Galesburg Register-Mail from Galesburg, Illinois on September 28, 1963 · Page 4
Get access to this page with a Free Trial
Click to view larger version

Galesburg Register-Mail from Galesburg, Illinois · Page 4

Galesburg, Illinois
Issue Date:
Saturday, September 28, 1963
Page 4
Start Free Trial

Page 4 article text (OCR)

4 GateSbura Register-Moil; Gotesburq, 111. Sot,, Sept. 28,J963 Sign of the Titties U.S. Charts a Hard Look at AH Its Europe Dealings AT HIS annual orchard picnic recently in Berryville, Va., Sen. Harry F. Byrd (D. of Va.) presented what he calls his annual "Byrd's-eye-view" of Washington. What he saw over the past 31 months he didn't like. Excerpts from his talk follow: "Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what, you can do for your country." These were the challenging words of the President of the United States closing his inaugural address on January 20, two years and seven months ago. Who has done what for whom in these past 31 months? Take a look at tlie record, and draw your own conclusions. You will find. . . .virtually no area of domestic-civilian activity by the federal government has been overlooked in Presidential message proposals for increased spending. . . .Some of these proposals might be desirable, if we were ready, willing and able to pay for them, but the record shows that we are not, and the Administration admits it. . . .In the fiscal year ended on June 30 before those famous words were uttered by the President, there had been a federal surplus of $1.2 billion. There has been a fedei'al deficit in each fiscal year since Jan. 20, 1961, and in the past two years it has totaled $6-and-a-half billion a year. This year it will be that high again, or higher, depending on the outcome of tax cut proposals. In the fiscal year ended June ' 30 before those famous words were said, the federal debt totaled $286.1 billion. Now it totals upward of $305 billion—an increase of nearly $19 billion. In three years, interest on the debt has been increased by $1 billion a year, or 9.2 per cent. * * * TO TAKE CARE of its activities, the federal government in the past two and a half years has added some 166,000 civilian employees and increased the civilian payroll by $1.7 billion a year. The civilian payroll is now running at an annual rate of $15-and-a- half billion or more; and there are more than 2.5 million civilians on the rolls. And the great bulk of the increase—both in number of civilian employees and in payroll costs—has not been in the military departments; it has been in civilian agencies. These figures continue to go up, and they do not include, of course, those employed as uniformed personnel in the Armed Forces. . . . Consider the Executive crack-down on the steel industry last year, when the central government made unprecedented use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Federal Grand Jury, and threats to withdraw and withhold federal contracts from companies which dared not to conform to administration price control. The President last year went so far as to recommend that he should assume the power of the purse. He actually proposed that he be authorized to cut taxes by executive order, and spend money on projects for which no appropriations had been made. Both of these powers would have undermined the Constitution, which prohibits expenditures except "in consequence of appropriations made by law," and fixes the taxing power of the government solely in the legislative branch. Congress, fortunately, defeated the proposals, but they are still being demanded. , . , * # * HOPJ? for the future—built on confidence --is the stimulating force for sound progress. But confidence is not stimulated by expanding federal domination and control, or judicial usurpation of power, or excessive Federal spending; and we are feeling the oppression of all three. There are deficits everywhere we look. The United Nations has a deficit of more than $120 million, and we will pay most of it. NATO has a deficit with only the United States and Canada fully meeting prescribed goals. There is a balance of payments deficit under which foreigners have taken two-thirds of our free gold. And there are planned deficits in the regular federal budget. We have bought half of the UN bonds. We are not demanding that our allies meet their NATO goals. The administration seems incapable of stopping the extremely dangerous outflow of gold, and gold backs our money. The management of our fiscal affairs is thoroughly irresponsible. We have, tried too long to be Santa Claus, banker and policeman for the free world. Government economists say balancing the budget is still a goal; but to balance it any time soon would make us poor because there would be no Federal deficit to make us rich. And to make us richer faster, they want the government to create bigger deficits by spending more and cutting taxes at the same time. These ideas don't sound like men looking for New Frontiers. They sound like Rip Van Winkle. These economists must have been taking a long nap. For years, we have been talking about the foolishness of trying to spend the country rich. And, some of the things for which the government is spending money are remarkable. You can see plenty of horrible examples, if you look around. . . . * * * THE PRESIDENT is a busy man, and he must be able to move and act quickly; and I certainly do not begrudge him any recreation he is able to find. But consider the land, sea and air transport available to the White House. There are: Ten helicopters; the President's private $8 million fan-jet Boeing 707320 aeroplane; three Boeing 707's assigned to tlie White House by the Air Force; one Air Force Douglas DC-6B for airports that can't take jets; a 21-foot Lincoln Continental automobile, and three other family cars, in addition to Secret Service vehicles, and the regular White House fleet; a special railroad car; two yachts; another yacht available from the Navy, and a racing yawl supplied through the Coast Guard. Maybe all of this is necessary; but somehow or another it seems to me that the President could set an example by getting along with a little less. . , . If federal expenditures were reduced substantially, I would be among the first to give serious consideration to reducing laxes. Taxes are too high, and they should be cut. But let me remind all who will listen, that there is only one reason for federal taxes. And that reason is to meet federal expenditures Eliminate unnecessary federal expenditures, and constructive tax reduction is sure to follow. As we stand now, tax reduction would be irresponsible and dangerous. People generally know this, and there is a feeling of reluctance about this proposal in the air. Since tliis present 88th Congress was convened last January, some 11,800 bills and resolutions have been introduced in the House and Senate. To date (through Aug. 28), 103 have been passed. That's less than one in a hundred, less than one per cent. And we would be better off if many of those had not been passed. Percentage-wise, I think this record to date would please Thomas Jefferson, who held that the least governed are the best governed. By PETER EDSON WASHINGTON (NEA) - A new look at United States relations with Europe may be in the making. Its major elements are economic — trade, tariffs, foreign investments and balance of payments. But back of these strictly business issues is seen a need for reappraisal of political and military lies. It looks toward a more equitable sharing of all free world defense costs, including foreign aid for the developing countries. This prospect is emphasized by the White House Conference on Export Expansion, which drew over 200 top business leaders to Washington. This conference concentrated on enlarging America's already favorable surplus of exports over imports. But this is seen as only one element in the much larger problem of bringing all U. S. in­ ternational relations into better balance. EUROPEAN BUSINESS and political leaders haVe a much different view of this complicated world situation than do American leaders, says Dr. N. R. Danelian, president of International Economic Policy Assn. This is a private research organization servicing a number of American corporations in foreign trade and investment. "Even if the United States could solve its balance of payment deficit by increasing exports," says Danelian, "many Europeans feel the result would be depression for them. They believe that any increase in U. S. exports would make them lose business at home, or it would take away European export markets in third countries." An important factor in this situation is the growing desire—led by President Charles dc Gaulle of France — to make Europe more self-sufficient economically and militarily. The American plan for a North Atlantic Treaty Organization nuclear defense force under U. S. leadership is dead, says Danelian, because Europe would not buy it and pay its share of the costs. Similarly, he reports that Eufo- peans have no intention of reducing their existing tariffs against American automobiles and agricultural products 'n which U. S. exporters believe they have the best chance to increase trade with Europe. IF THIS REPORT is accurate, it does not augur well for success of the so-called "Kennedy round" of tariff reduction negotiations scheduled to begin next spring with "trade czar" Christian A. Herter as chief U. S. bargainer. If the United States cannot increase its exports to Europe, perhaps the next best opportunity for reducing the American balance of payments deficit may be found in increasing foreign investments. Their earnings could be brought back to this country as profits. Europeans, however, are afraid of the competition from American investments overseas and would like to curtail them. At the same time, Europeans oppose any curbs on their investments in the United States. They help the Europeans earn dollars on which they can demand payment in gold. This is a constant threat to the American gold reserve and another major point of difference on economic policies of the two continents. THE FINAL and most troublesome difference is over foreign aid. The, United States wants Europe to bear an increasing share of the aid prognm for developing countries as another means of reducing America's balance of payments deficit. The European justification for not doing more in this field is that the United States, with the highest living standard in the world, can best afford to give foreign economic and military aid and should continue to do so as its duty. Europe spends less than 6 per cent of its g-oss national product for defense, compared to the U. S. 11 per cent. Germany pays a share of the European NATO defense costs by buying considerable military equipment from the United States. The other NATO countries pay back nothing, but bask in the collective security of American nuclear protection. If the United States was to suggest that it would have to reduce its military aid outlays, a loud scream probably would be heard. But as a bargaining point in seeking a new arrangement for more equitably sharing such costs, such a suggestion might be justified. Goldwater's 'Compromise 9 Slant Analyzed By JOHN CHAMBERLAIN FOR ONE REASON or another, people are suddenly making the discovery that Barry Goldwater is a reasonable man, willing to "move toward the center." Walter Lippmann, for example, has found, to his own considerable astonishment, that Goldwater, if elected to the Presidency, would not attempt to abolish the income tax overnight or drop an atomic bomb on-Castro without warning. This discovery that Goldwater is not a lunatic pleases me. But the terms in which it is couched are a bit worrisome, for all that. The important thing is not that Barry Goldwater is willing to "move tovard the center"; it is, rather, that he is dedicated to using only the fairest and the most decent methods in the whole political arsenal to move the "center" toward his own philosophy as a limit. LIKE ALL good politicians who are truly in the American grain. Goldwater is a pragmatist. He MAILBOX Voting Union Choice Editor, Register-Mail: On Sept. 19, 1963, an article appeared in the Galesburg Labor News by Gerald DeWitt, president of Marine Motor Lodge 1659. This article was his comments, on the memberships action on the company's proposal to bring employes from LaMar, Mo., to Galesburg with full seniority. I will agree the membership did show good judgment in defeating the proposal, however I must point out to the members that had their union officers shown any leadership, the vote on the proposal was unnecessary. . . . The contract between Gales and the union had not been reopened. The present seniority clause gives the members adequate protection. Nothing was to be gained by the members, and it would have cost some of them their jobs. President DeWitt then stated that, had the independents been in office they could have lost much more than seniority. It appears that Mr. DeWitt is trying to instill fear into the membership, as time draws near for a de-certification election. I believe most Gale employes realize their contract is patterned after the Johnson contract, which incidentally is an independent union. A good independ- et union can serve the people as well as the International Association of Machinists. In closing I wish to say, When a vote does come, vote in what you believe, be it Machinist or Independent.— liernaid Smith, 1520 Meadow Dr. Spotsylvania is the name of a county in Virginia which was the scene of four Civil War battles. The county is named for Alexander Spotswood, a pre-Revolutionary British governor of Virginia, who developed the state's iron industry and promoted religious education for the Indians. © Encyclopaedia Sritcnoic* judges a thing—or a policy—by its workings. But, unlike some pragmatists, he is aware that there is a catch to the famous statement that "a tlung is true if it works." The catch about this test of truth is that nobody can know what is working if he doesn't know what it is working toward. The pragmatist must have a goal, a philosophy, in order to judge the usefulness of a thing or a policy. You don't hitch a machine to empty air. Lippmann's fascinated—and approving—discovery that Goldwater is a pragmatist, a compromiser, then, must not be left to stand by itself. What is interesting about Goldwater is that he has ends, but is quite content to push them within the context of the American political system, which is one of compromise. If the majority goes against him, he is willing to accept the circumstance for the time being. But before acknowledging the Other Editorial Opinion MAGICAL LEARNING AID. A new aid to rapid—almost magical —learning has made its appearance. Indications are that if it catches on, all the electronic gadgets will be so much junk. The device is known as Built- in Orderly Organized Knowledge. The makers generally call it by its initials, BOOK. Many advantages are claimed over the old style learning and teaching aids on which most people are brought up nowadays. It has no wires, no electric circuit to break down. No connection is needed to an electrical power point. It is made entirely without mechanical parts to go wrong or need replacement. Anyone can use BOOK, even children, and it fits comfortably into the hands. It can be conveniently used sitting in an armchair by the fire. How does this revolutionary, unbelievably easy invention work? Basically BOOK consists only of a large number of paper sheets. These may be run to hundreds where BOOK covers a lengthy programme of information. Each sheet bears a number in sequence, so that the sheets cannot be used in the wrong order. To make it even easier for the user to keep the sheets in the proper order, they are held firmly in place by a special locking device called a "binding." Each sheet of paper presents the user with an information sequence in the form of symbols, which he absorbs optically for automatic registration on the brain. When one sheet has been assimilated a flick of the finger turns it over and further information is found on the other side. By using both sides of each sheet in this way a great economy is effected, thus reducing both the size and cost of BOOK. No buttons need to be pressed to move from one sheet to another, to open or close BOOK, or to start it working. BOOK may be taken up at any time and used by merely opening it. Nothing has to be connected up or switched on. The user may REMINISCING Of Bygone Times FIFTY YEARS AGO Sunday, Sept. 28, 1913 "Every Day a Rally Day" was the theme used by tlie Sunday school at First Methodist Church. Diplomas and Bibles were presented to pupils who were graduated from one department to another. Alexis was defeated by Aledo in a football game, 6-0. The Alexis players, it was said, were outweighed 15 pounds to the man. TWENTY YEARS AGO Tuesday, Sept. 28, 1943 E. L. Harden, principal of Galesburg High School, delivered a talk to members of the Kiwanis Club at th Galesburg Club. He spoke on schools and the development of education. Officers of Woodbine Camp No. 445, Royal Neighbors of America, held a farewell party for Mrs. Ethel Wooley, who was leaving Galesburg to reside in California. turn at will to any sheet going backwards or forwards as he pleases. A sheet is provided near the beginning as a location finder for any required information sequence. The initial cost varies with the size and subject matter. Already a vast range of BOOKS is available, covering every conceivable subject and adjusted to different levels of aptitude. One BOOK, small enough to be held in the hands, may contain an entire learning schedule. Once purchased, BOOK requires no further upkeep cost; no batteries or wires are needed, since the motive power, thanks to an ingenious device patented by the makers, is supplied by the brain of the user. BOOKS may be stored on handy shelves and for ease of references the programme schedule is normally indicated on the back of the binding. Altogether the Built-in Orderly Organized Knowledge seems to have great advantages with no drawbacks. We predict a big future for it.— Antiquarian Bookman (Newark, N. J.) A MEASURE OF HYPOCRISY. South Africa and Algeria, a continent apart geographically, may not seem to have much in common politically either. Yet they exhibit similar traits. And taken together, the two African nations are a reminder of some of the strange standards prevailing in today's world At one extreme of the continent is South Africa, relatively rich and run by a white minority that is itself divided. It faces a new assault in the United Nations by the dominant Asian and African countries along with boycotts such as the current one against its air transport industry. At the least, the U.S. Government sympathizes with this attack. At the other is Algeria, ruled by a one-party system under a frankly leftist dictator. Just before a rubber-stamp election installed him as the country 's first president, Ben Bella announced plans to seize the remaining lands of French settlers and other foreign properties. It is a characteristic move in a nation from which thousands have been forced to flee because of persecutions, and where thousands more are said to have been imprisoned or slain by vengeful nationalists. Last year Ben Bella was fondly embraced by the U.S. Government. A sincere opponent of terror and oppression might look at South Africa and Algeria with equal disdain, holding that the one's apartheid is no more reprehensible than the other's totalitarianism. So it is a measure of the hypocrisy that holds sway in the world when Algeria, along with Ghana and others, helps engineer the mounting attack against South Africa. Algeria itself shows once again that a successful revolution doesn't always bring an end to oppression; it may simply give it a new brand name. But these are lessons little noted, and perhaps little understood, in either the UN or Washington.—The Wall Street Journal. verdict, he does everything that he can to inch the "center" over a bit toward the goal he has in mind. Goldwater's willingness to defer temporarily to a broad consensus would make him a "safe" President. But the quality of his deference would nonetheless change the atmosphere of American life. In domestic politics, it would result in the presentation of all manner of ingenious compromises designed, not to repeal the Welfare State, but to take the hard-and-fast compulsions of the New Deal period out of it. FOR EXAMPLE, a Goldwater in the White House would know that he could not get rid of Social Security. But he would almost certainly send a bill up 'o Congress advocating that every employed person be accorded a choice between government or private old-age insurance. The choice could be easily administered merely by letting a person indicate his preference on his income tax statement and by clipping a duplicate of a private insurance receipt to the statement the following year. The citizen could be compelled by law u> keep his old-age insurance at a certain level. A Goldwater in the White House would be forced by a prevailing consensus i .o take the responsibility for keeping the U.S. economy from going into a tailspin. But such responsibility by no means commits a President to a policy of big deficit spending. Instead of using taxation and Inflation to keep the Gross National Product at high paper levels, a Goldwater might limit government support of the economy to the maintenance of a comprehensive system of unemployment insurance. Dr. Arthur Burns, who was one of Eisenhower's economic advisers, was urging this at the time Nixon and Kennedy were fighting it out for President in I960. But it came to nothing because Kennedy chose to advocate a floor for "depressed areas" instead of for unemployed individuals. THE GOLDWATER pragmatism would be exercised toward the end of maximizing the amount of voluntarism, of free choice, in society without letting people starve. It would permit a remission of tax money to families that choose private or parochial schools instead of public schools for their children. It would work toward a flat income tax instead of a progressive tax —but would lighten the tax burden to people of small incomes by getting a whole host of expenditures off the public cuff. Thus a Goldwater would try to inch the center over to the so- called Right. But we would still have a Welfare Society under- girded by a politician with a heart. A Kennedy, running against a Goldwater, might still win by stealing Goldwater's clothes. Which would be okay with me. Copyright 1963 Qalesburg lfegtster-Mail Office 140 South Prairie Street Galesburg, Illinois rELKPHUNfc. NUMBER Register-Mail Exchange 342-6161 Entered -*s Second Class Matter at the Post Office at Galesburg Illinois, under \ct of Congress of M^-"h 3 1879 Daily except Sunday Ethel Custer Schmitb.— Publisher Charles Morrow ... Editor and Genera* Manager U. H h.ddy Associate cklltoT And Director of Public Relations H. H Clay Managing Editor National Advertising Representative' Ward-Griffith Company Incorporated, New Yorfc. Chicago, Detroit. Boston. Atlanta, San Francisco. Los Angeles Philadelphia Charlotte MEMTEH AUDIT BUREAU OF CIRCULATIONS MEMBEK ASSOCIATED PRESS rhe Associated Press la entitled exclusively to the use OT republication of all the local news printed in this newspaper as well as all AF new« dispatches SUBSCRIPTION RATES By Carrier in City ol Galesburg 35c a Week By RFD man in our retail trading zone 1 1 Vear $10.00 a Months $3.50 6 Months $ 6.00 1 Month $1.25 No mall subscriptions accepted In towns where there ts established newspaper boy delivery By Carrier in retail trading xona~ outside City of Galesburg. 1 week 30c By mail outside retail trading zone in Illinois. Iowa and Missouri and by motor rout* to retail trading zone. 1 year $13.00 3 Months $3.71 6 Months $ 7.00 1 Month $1.29 By mail outside Illinois. Iowa and Missouri 1 Vear $18.00 3 Months $5.00 6 Months $ 9.50 1 Month $2.00 Crossword Puzzzle Cook's Tour Answer to Previous Pimle ' TOT ACROSS 1 Cook's concoction 4 Cook's utensils 8 Bean used by a cook 12 Art (Latin) 13 Nautical term ' 14 Wolfhound 15 Cook's lettuce 16 X-rays (comb, form) 18 Grimaced 20 Plant exudate 21 Negative vote 22 Falsifier 24 Mongrel dog 26 Partly (prefix) 27 Article SO Each 82 Sounded as a trumpet 84 Florida river (var.) $5 Branch of the Amur 46 Shakespearean prince 97 Unoccupied 39 Trial 40 And 41 Chest bone 42 Odd job 45 Arranging in layers 40 Requiting 61 Meadow 62 Hebrew measure B3 Particle 64 Gibbon 65 Pineapple 66 West Indian shrub 67 Seniors (ab.) PDWN 1 Moccasins % Cook's — skillet 8 indispensable 4 Ward off, as a blow 6 Succulent plant 6 Sewing tool 7 Oriental coin & South African camp (var.) 9 Islands (Fr.) 10 Peanut 11 Presently 17 Marked paths 19 Consumed 23 Permeate 24 Cook will do it to potatoes 25 Labor union (ab.) 26 Sows 27 Indictments 28 Pronoun 29 Redact SlWainscoter 33 Moving 38 Medicinal preparation 40 Palm cockatoo 41 Stately 42 Craw 43 Half (prefix) 44 Masculine appellation 46 Principal Inc3B god 47 Approach 48 Long fishel 50 Asunder (prefix) 1 2 3 " 4 5 6 1 8 9 VT 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22" 24 25 26 • 28 29 30 32 W 34 35 36 1 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 • • 46 47 48 49 50 bl 52' b3 54 55 56 57 28 t. i 4

Get full access with a Free Trial

Start Free Trial

What members have found on this page