McGovern campaign around. For a Kennedy investigation would have certain predictable results. Whereas, as noted in a previous report in this space, the smelly business has had little impact on the campaign so far, a televised, Kennedy-chaired investigation would make it the central focus of the campaign. The stuff of marvellous televised drama is all there. Interesting questions An obvious lead-off witness is Alfred C. Baldwin 111, the elusive ex-F.8.1. agent who was a member of the “security team” of the Committee to Re-elect the President. Baldwin has already told all, or nearly all, to the F. 8.1. and to others investigating the case, and he would be under oath before the Kennedy sub-committee. He could be asked some interesting questions for the benefit of the television viewers. For example: How much money did you get? For what purpose? What bugged telephone conversations did you listen to? Between whom? From what listening post? How many hours a day did you listen? To whom were the transcripts or other information circulated? And so on.

The Kennedy sub-commit-tee investigators already have an accurate foreknowledge of the answers to these questions. On the basis of the answers, more important figures, like John Mitchell and Maurice Stans, could also be asked some interesting questions. The most interesting would be this: Did you really have no idea that this sort of thing was going on? On live television, the investigation would surely become the biggest political television show since the nation was glued to its television sets during the McCarthy hearings in the early 50s. That would be one predictable result. Another would be that the Nixon campaign would be hurt — perhaps very badly hurt. Still another would be a marked improvement in Senator McGovern’s abysmal standing in the polls. From McGovern’s point of view, in short, all this and heaven too. Backing away But it would not be all heaven for Senator Kennedy. The senator is currently backing away from an investigation, on the plea that the case is “sub judice,” that he already has too many time-consuming campaign commitments, and so on These objections are impatiently dismissed—with unprintable expletives—-by the desperate McGovern men. There are other objections from Kennedy’s point of view. He is quite aware that the Nixon Administration is capable of playing the game rough. He would certainly be attacked all-out as a demagogue using his sub-commit-tee chairmanship to play cheap politics, compromising the rights of the accused in the process. The game might get rougher than that. One of the accused, Howard Hunt, spent a lot of time, with access to a lot of money, investigating the Chappaquiddick tragedy, and anything else that might harm Kennedy. The reason for this investment of time and money is obvious —till the last moment there was a queasy feeling in the White House that Kennedy might emerge as a formidable Democratic unity candidate. Questions would no doubt be asked about the results of Hunt’s sleuthery. There are other ways the game could be played rough. Above all, there is the

Biblical admonition, which applies with special force to politics: “He that toucheth pitch shall be defiled therewith.” McGovern would be helped by a probe of the Watergate pitch pot, but Kennedy would almost certainly be hurt. This is why the odds are currently high against Kennedy’s deciding to investigate, though he has not finally decided. Kennedy or nothing It is a case of Kennedy or nothing. An effective investigation by Representative Wright Patman’s House Banking and Currency Committee is most unlikely now. Patman apparently lacks a majority on the committee to grant him the necessary subpoena power. Senator Kennedy would not be a bit displeased if Sam Ervin’s sub-committee on constitutional rights or John McClellan’s Government Operations Committee claimed jurisdiction. But neither of these Southern senators has any ungovernable impulse to help George McGovern, who is political poison in Ervin’s North Carolina and McClellan’s Arkansas. And neither has shown any interest in launching an investigation. All sides agree that there can be no public trial before November 7. That leaves Ted Kennedy. And that fact suggests a certain weakness in Kennedy’s very special political situation.

The Watergate affair is a snake that badly needs to be scotched — it is as nasty a business as Washington has seen for a long time. Another liberal Democrat with White House aspirations — Senator Walter Mondale of Minne-

sota, for example, who is the Washington insiders’ bet to be Kennedy’s chief rival in 1976—could benefit greatly, in terms of visibility, by taking on the snake-scotch-ing job. But Mondale lacks the necessary committee chairmanship. Senator’s dilemma Kennedy already has all the visibility he needs. In his special situation, it is to his interest to appear (a) a loyal Democrat, eager to fight and die for George McGovern and (b) a statesmanlike and presidential figure, operating grandly on the world stage. The Watergate decision that now confronts him suggests how hard it is to play both roles at once.

If Kennedy does not take on the Watergate job (as now seems likely) and McGovern (as also seems likely) is soundly trounced, it will be said by bitter McGovern men that in time of trouble Kennedy turned chicken. But if he does take on the Watergate job, it will be said — and said very loudly — that he is playing tawdry election-year politics. Rougher things than that are likely to be said.

There are other ways in which Senator Kennedy is damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t. He will have other moments to decide, and they may be as painful as the Watergate decision. This is why it is premature to predict, as many people are confidently predicting, that Edward Kennedy will be the Democratic Presidential candidate in 1976. — Copyright, Newsweek Inc., 1972.