This is a printer friendly version of an article from
www.goupstate.com
To print this article open the file menu and choose
Print.
Back
Article published Jul 5, 2004
Shifting political winds
Will Rothschild
Features/Special
Projects Editor
"I would remind you that extremism in the defense
of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit
of justice is no virtue."-- Barry Goldwater, upon accepting the Republican
Party's presidential nomination in San Francisco, July 16, 1964That was Roger
Milliken's candidate.Way before he backed kicked-to-the-curb former governor
David Beasley, and before he backed third-party presidential candidates Pat
Buchanan and Ross Perot, Milliken was a Barry Goldwater man.As the political
winds have changed in the South during the past half-century, Milliken often has
been the background force by selectively bankrolling candidates who march to his
beat.And today, the man many say deserves a lot of the credit for the emergence
of Republican Party power in South Carolina in particular and the Deep South in
general is linked more closely to left-wing protectionist Ralph Nader than to
Jim DeMint, the Republican congressman from his own district who may become the
state's newest U.S. Senator this fall.Goldwater's 1960 book "The Conscience of a
Conservative" still resonates with many on the right. Though his 1964
presidential campaign failed, the conservative movement it buoyed has come to
define the Republican Party in the 40 years since. The Goldwater Movement in
many ways paved the way for future presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan,
George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush.And yet, with the party he helped build at
its zenith in his home state and nationally, Milliken is going his own way."I
would in many ways call Milliken a classic Goldwater Republican, which many
people would say is not the same Republican Party of today with all the big
spending and military intervention abroad," said Ron Romine, who teaches
political science at the University of South Carolina Upstate."Goldwater
Republicans like Milliken are classic small-government Republicans.
Goldwater
would be absolutely appalled if he saw the Republican Party today."Based on his
political contributions, Milliken is no fan of Bush, the party's present-day
leader.He has not directly contributed money to Bush's campaign efforts. He also
spurned Bush's father in 1988 and 1992, and Republican nominee Bob Dole in
1996.Milliken did, however, contribute $2.2 million in 1994 to Buchanan's
non-profit organizations, American Cause and Coalition for the American Cause,
according to several media reports. During Buchanan's 2000 presidential run,
Milliken & Co. employees contributed more money to the Reform Party
candidate than those of any other company, The New Republic magazine
reported.His involvement with a fringe candidate such as Buchanan was not
without precedent. In fact, Milliken's history of hardened loyalty to candidates
who eventually suffered huge losses at the polls is lengthy:In 1964, Goldwater's
sudden ascent was a seminal moment for the Republican Party's conservative wing
and signaled a death knell for the party's moderate faction led by Nelson
Rockefeller and Henry Cabot Lodge. Still, Democrats effectively portrayed
Goldwater as a war-mongering extremist and the Arizona senator went down in
flames on Election Day, winning just five states and garnering less than 40
percent of the vote as Lyndon Johnson enjoyed one of the biggest landslides in
presidential history.Ross Perot used Milliken money to help fund his strong
third-party run for the White House in 1992. Perot eventually captured nearly 20
percent of the popular vote, helping to doom President George H.W. Bush's
re-election bid and enabling Democrat Bill Clinton to win election. Perot ran
again in 1996, capturing about eight percent of the vote as Clinton easily beat
Dole.In 1992, 1996 and 2000, Milliken's support of Buchanan did little to make
the television political commentator and former President Reagan aide a viable
candidate he failed in his quest for the Republican nomination in '92 and '96
and ended up with less than half a million votes as the Reform Party candidate
in 2000.Beasley was voted out of the governor's office in 1998, no small feat
for a Republican incumbent in staunchly conservative South Carolina. Despite
that history of statewide anti-Beasley feeling, Milliken and his family
contributed $48,000 to Beasley's U.S. Senate campaign this election cycle,
according to politicalmoneyline.com. Beasley advanced to a June 22 runoff before
U.S. Rep. Jim DeMint of Greenville won the nomination with 59 percent of the
vote.Indeed, Millilken has regularly forsaken political expediency in favor of
vigorous support of his beliefs. In the political arena of the past 15 years,
that has meant a stubborn refusal to back any candidate who does not share his
protectionist views on trade, even if it means a Republican has to be, in the
words of USC Upstate's Romine, "sacrificed every now and then.""It's rational
when you think where he's coming from," Romine said. "He hasn't changed. The
world around him has. He's espousing the same beliefs he always has."Indeed,
Milliken's nationalistic protectionism today is so fierce that it transcends the
Republican Party he worked so hard and spent so much money to help
build.Building a powerIn 1960s South Carolina politics, Daddy Warbucks was a
real person and he posed a real threat to the Democratic Party that had
enjoyed a decades-long domination of the so-called "Solid South.""It was the
region of the yellow-dog Democrat," said Lee Edwards, distinguished fellow at
the Heritage Foundation, a national conservative think tank. "There were no
Republicans up and down the line from top to bottom."And, "when you could find a
Republican to run, which wasn't often, there was no infrastructure or
organization for them to tap into," said Spartanburg's Barry Wynn, who served as
chairman of the state Republican Party from 1989-93.But by the early 1960s,
cracks were forming in the once-invincible Democratic Party foundation."The
Democratic Party was going so far to the left in so many ways," Edwards said.
"There was a lot of debate about what should be the size of government. People
in the South believed in a Jeffersonian-style small government, and (the
Democratic Party) got to be too much for a whole lot of people."About that time,
then-Republican Party state chairman Greg Shorey successfully enlisted
Milliken's help."One of the smartest moves I ever made was getting Roger
Milliken on board," Shorey said. Milliken's standing in the business community
in South Carolina "not only added prestige and opened doors, but it gave a great
deal of needed credibility to our effort," said Shorey, now 80 and living on St.
Helena Island.It also meant money though Shorey insists Milliken was not the
party's "chief financier" in those days.More important than his money, in
Shorey's opinion, was the fact Milliken helped the S.C. Republican Party "when
few if any other prominent business leaders in this state had the courage to do
so."Milliken's business sense and organizational expertise changed what had for
years been a "phony Republican Party around only to get patronage," Shorey
said.Regardless, Democrats who noticed the Republicans growing in strength and
number tagged Milliken with a nickname."Democratic Party Chairman Earle Morris
Jr. tells us that the Republicans are being financed by a Daddy Warbucks who is
identified only as 'an industrialist,'" Rudy Rivers wrote in an Aug. 7, 1966
Spartanburg Herald-Journal column.Seconds longtime political writer Lee Bandy of
The State newspaper: "He was known as the Daddy Warbucks of the Republican
Party. But he was always invisible."Some of Milliken's top-level associates were
deeply involved in the party's rebuilding, as well.Hal Byrd, the company's vice
president of purchasing at the time, handled some financial matters for the
party and was put in charge of ticket sales for party fundraising dinners,
Shorey said. A patent lawyer for the company, Norman Armitage, also played a
major role in helping organize the state party, according to Shorey and Wynn.
Armitage's wife, Constance, later served as president of the National Federation
of Republican Women, from 1972 to 1976."(Milliken) knew how to organize a party.
He knew how it was done in Connecticut and New York," Wynn said.While Sen. Strom
Thurmond's 1964 switch to the Republican Party is considered the moment when the
political tide turned in the South, observers credit Milliken for building the
party Thurmond joined."(Thurmond's switch) would not have taken place without
some effort by somebody to build a party organization that people like Thurmond
could tap into," Wynn said.Milliken and other party leaders at that time
stressed the need for the party to reorganize itself on the county level. As
that began to happen, the party was able to begin to recruit candidates for
state and county offices, as well as provide increased funding and other types
of support for candidates.Even before his work with the state party, Milliken
had been involved with building conservative political institutions. In 1954,
William Buckley Jr. founded the magazine National Review which the New York
Times calls the most influential journal of the American right -- with a big
assist from Roger Milliken."He played an absolutely crucial and founding role in
National Review," Edwards said. "Milliken promised to take out a series of ads
in National Review. (Buckley's father) put up $100,000. I gather the figure
Milliken contributed, if not that much, was pretty close to it."That was an
enormous amount of money in those days, especially for an unknown
publication."In 1960, Milliken became a player in steering the future course of
the national Republican Party through his support of Goldwater.Shorey remembers
organizing a 1959 fund-raiser in Greenville at which he had secured Goldwater as
the keynote speaker. The retired Air Force brigadier general's rhetoric of small
government, personal freedom, states' rights and the need for a strong military
hit a home run with Milliken."Mr. Milliken came up to me after Goldwater's
speech that night so full of enthusiasm and excitement," Shorey said.Milliken
and Shorey jumped headfirst into the Goldwater Movement, serving on the national
Draft Goldwater and Goldwater for President committees that culminated in his
presidential nomination at the 1964 convention in San Francisco."There is a huge
national political significance to all this," Shorey said. "Roger Milliken
served not simply to represent the textile industry, though that was important,
but he was there as a shining light of the conservative movement within the
party."Milliken was picked to serve on the party's platform committee at the
1960, '64 and '68 national conventions."The heavy hitters in the party sit on
that committee," Shorey said. "It's where all the fundamental precepts and
positions of the national party are addressed
and they come up with
the
national party platform."Milliken believed Goldwater was the best man to carry
out that platform. So, Shorey said, he and Milliken forced the reluctant junior
senator from Arizona onto the national stage in 1960.Going into the 1960
convention, it appeared that Nixon had enough support to get the presidential
nomination. (In those days, the nomination was not officially determined before
the convention.)But Milliken and Shorey insisted on bringing up Goldwater for
nomination, despite Goldwater's objections."We locked Goldwater in our (hotel
room) bathroom and told him we weren't going to let him out until he agreed he
would let us nominate him," Shorey said. "There was some language coming from
that locked bathroom that would make any salty dog sailor proud."There were some
real negotiations going on. Finally, he realized he was going to stay in there
and he relented with the understanding that he could withdraw immediately after
he was placed in nomination."Shorey said it was important to give Goldwater a
"stage and national presence" that would lay the groundwork for his successful
bid for the nomination four years later."It put the more moderate Republicans on
notice that their days were numbered," Shorey said. "The Young Turks, the
conservative movement from the South, were about to take over the party and
Goldwater was going to lead the charge."Thurmond's switch in September 1964
added considerable steam to that charge, and Milliken and the longtime senator
became "very close allies," Wynn said.At the polls in November of that year,
thanks in large part to his opposition to the passage of the Civil Rights Act,
and in a sign of things to come for Republican candidates, Goldwater won five
Deep South states: South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana.
Outside of Louisiana's nod to Dwight Eisenhower in 1956, it was the first time
any of those states had voted Republican since 1876.Four years later, in 1968,
Republican power was cemented with Richard Nixon and his "Southern Strategy"
winning the White House. With Thurmond's help, Nixon carried South Carolina in
1968, and then won re-election in a 1972 landslide over George McGovern, who won
only Massachusetts.The days of the Democratic "Solid South" were officially
over, and Milliken's fingerprints were all over it: Eight years after propping
up Goldwater and wooing Thurmond, he reportedly hand-delivered $363,000 to
Nixon's 1972 campaign the day before a new law requiring public disclosure of
such contributions went into effect.Two years later, in 1974, with financial
help from Milliken, Jim Edwards became South Carolina's first Republican
governor in 98 years and the first elected by a Deep South state in the 20th
century.Not Milliken's Republican PartyJim DeMint's reputation as a strong
Capitol Hill ally of President George W. Bush was forged in large measure
through fiery debates over trade.Like his father, Bush is a free-trader. He
pushed for normal trade relations with China and for "fast-track" trading
authority the ability for the White House to negotiate certain trade
agreements without congressional approval.DeMint, who represents an Upstate
South Carolina congressional district polarized by old-guard textile companies
such as Milliken's and international economic engines such as BMW and Michelin,
voted in favor of both measures."The strategy of no trade agreements was hurting
us," DeMint said. "We were accepting imports, but the only way to get them to
accept our products was to enter into agreements."DeMint is quick to point out
that "exports are expanding in this state faster than almost any state in this
country. There never has been any indication trade deficits hurt the
economy."Those beliefs have branded DeMint an enemy of Milliken's. In fact,
DeMint says he has not even been able to talk to Milliken, the richest man in
his district and state."I haven't been able get in to see him, although I've
asked," DeMint said. "His lobbyist Jock Nash is very heavy-handed. He is the
filter through which Mr. Milliken knows Jim DeMint and I don't think it is an
honest filter."Even without Milliken's support, DeMint has fashioned a
successful political career to this point: a three-term congressman now in a
race against Democratic nominee Inez Tenenbaum for the U.S. Senate.Given that
DeMint is in a solidly Republican state and figures to get a boost from voters
turning out to try to re-elect a Republican president, he should be in good
stead.But some political observers think the DeMint-Tenenbaum battle could be
ripe for an upset. Tenenbaum, the state Secretary of Education, is a moderate
who supports the war in Iraq, the death penalty and a constitutional ban on
same-sex marriage.And, like Beasley, she is trumpeting the protectionist
message, which could bring Milliken into play.Tenenbaum spokesman Adam
Kovacevich said the campaign has "reached out" to Milliken. "He was on vacation
but we look forward to meeting with him."If Milliken gives money to the
Democratic candidate, it wouldn't be without precedent.He and his late wife,
Nita, gave $1,900 to outgoing Sen. Fritz Hollings, a Democrat, during his last
campaign in 1998, according politicalmoneyline.com.There perhaps is more at
stake for the Republican Party in this race. For the first time since a brief
period in the 1950s, Republicans control the House, Senate and White House at
the same time.How the makeup of the Senate -- 51 Republicans, 48 Democrats, 1
Independent changes will be one of the most compelling storylines on Election
Day. As it is, Democrats have enough power to impede the Republican agenda, most
notably with their filibusters over Bush's judicial nominees.For his part,
DeMint says he and Milliken would agree on just about every issue with the
exception of trade."I would hate to see him give up on what he's worked so long
on bringing the Republican Party to where it is today over this one issue,"
DeMint said.Standing strongBut DeMint should know by now that Milliken and his
associates have proven capable of making unlikely political allies over that one
issue.In the New Republic article, Milliken lobbyist Nash calls Ralph Nader "a
man of courage. This is a man of enormous intellect."Nash goes on to say that
when Milliken and Nader met for the first time, "these two men were like Velcro
to one another. They sat together, talked together, bounced ideas off one
another. It was incredible."It is unclear if Milliken has ever financially
contributed to the left-wing organizations that fund Nader's activism, but there
is no doubt the two men see eye-to-eye on the trade issue.Even if Milliken
decides not to financially support Tenenbaum, he will have succeeded in ensuring
that trade remains on the table.And that's what makes political operatives like
Milliken important even when they back a doomed candidacy, Edwards of the
Heritage Foundation says."They're important because of a balance. They stand for
a certain ideal. They believe in it and are going to fight for it," Edwards
said. "You can't just dismiss free trade as a concept because of Buchanan and
Milliken."In a 1985 letter to Goldwater, Milliken thanked the senator."Your run
for the Presidency in 1964 certainly laid the groundwork for the tremendous
resurgence we have in conservatism and freedom in this country today," Milliken
wrote. "We all owe you a very great debt of gratitude for this pioneering
effort. Thank you."Which begs the question: Would Goldwater, who believed in
reducing the size of the federal government, side with Milliken in fighting for
tighter federal control over trade?"Maybe Goldwater would probably be more for
free trade than Mr. Milliken," said Edwards, who wrote the Goldwater biography,
"The Man Who Made a Revolution.""But I know one thing," Edwards continued,
"Goldwater would have admired Milliken for standing strong and standing for what
you believe in. It was a quality in himself."Will Rothschild can be reached at
will.rothschild@shj.com or 562-7223.