Carrol Daily Times Herald from Carroll, Iowa on February 25, 1976 · Page 10
Get access to this page with a Free Trial

Carrol Daily Times Herald from Carroll, Iowa · Page 10

Carroll, Iowa
Issue Date:
Wednesday, February 25, 1976
Page 10
Start Free Trial

Campaign Law's Bizarre Mutation: Half Decision Makes a Half-Law WASHINGTON - (LENS) — Whatever becomes of the election campaign reforms enacted in 1974, it is beyond reasonable doubt that 1976 will be a financially leaner and cleaner year in national politics than 1972 was. The object-lesson of what happened to Richard Nixon and his associates, and the embarrassment and humiliation of the people who fed them money, are too close; for the present, good behavior is good politics. The Watergate scandals did, however, give an extra impetus to long-standing demands for improvement and stricter regulation of campaign finance, and so an elaborate new law was passed in 1974 that would not have been passed if Mr, Nixon had not been found out. How best to put everything right in this field for the future is, however, a complicated subject, involving constitutional principles as well as political interests. While the early stages of the 1976 presidential campaign were- unfolding under the umbrella of the new law, the law's critics were moving from court to court in an effort to get it overturned. Their effort ended up in the Supreme Court, which announced on January 30 its decision to uphold some parts of the Federal Elections Campaign Amendments of 1974 while overturning other parts. The court, in effect, Animal Products Help Human Lives read Congress a lesson on the perils of framing a law for the long term under the influence of a passing event. Not the least unfortunate of the consequences was, evidently, to throw the court itself into a state of fearful perplexity, as the multiplicity of its opinions shows. Only three of the eight justices who took part (Justice John Paul Stevens having stayed out of it as a newcomer) subscribed to the entire opinion, the other five concurring in part and dissenting in part. While the court will naturally recoil from accepting suits on this subject for a while to come, not much doubt exists that it will be obliged sooner or later to come back to it. What it boils down to is that By Gaynor Maddox \ (NEA Writer) How big is a cow? To measure the value of beef, as well as hogs and sheep, you must calculate the value other than in meat. The by-products of these animals play a vital role in the general condition of man. Many housewives and users of meat think of bones, fat and sinews as garbage. Not so. Nothing need be wasted. The by-products of our slaughtered cattle population, provide us with such necessities as drugs. Here is a partial list of some useful by-products from beef, sheep and hogs. Insulin — used in treatment of diabetes. Bone material and purified bone meal — used in plastic surgery. Liver — used in treating pernicious anemia. Lung — tissue is used to provide heparin, the anti-coagulant drug. Ovaries provide estrogen, used in treating medical problems of the female reproductive organs. Pancreas used for the control of diabetes. Chymotrypsin-proteolytic enzyme promotes healing of wounds, lesions, bruises and swelling; also used during cataract eye surgery. Spinal cord: is a source of cholesterol used in preparation of sex hormone products. Stomach is the source of rennet which is added to infant's diets to aid digestion. This list is only partial. There are many more chemicals and drugs derived from the non-meat parts of beef, sheep and pigs. Research Chemicals: closely associated with Pharmaceuticals, various research chemicals obtained from livestock are used to develop new medical treatments, to provide standard measurements for research work, and to permit various research work to be conducted. Foods: meat includes not only the "red meat" portions of cattle, but also the "variety meats" such as liver, kidneys, brains, tripe, sweetbreads, tongue, ox joints and fries. By-products of livestock and meat processing are also used in the production of othe- foods. Edible animal fats are used in the production and processing of: blend-type shortenings, bakery products, confections, casing products, chewing gum, glycerine and margarines. Protein concentrates for human use can be processed from various animal by-products. 3 DAYS ONLY WARDS CARRIES ALL PAINTS IN STOCK ^^^^••^•^^"^ $ 2 savings on Fresh Cover interior. 2 Choose from 10 popular decorator colors. Dries in just 30 minutes to a smooth flat finish. Soap, water wash-up. 1 99 GALLON REG. 4.99 SAVE $ 4 INDOOR FLAT LATEX PAINT Durable fin- REG.9.99 ish. In 25 mod- C99 em colors. iJGAL. Semi-gloss, 11.99 8.99 Decorating? See Us. USE WARDS CHARG-ALL CREDIT Highway 30 East, CARROLL Phone 792-3515 HoUn: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mon. Thru Thun. and Sal. Friday till 9 p.m. Congress is within its rights in requiring candidates to disclose the source and amounts of the campaign contributions they collect. It can limit how much a contributor may give to a candidate's campaign for the presidency or for a seat in Congress, and how much he can give to all candidates in any one year. It can provide public funds for presidential campaigns, as it has done, and by implication could provide public money for congressional campaigns if it chose. The court even upholds the right of Congress to discriminate between the major parties and minor, independent, .or splinter parties in the way it allocates public campaign money. What Congress, cannot do, Titnct Herald* Correll, la. Wednesday, Feb. 25, 1976 10 says the court, is to tell a candidate how much he may spend on his campaign, or tell private persons or associations how much they may spend on promoting their beliefs — even if promoting their beliefs has the effect of supporting a candidate for some elective office. This is where the mind begins to boggle and the shadowy outlines of many future lawsuits begin to come distantly into view. As Chief Justice Warren Burger observed in one of the more acid of the partially dissenting opinions, ''for me contributions and expenditures are two sides of the same first amendment coin." The court says that, if Congress so wishes, a man can be stopped from giving as much as he chooses to a candidate, but he can spend as much as he chooses in the same cause. The candidate may not collect as he wants, but he can spend all he wants if he can get it, and if he happens to be rich, Congress cannot stop him spending his own money. How is such a result arrived at? In a way it is simple. Congress, says the first amendment to the Constitution, "shall make no law. . . abridging the freedom of speech,- or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The right to express opinions carries with it the right to spend money in making them known. If a publisher may not be denied the right to use newsprint, ink and costly presses to disseminate his views, can Nelson Rockefeller be stopped from buying a page in the New York Times or 10 minutes on channel four to petition President Ford for a redress of his grievances? Indeed not, said the court, restating the matter in lapidary form: "The first amendment denies government the power to determine that spending to promote one's political views is wasteful, excessive, or unwise." There is a difference between spending and contributing, and the court arrived at the conclusion that for* Congress to make a law limiting political contributions was perfectly all right. Free expression had to give way to the overriding necessity for representative government to avoid either corruption — the exchange of a campaign contribution for a quid pro-quo — or the appearance of corruption in the government. This leaves a substantial part of the 1974 law in force. The compulsory disclosure of contributions and of campaign spending is another substantial part that survives. As far as the presidential campaign is concerned, a candidate may have the right to spend what he likes, but not if he accepts the grant of matching federal funds for his campaign. CARROLL HARDWARE ******** GENUINE ******** daiie ALL FRIGIDAIRE 1 APPLIANCES' i SPECIALLY APPLIANCE ^ /T ill tYOU ARE INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN THESE GIGANTIC APPLIANCE SAVINGS r~ GENUINE FRIGIDAIRE REFRIGERATORS 1. Built & Backed by General Motors 2. 100% Frost Proof 3. 'Post Loop' Energy Saving Coil 4. Slim Wall "Frigi-Foam" Design' 5. Reversible Doors—Right or Left • 6. Adjustable Nylon Rollers 7. Giant 166'.b. Freezer 8. Handy Freuer Shelves 9. Frozen Juice Storage 10. Cantilever Fully Adjustable Shelves / 11.2 Giant Vegetable Crispers 12. Separate Cheese-Butler Keepers 13. Full Width Door Shelves 14. Bright Interior Light 15. Giant Egg Storage Capacity 16. Ice Maker Availability 17. GM and F/igidaire Styling BUY NOW I*GENUINE FRIGIDAIRE ELECTRIC RANGES Easiest to Use . . . Easiest to Clean!! • Self-Cleaning Oven • Automatic Cook Master • Giant Cooking Bakin' Oven • Giant Pot-Pan Storage • Easy Read Controls GIANT DISCOUNTS 'GENUINE FRIGIDAIRE 'AUTOMATIC WASHERS AND CLOTHES DRYERS > For the Cleanest, Whitest brightest wash, the Frigidaire Laundry Pair is for your family! TURN YOUR WHOLE FAMILY ON WITH A MICROWAVE OVEN FROM FRIGIDAIRE ' • Saves Up to 75% cook time • Eliminates messy pots-pans • Meal planning is a snap • Defrosts foods in seconds 'No kitchen heat build up > Exclusive 5-year warranty N'T LET THESE BIG UGIDAIRE VALUES SLIP THRU YOUR FINGERS BUY IW& SAVE a la Buy Your Next Appliance Where You're Assured of Qualified Service CARROLL HARDWARE 514 No. Adams MIKE ROBERSON, Owner 792-3385

What members have found on this page

Get access to

  • The largest online newspaper archive
  • 11,200+ newspapers from the 1700s–2000s
  • Millions of additional pages added every month

Try it free