The Big Showdown in California

AND now, the big one: California. As the Democratic presidential contenders near the end of their punishing primary ordeal, the stakes in next week's voting for California's 271 delegates are huge. The winner in the head-to-head showdown between Hubert Humphrey and George McGovern will be a heavy favorite to grab the nomination in Miami Beach. As the duel between the two longtime friends from neighboring Midwestern states turns personal, the man with all the momentum is McGovern.

McGovern goes into California fresh from an impressive victory in Oregon, where he took 50% of the vote. Humphrey, who wisely stayed out of the state, finished a poor third with 13%, behind George Wallace's 20%. Neither Humphrey nor McGovern paid much attention to Rhode Island, where a meager 48,088 out of some 500,000 eligible voters turned out. McGovern won it with 41%, despite the state Democratic leaders' longstanding commitment to Ed Muskie. Humphrey again finished third, this time behind Muskie. Humphrey had wound up a dismal third in his favorite kind of state, Michigan, the week before. His campaign aides know that California could become Hubert's last hurrah unless he finds a way to stop McGovern there.

Although the most recent California poll (taken a month ago) showed Humphrey leading McGovern by 4%, Humphrey's top local strategist, Joe Cerrell, concedes that Hubert is now up to 8% behind. Pending a new survey, one reliable pollster predicts a "wide win for McGovern--perhaps even a landslide."

McGovern has been able to raise $840,000 in recent weeks from Californians, and expects to spend about $1.5 million --double Humphrey's goal, not yet met, of a "survival budget" of $750,000. McGovern has opened 153 local headquarters to Humphrey's 39, expects to field 15,000 get-out-the-vote canvassers on the weekend before the primary.

Outfinanced, outorganized and trailing in popularity, Humphrey has taken the offensive, attacking McGovern's campaign proposals and voting records. "If we can show the voters where McGovern really stands and where Humphrey stands, we can win," insists Cerrell. To do so, Humphrey challenged McGovern to three television debates. There was no haggling between the two camps over the format, which is to have both men answering questions from a small group of national newsmen. McGovern quickly agreed, even though the man ahead has the most to lose in such a clash. The hourlong debates, two this week and one next Sunday, are crucial to Humphrey. "I kid you not," says Cerrell. "This is the whole thing--the whole campaign."

Wrong. Humphrey has lashed out at McGovern's proposed defense-budget slashes as "preposterous," claiming they would lead to "a completely inoperable Army, Navy and Air Force." The cuts would not only pose "a serious threat to the security of the nation," but also "a direct threat to the economic viability of the state of California." Scathingly, Humphrey tells nervous defense and aerospace workers that "a man should not seek the presidency at the expense of the jobs of the people of California." His supporters have dispatched "worried worker brigades" from Lockheed to confront McGovern. Humphrey also assails McGovern for a lack of leadership in civil rights and claims that his celebrated antiwar record is marred by repeated votes for Viet Nam appropriations. "We were both wrong," insists Humphrey.

Forced to the defensive, McGovern has retaliated just as personally. "It's difficult to draw a distinction between the Lyndon Johnson-Hubert Humphrey era and the Richard Nixon era," he says. Humphrey, he adds, is "an Establishment figure" who represents "politics as usual." McGovern describes his campaign against Humphrey as a contest between "the old politics and the new."

McGovern is repeatedly questioned about his stand on controversial issues. His supporters placed a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal in hopes of calming fears of businessmen by clarifying his proposals for tax reform and redistribution of income. He was even asked last week how he felt about the legalization of prostitution. Replied McGovern with a weary smile: "Even if I was for it, I wouldn't say so. There are some tests of political courage that are too much."

The key question is just how much McGovern's political courage will be tested. Will he feel it necessary to modify his positions and move toward the political center as the convention--and a potential campaign against Richard Nixon--approaches? So far, he has been speaking increasingly carefully, but he has hardly retreated. His stands include:

JOBS. Conceding that his proposed 40% cut in the defense budget would temporarily cause some unemployment, McGovern is trying to convince California workers that steadier jobs would be created if defense and aerospace industries shifted to such peacetime needs as mass-transit facilities, housing and environmental cleanup. During the conversion, he proposes that laid-off workers be paid up to 80% of their salary for one year.

WELFARE. McGovern insists that Humphrey's $72 billion cost figure for his welfare proposals is "the sheerest kind of nonsense." But he has talked conf usingly about what they would cost, first claiming that the expense would be less than that of the current "unworkable mess" in welfare and thus mean no new burden for taxpayers. Later he conceded that, well, they might cost more.

TAXES. McGovern has backed off an earlier proposal that inheritance taxes be increased to 100% when the amount passes $500,000; he now places the limit for the few in that position at 77%. Otherwise, McGovern would still boost corporate income taxes by $17 billion --a jump of about 40%--by repealing the investment tax credits, tightening depreciation rules and closing other loopholes. McGovern's income tax proposals for individuals making more than $50,000 are confusing and contradictory. In his Wall Street Journal ad, he said, "I am here suggesting a tax which will not exceed 52.5% even on an income of $1,000,000." Yet in his position paper on tax reform, he seemed to be suggesting that 52.5% might be the minimum for such wealthy taxpayers.

AMNESTY. McGovern makes it clear that he does not favor amnesty for deserters or, while the fighting in Viet Nam goes on, for draft evaders. But he contends that after every major war the U.S. has granted amnesty to those who left the country or claimed conscientious objection to fighting. (This was true for both World Wars and the Civil War, but not after the Korean War.)

Humphrey, often accused of being on every side of every issue, has been uncharacteristically consistent of late. He opposes unconditional amnesty and would require two years' civilian service from draft evaders. He has said for months what McGovern is saying now about marijuana: cut penalties for use, keep penalties for selling. Like McGovern, Humphrey would leave abortion to the states.

Humphrey, too, is eager to close tax loopholes. He urges cutting the oil depletion allowance. He promises a comprehensive tax-reform program, higher corporate taxes, an end to escape from taxation by the rich. He would cut the Pentagon budget, but not without bilateral concessions from the U.S.S.R. He favors jobs for all, with the Federal Government as the employer of last resort. He wants a 25% increase in Social Security benefits.

Despite all the debate over issues, the California primary could well turn on whether McGovern is right in believing that the huge state and its more than 5,000,000 registered Democrats (Republican cross-voting is not permitted) can be reached by door-to-door and personal telephone drives. The Humphrey strategists buy the conventional view that it is a "media state," reachable mainly by radio, television and print. The possibility that McGovern's drive could pay off even in Humphrey's natural constituency among minorities was bolstered by two impressive new endorsements of McGovern--from Coretta King and Cesar Chavez.

As the baffling McGovern phenomenon keeps building, his workers are feeling euphoric. The man they once latched on to as more of an idealistic cause than a plausible candidate now seems within reach of the nomination. Not even the presidency is out of sight. In this unpredictable election year, opinion polls are not wholly convincing. Yet it is remarkable that a Harris survey showed last week that McGovern, who not long ago ranked almost at the bottom of most national polls, would be virtually as strong as Humphrey in a three-way race with George Wallace and Nixon. He now trails Nixon by only 5%, while Humphrey is rated just 4% behind the President.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.