Galesburg Register-Mail from Galesburg, Illinois on June 12, 1973 · Page 4
Get access to this page with a Free Trial

Galesburg Register-Mail from Galesburg, Illinois · Page 4

Galesburg, Illinois
Issue Date:
Tuesday, June 12, 1973
Page 4
Start Free Trial

t 4...!!^Mbur9 ,Refli $t (6 ^MQll 7 Golesburg, Ml. Tues,,June 12, 1973 "Don't You Think It's About Time You Picked Up Your Diploma?" u a* * h v EDITORIAL Comment and Review 27ie Campaign Finance Dilemma; Senate Bill ISot The Answer •4 Si id * •a *> to m *\ v A M » 4) « a At » K to * 4 •ft tt Poetical candidates spent a total of $400 million last year in their quest for public office. The figure was so high it bordered on the absurd, but it brought out into the open some glaring weaknesses in our elective process: —It became obvious that the large amounts required to win public office left qualified individuals without financial backing out in the co]d, unable to run and unable to serve. —Those who did run for office without great wealth, found themselves with three bleak alternatives—selling their souls to the highest bidder, going deeply in debt or losing. —Those with vast amounts of money were able to hire professional campaign workers and public relations armies. They in turn were able to package their candidates as ideal public servants, often concealing the real man. In some cases the candidates were able to avoid extensive contact with the voters and blur their true ability to serve. —As in the case of the Committee to Re-Elect the President, which horded more than 10 per cent (nearly $50 million) of the totaj $400 million spent, the professional troops went to unethical or even criminal lengths to win the election. To combat the election finance dilemma, a number of bills have been introduced in Congress, and a few implemented, but with only a modicum of success. Two examples are the federal campaign contributions disclosure l^w and the federal tax checkoff system. The disclosure law requires accountings of campaign contributions and contributors and restricts the amount of some contributions, That Jaw, however, was enacted too late to have an appreciable effect on last year's elections. The checkoff scheme permits U.S. taxpayers to designate $1 on their income tax returns for the political party of their choice. The idea is sound and simple, but the Internal Revenue Service, in true bureaucratic form, sent taxpayers a separate form for the checkoff procedure along with the standard 1040 forms. The process was complicated, and as a result, at last count, only 3 per cent of the 72 million taxpayers responding set aside money for political campaigns. That has provided only $2 million for the two parties—not even a drop in the bucket. Among the bills proposed in Congress t is a comprehensive election finance reform bill co-sponsored by Sen. Adlai Stevenson III, D-Ill., and Sen. Charles Mathias, R-Md. The Stevenson-Mathias package places badly needed limitations on the size of campaign contributions and total spending, but it contains several potentially dan? gerous and ineffective provisions, which, make the bill; unacceptable. The senators propose the creation of a Federal Election Commission comprised of representatives from both political parties with the authority to oversee campaigns, enforce reform laws, investigate possible violations and prosecute offenders who would be subject to stiff penalties. More importantly, the bill provides for subsidizing federal campaigns with funds from the U.S. Treasury. Sen. Stevenson argues, and accurately so, that,the Justice Department has shown itself incapable of handling its responsibility to keep candidates and their machines honest, and that the party in power exercises too great an influence over Justice Department investigations and prosecutions. The creation of another independent, regulatory commission, however, is not the , answer. Lawmakers seem to have an automatic reflex to corruption or incompetence —create another commission or committee. If this country cannot elect a President capable of appointing honest, effective department heads, then what is needed is another constitutional branch of government with the sole responsibility of investigating the other branches, headed by a representative (s) of the people, not appointed by Congress, the President or the Courts. We are not at that point yet, although Watergate might lead some to believe otherwise, nor are we at the juncture in American politics where the taxpayers must be forced to finance the campaigns of aspiring politicians. The Stevenson-Mathias plan for government financing of campaign costs places half the candidates at the mercy of the other half—the incumbents who would be indirectly responsible for the administration of the public campaign fund. The potential dangers are obvious and not worth the risk. There are other campaign reform laws proposed in Congress, and the Watergate affair will surely inspire the introduction of many more, including one by U.S. Rep. Thomas Railsback, It-Ill. They may provide a better answer to the problem than Senators Stevenson and Mathias have. Europe Moving Closer to Unification The 50 slates of the United Scales of America are bound t6* gether by the glue of a basic legal document — the Constitution — whose ultimate interpreter is the Supreme Court. Although the nine members of the European Economic Community — which is the closest Europe has yet come to a "United States of Europe" — have no constitution as such, they do have a common body of agreements and a supranational court of adjudication which is becoming a growing force in the daily lives of Europeans. This is the European Court of Justice, created by the 1952 Treaty of Paris which established the European Coal and Steel Community, a forerunner of the Common Market. The court's role is to interpret the various Community treaties and the laws flowing from them in cases of disputes between Community members. But increasingly, notes French journalist Jean Lecerf, writing in the publication European Community, the court is finding itself deciding suits brought by private citizens against their own or other member governments. For example, one as yet. undecided case involves a German engineer who obtained his employer's consent to take a position in Alsace. Soon after his arrival in France, he was the victim of an on-the-job accident. Who pays — the French social security system or the German? Without the Court of Justice, the engineer might have run up against a double refusal. As it happened, the German court to which the matter was brought has deferred judgment pending the European Court's interpretation of the appropriate text. It also appears likely, says Lecerf, that in coming years the Court of Justice will become an instrument of recourse in the application of Article 119 of the Common Market Treaty, which stipulates that men and women shall receive equal pay for equal work. One female employe of the European Parliament in Luxembourg has already won a case in which she alleged salary discrimination on the basis of sex. The growing stature of the court has raised an important question: When Community law and national law conflict, which' Comment should prevail? A minor case has served to establish the preeminence of the European Court in this area. It involved an Italian citizen who had been called before a judge for refusing to pay an electricity bill on the grounds that the nationalization of the electric power industry violated the Rome Treaty. The issue was particularly serious in that an opinion of the Italian Constitu­ tional Court had held that any national law overrode an ear* Her Community statute. The European Court disagreed, and recehfc decisions have confirmed the supremacy of Community law. The court's verdict last July against the Italian government for having continued to levy a tax on exported aft objects,. a practice prohibited by the Treaty, established a fundamental legal point: "Application of Community law is to be identical at all times and in all parts of the Community and must prevail over any obstacles that a mem-' bcr state may place in its way," the court declared. "In relinquishing to the Community the rights and powers corresponding to the Treaty provisions, the member states have affected a definitive limitation of their sovereign rights which no national statute may disavow." In just such a way did the 13 original American states relinquish their absolute sovereignty 184 years ago when they joined together to form "a more perfect Union." (Newspaper Enterprise Assn.) U.S. Agency Opens Season on Vitajnnkies «r i fitTTAf/irn /MiT mi WASHINGTON - The government is making a mew class of criminals. They are the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of vitajunkies who take high-potency megashots of vitamins. Starting next year the Food and Drug Administration will put high-potency vitamin A and D pills on a prescription-only basis. Low-potency A and D, that is pills containing 150 per cent or less of the "recommended daily allowance," will still be available without prescription. So if your bags are searched at the airport and tihey discover a bottle of high-potency A or Din them you had better have a doctor's prescription, or they might throw you in jail with the scag shooters, speed freaks and Quaialude poppers. AFTER THE fingerprinting you'll be publicly .labeled a vita- junkie. If-you don't get a year in jail the judge will force you into group therapy; once a week your probation officer will strip yctu down to make sure you haven't started sneaking hard stuff back into your diet. The new FDA regulations also require that all other vitamins in pills containing more than 150 per cent of the recommended daily allowance — a figure, one suspects, they arrive at by lottery — must be labeled and sold as drugs. No matter what's written on the bottle, you won't be able to buy these vitamins freely for long because, the agency says, they too will be "reviewed by experts who will judge their safety and effectiveness and advise the FDA whether any of them should require a prescription." . The reason offered for making A and D more expensive and much harder to get is the evidence that, taken in massive amounts, they are toxic. But so is spinach. If you drink enough Comment By Nicholas Von Hoffman water you can kill yourself, so, by the same reasoning, the FDA should be obliged to put doses of H20 exceeding the recommended daily allowance under prescription. But as with vitamins, no one can recommend a daily allowance with confidence because each of us is different with different needs; and because they haven't spent the money to do the research to make more than an educated guess. THIS SOLICITUDE for the safety of what we eat comes well from an agency that for years was willing to let the. public ingest meat contaminated with a deadly substance like diethylstilbestrol (DES). The FDA has looked on while we gorged ourselves on cycliamaites, dyes, preservatives and noxious additives of any sort that could be concocted in a chemistry laboratory. Opponents of the new regulations don't have it easy. Even publications like The New York Times refer to them as "food faddists" in the news columns, while the FDA accuses the National Health Federation, the main organized group in opposition, of being quacks and charlatans. The agency is circulating a memorandum saying that some of the federation's leaders have been convicted of such things as practicing madd- cine without a license, misbranding health products and making false claims for them. It does indeed sound bad that a former. National Health Federation board member was convicted of promoting a "worthless" cancer remedy, until you recollect the number of equaMy worthless cancer remedies being promoted by members of the American Medical Association. TWENTY YEARS ago the viral theory of cancer was regarded as quackery-and acu- punture was considered a species of Red Chinese witchcraft. Millions of us are walking around with our tonsils cut put because doctors knew those fun- ' ny lumps in our throats have no physiological function. The . naturopaths, the chiropractors and the other people who give themselves queer-soui'iding titles disagreed. This is not to say that every- , one who disagrees with. a doctor is right. Doubtless many who , are fighting the FDA will ultimately be found to be in serious error; but right or wrong, it is'; medieval to put people with IMV',' ; popular scientific opinions in, jail. It as equally irrational and anti-scientific to settle complex,;, widely disputed and under-re^, searched questions of great! difficulty and importance by- ridicule or by promulgating new • rules and regulations in the Federal Register. V •'. If we are going to go back to deciding scientific disputes iri';i the courtroom, let's go all the \ way: let's (extend the death,, • penalty for heroin-pushing to ; the operators . of health food. • stores and we can save our young people from being enslaved by vitamin C and wheat germ. Oapyright, 1973, The : Washington Post-King Features Syndicate THE MAILBOX ... Loiters to the Editor Likes Nixon Editor, Register-Mail: Mr. Nixon is still great in my book. This position that he is in isn't easy. He tries to get something done with a House full of Democrats—? So don't blame him for the mess we are in, blame your own believers. I am not brainwashed. Although I have a clean thinking mind—that's the reason I voted Crossword Puzzle Scrambler Answen to Previous Puzzle 35! CI ACROSS 1 Trimmings from a tree DOWN 1 Openwork fabric zrom a tree „ Z7 .7.- - ., , 4 Child's puppet 2 Ellipsoidal 8 Lustrous fiber * Cer l*m paragraphs in 12 Hail! 13 Candelnut trees 14 Iroquoian Indian 35 Vehicle 16 Snickering 18 Scottish "Elizabeth" 20 Moves upward 21 Aged 22 Ardor 24 Fatal mischief 26 Malayan dagger (var.) 27 Male child 30 Asian peninsula 32 Nullify 34 Canadian river 35 Amatory 36 Power property 37 Gaseous element 39 Notch 40 Mail, as a letter 41 Legal point 42 Malicious burning 45 Weeping 49 Incessant 51 Chemical su/fix 52 Grafted (her.) b'i Sea eagle 54 Greek letter 55 One who (suffix) 66 Employer 57 Dip in gravy newspapers 4 Reckoned chronology ically 5 Leave out 6 Froth 7 Type of boat 8 European finch 9 Rainbow 10 Row 11 Small casks 17 Expunger JSPlebians (slang) 23 Flaxen cloth 24 Company of musicians 25 Martian (comb, form) 2G Walking sticks 27 Makes content 28 Auditory 29 Strait 31 Artificial perfume 33 Dead duck (slang; 38 Musteline mammals 40 Puzzle 41 Demolishes* 42 High cards 43 Torn 44 Glut 46 Anglo-Saxob slave 47 Preposition 48 Jump 50 Romanian coin for Mr. Nixon, who else was there to vote for? I vote for the man not the party—we are not perfect you know, but at least we can try. So come on and join the party and be thankful we have some freedom left. I sure don't like being taxed more and more, for all the ones who don't believe in our American ways. For instance all the boys who arc deserters should be sent over to the ones they believe in. If they don't like America then we should not have to pay for their way—such as welfare and etc. Let the ones who need this kind of help get it, but there's a lot who don't deserve it. Wait until you have to pay three times the amount you are paying now for income tax. That was on the radio the other day (it was a possibility we might have to) so if Congress passes this, who are you going to blame then? Three guesses, to blame then. Three guesses. —Nova Gocdeke, Galesburg No Oil Crisis Editor, Register-Mail: There is no oil and gas shortage in America. These are fear tactics. A maneuver with a many folded purpose, by whom? 1 You know or suspect—profit. It is: To force'the. pipeline' issue in Alaska; .to withdraw the ecology laws on offshore and ocean drilling; to drive out the small independent; to bring about an oil agreement with USSR, I strongly suspect this. I have worked with the oil majors for the last 10 years from drilling to refinery. I have worked on wells that have been confidential, no information released, these wells were then capped and cemented. Why? Don't they want us to know there's oil there? They say there's an oil shortage so why the secrecy? On second thought maybe they'll die before they admit the truth, Their way they'll profit This way you'll p r o f i t.—Bruce A. I'ittman, Galesburg, (K£WJf>AW lMT«f*l5£ ASSN.) i./ 1 I r 4 i 6 7 r 9 10 rr 12 13 u 15 16 1?" 18 21 18 2T 3T P W »- 30 rr" P 34 *& '• P ar 3o P ar a 42 43 44 <% 67" — i i 52 J53 W" — i i 68 r 1 57" —— i Office HO South Prairie street Galesburg, Illinois, 61401 TELEPHONE NUMBER Register-Mall Exchange 343-7181 i-ntered as Second Class Metttr at the Post Office at Galesburg, Illinois, under Act of Congress at March 3, 1870. DaJJy except Sundays and Holidays other than Washington's Birthday, Columbus Day and Veterans Day. Ethel Custer Prltchard, publisher: Charles Morrow, editor and general manager; Robert Harrison, managing editor; Michael Johnson, assistant to Ihe editor; James O'Connor, aasUlant managing editor. Nallonal ,., Advertising Representative,: Ward UrUMh Co., Ao., New Y'uk, Chicago, Detroit, l.os Angeles. Kan Francisco, Atlanta, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh. Boston, Charlot te. MEMBER AUDIT BUREAU OF . CIRCULATION 1 SUBSCRIPTION RAT88 By Carrier In City o{ Galesburg SOo a Week • * By RFD mall In our ratal! trading zona: 1 Year $18.00 3 Month! U.29 6 Months % 8.00 i Month 12.00 No mall subscriptions accepted in towns where there is aitablishaa newspaper boy delivery service. By Carrier In retail trading tone ouUlde City of Galesburg 5Uc a Week By mall outside retaU trading zona In Illinois, Iowa and Missouri and by motor route in retail trading zone: 1 Year $22.00 a Months MOO 0 Month! 112.00 1 Month J31W By mall outside Illinois, low* and Missouri: _ 1 Year tZOOO 3 Month* §7.80 li Months |14.60 1 Month |3.00

What members have found on this page

Get access to

  • The largest online newspaper archive
  • 8,900+ newspapers from the 1700s–2000s
  • Millions of additional pages added every month

Try it free