The 1950 Elections in California

• Date: 01 March 1951
• DOI: 10.1177/106591295100400106
• Published date: 01 March 1951
• Subject Matter: Articles

67

THE

1950

ELECTIONS

IN

THE

WEST

Edited

by

JOSEPH

P.

HARRIS

University

of

California

THE

1950

ELECTIONS

IN

CALIFORNIA

BURTON

R.

BRAZIL

Stanford

University

HE

ELECTIONS

of

1950

in

California

represented

an

almost

com,

plete

Republican

sweep.

Republicans

are

now

in

control

of

all

but

***

one

of

the

six

partisan,

elective

executive

posts

of

the

state.

Both

of

California’s

United

States

senators

are

Republicans,

and

so

are

13 of

the

23

representatives

in

Congress.

Republicans

remain

in

firm

majorities

in

both

houses

of

the

state

legislature.

This

apparently

tight

one-party

control

is

deceptive,

however.

Cali-

fornia

has

been

a

one-party

state,

so

far

as

state

officials

are

a

measure,

for

most

of

the

past

half-century.

Factional

and

personality

politics

fre-

quently

have

been

more

significant

than

party

politics.

The

blurring

of

party

lines

and

party

labels

as

a

result

of

the

system

of

cross-filing

also

tends

to

reduce

the

import

of

a

partisan

description

of

the

political

pattern.

The

1950

elections

were

normal

in

this

respect.

In

the

pre-primary

jockeying

for

position,

candidates

for

the

higher

officers

generally

announced

themselves

early

in

the

year.

Lieutenant

Governor

Goodwin

Knight,

whose

aspirations

had

been

thwarted

in

1948

by

Warren’s

defeat

for

the

vice-presidency,

made

preliminary

moves

to

acquire

Republican

organizational

backing

for

the

nomination

as

governor.

Warren’s

delayed

decision

to

run

again,

left

Knight

with

no

choice

except

to

run

for

lieutenant

governor.

Warren

has

never

been

the

wholehearted

choice

of

the

party

regulars,

despite

his

winning

ways

with

the

voters.

Many

leaders

of

the

Republican

party

resented

Warren’s

aloofness

from

the

party

machinery,

his

emphasis

on

&dquo;non-partisanship,&dquo;

and

his

&dquo;liberal&dquo;

social

views.

James

Roosevelt

was

even

less

popular

with

organization

Democrats,

despite

his

name

and

his

experience

as

chairman

of

the

state

central

com-

mittee.

Many

Democratic

leaders

regarded

Roosevelt

as

an

upstart

without

adequate

political

seasoning,

and

others

considered

him

a

&dquo;carpetbagger&dquo;

because

of

his

relative

newness

on

the

California

scene.

Amateur

accre-

tions

to

his

campaign

organization

were

sufficient

to

enable

him

to

win

the

nomination

of

the

Democratic

party

without

the

experience

or

the

enthusiasm

of

the

professionals.