EDITORIAL

Although ONE, Incorporated, is non-partisan and intends to remain so, and though the editors and readers of this magazine range fully across the political spectrum, we feel that homophile organizations cannot divorce themselves from some concern with the issues involved in 1960's national political Donnybrook.

How much effect do American homosexual voters have on the contemporary electoral scene? Perhaps not much, since many homosexuals seem gaily content to leave their fate in others' hands. But what if such a group were to become self-conscious? At least three million Americans of voting age are fully homosexual, and another seven million partly so: enough to have overturned most Presidential elections-had they voted as a partly cohesive bloc. Any change in the voting habits of so large a group would have real national significance.

How do most homosexuals determine the way to vote? There seems to be no distinct pattern at present. Many don't bother to vote at all, feeling that neither party will give homosexuals a fair shake. Most homosexuals probably conform indiscriminately to the political bias of their family, religion, class or birthplace, with perhaps not a single X on a lifetime of ballots influenced by the fact of their homosexuality. Some vote for "sexy" candidates, or for those rumored to be "friendly."

In any minority group, an early sign of group consciousness is the adoption of Samuel Gompers' formula of using the ballot to punish one's enemies and reward one's friends. This may not be the ultimate of political maturity, but it is a sign of growing up. When McCarthy raged against State Dept. homosexuals and Senator Dirksen promised 1954 GOP campaign "against reds, pinks, psychopaths and homosexuals," or when Calif. Governor (then Atty. Gen.) Brown worked to close down gay bars, or when legislators of either party supported fascistic sex laws, homosexuals should have voted to strike down these men. Citizens who fail to use the ballot to protect their rights, deserve no rights.

Only rarely has homosexuality been a direct campaign issue. Russ Wolden's anti-homosexual smear backfired miserably in San Francisco last year. Much of 1952's egghead-baiting had a vicious anti-homosexual undertone. Even McCarthy was accused of homosexuality. An eastern mayor survived a campaign involving his son's morals arrest. Wyoming Senator Hunt's suicide was attributed to similar parental embarrassment. Rumors that a candidate is homosexual generally (except with President Buchanan) stay very sub rosa.

Among the many factors affecting a homosexual's political leanings how much influence should his homosexuality have?

We distinctly need to claim pre-eminence for the issue of homo-

one