Freeport Journal-Standard from Freeport, Illinois on July 14, 1975 · Page 8
Get access to this page with a Free Trial

Freeport Journal-Standard from Freeport, Illinois · Page 8

Publication:
Location:
Freeport, Illinois
Issue Date:
Monday, July 14, 1975
Page:
Page 8
Start Free Trial
Cancel

AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER Published daily except Siinday and six .legal holidays by The Freeport • Journal-Standard Publishing Company FREEPORT JOURNAL-STANDARD MONDAY, JULY 14, 1975 FREEPORT, ILLINOIS Snooping, All Kinds While personnel of the Central Intelligence Agency, empowered by law to do certain kinds of snooping, are under criticism by the snoopers of Sen. Frank Church's committee for doing what they shouldn't, the whole issue of secrecy is under scrutiny. It gets more complicated with the charges and denials concerning the alleged involvement of Alexander Butterfield whose suggestion that he was a target of Nixon loyalists adds more to the Watergate scenario. Butterfield's response is more convincing than retired Colonel Pronty's assertion which he now says is based on what someone told him. A question still pertinent is what prompted the colonel to bring up his charge at this time. What effect will it have on the ongoing investigations? Will we ever know the full story? What Sen. Church's committee is doing, for partisan as well as for patriotic purposes, is to demand that the entire public, whether intelligent or stupid, whether patriotic or treasonable, be allowed to receive much, perhaps nearly all, of the intelligence formerly supposed to be designed for government officials to utilize in the national interest. The people's right to know is certainly basic in the practice of democracy. But even that right is not absolute. Like all other rights, including those guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, it exists for'the people's good and to satisfy their needs, not to whet or encourage purposeless curiosity. There is plenty of idle curiosity inherent in human nature, and it extends to all sorts of goings on, private and public, whether or not their disclosure will serve any useful purpose whatsoever. Arid all curiosity creates the risk, in fact the certainty, of snooping. - Snooping always has been and always will be a dirty word. That admired and admirable statesman, twice a member of the Cabinet, Henry L. Stimson, once said that opening mail addressed to other people is something of what no gentleman cares To be guilty. There was more understanding of what was gentlemanly in the days when Stimson lived and worked. Gentlemen have less chance of survival in today's world where the rule seems to be that, in order to beat those who use dirty tricks, you must imitate them. Nonpolitical Journey The tour of Michigan and Chicago just completed by President Ford has at least proved that an enormous number of people in his home state are anxious to see him and endure congested travel and jostling through crowds to get a glimpse of him that is not quite so distinct as that which they could see at leisure in their homes on television. What it means about the real popularity of the President or his chances for election in 1976 is something else. The tour has been labeled as nonpolitical, which seems to mean that it was planned anyway, without regard to the fact that he was about to announce his candidacy a few days before the tour began. That is no doubt the case. On the other hand, anything that an incumbent of the White House does is political, whether or not it is labeled as such. It cannot be otherwise, and there is no difference between the activities of the President and those of the members of the Congress in that respect. All have their expenses paid for going back home to see their constituents, and the constituents of the President are to be found throughout the 50 states. As for members of the House of Representatives, with their two year terms, they are constantly running for re-election, and the trips back home for which they are reimbursed, and must be reimbursed, are both for the purpose of consulting with constituents and for mending political fences. The senators, with their six year terms, do the same, though possibly less compulsively. But some features of the Michigan trip were exceptional. The report that 300,000 persons jammed into Traverse City to see the President in the cherry festival parade is a sample. Increasing the population of Traverse City by ten or fifteenfold for a day created an emergency demand for food, shelter, gas and sidewalk space to stand on. At Mackinac island members of the bar attempting to register for their meeting found the Grand Hotel completely taken over by security officials and other functionaries. As usual one can find, an appropriate comment from Shakespeare and in this case it would be "Lord, what fools these mortals be." Planning Or Experiment? The Balanced Growth and Economic Planning Bill, sponsored by Sen. Jacob Javits, D-N.Y., and Sen. Hubert Humphrey, D-Minn., is a well-intended but grandiose effort to have the government of the United States study and determine just how all the legitimate needs and demands of the public can be satisfied by some practical use of the legislative and executive powers of their'elected servants. The federal government, at the insistence of many groups in the country, some working at cross purposes with others, has long been trying to do exactly that by passing a large number of laws and creating a large number of agencies to benefit and please the constituents of Congress and the White House. The Javits-Humphrey bill would study and eventually produce a master plan which, Sen. Javits says, could be submitted to a sort of all-embracing referendum of the people and the officials they have elected to care for their needs. It is called "planning" but it is really a proposal for reassessing the experiments we have been making for a long time, some successfully and others not successfully. Out of the reassessment would come a new big plan, replacing or revising all of them. As seen by Javits and Humphrey it would be the result of the best brain power and the best politics possible, replacing the haphazard operation of economics. The idea is good, but not new except in its ambitious character. It assumes that government can do better for the people what the people cannot do for themselves. Every planned society has to pro- cede on that basis. The differences between the various planned economies, ranging from extreme autocracy of the right to extreme autocracy of the left, lies in the degree of force which must be imposed upon the people in order to better their lives and promote the enjoyment of their brief span on earth from birth to death. This kind of criticism is certainly damning the efforts of Sens. Javits and Humphrey with very.faint praise, or none at all, and deserves to be so stigmatized. But it would be more convincing to those who have lived through generations of trying to harness economics to man's needs if the bill were to be frankly .labelled as another and bigger experiment. Of course, experiment is essential to all prog- >v ress. ' C. L SULZBERGER O • Xn^ini' \jfJCli H JAWS ART BUCHWALD And Pops, You Have A Nice Day WASHINGTON - "Hello, I have a collect call from Miss Joyce Robinson in Oshkosh, Wis. Will you accept the charges?" "Yes, operator, we will." "Hi Pops. How are you?" "Fine. What are you doing in Oshkosh? I thought you were driving to Cape Cod to visit Aunt Rose." "We were, but Cynthia wanted to stop off and visit a boy she knew from school who lives in Minneapolis." "Who is Cynthia?" "She's a girl I met in New Orleans." "New Orleans? I didn't know you went to New Orleans." Great Concert "I wasn't planning to, but Tommy said there was a great concert of the Grateful Dead scheduled to play in the stadium. He got the day right, but the wrong month." "Tommy?" "He was hitchhiking on 95." "You started out with Ellen Mulberry. Where is she?" "She met some kids she knew in Fort Lauderdale, and they were driving to Mexico, so she decided to go with them." "Do Mr. and Mrs. Mulberry know this?" "I think Ellen called them after the accident." "What accident?" Banged Up "The camper she was in had a blowout, and Ellen got banged up a little." "So you're now traveling with Cynthia and Tommy." "No. Tommy stayed in New Orleans and Cynthia left yesterday. She said she couldn't wait until my car was fixed." "What's wrong with your car?" "The motor fell out. That's what I'm calling you about. The garage man said it will cost $550 to fix it up." "That's a fortune!" "You don't have to pay it if you don't want to. I can leave the car here. I met a giiy who has a motorcycle, and he says he'll take me as far as Detroit." "I'll pay it!" "How's Mom?" ( - Unttl Now "She's on the extension. I think she was fine until we got your call. Where are you staying until you get your car fixed?" "I met some nice kids who have a religious commune near here, and they said I could stay with them if I promise to devote the rest of my life to God." "That's nice." "The only problem is I have to shave my head." "Can't you stay at a motel?" "I don't have any money left." "What happened to the $300 I gave you?" "Two hundred went for expenses and one hundred of it went for the fine." "What fine?" "We were fined $100 for speeding in this little itty-bitty town in Arkansas." "I told you not to drive fast." "I wasn't driving. Fred was." "Who the hell is Fred?" "He's a vegetarian, and he says capitalism is finished in the West." "That's worth $100 to hear. Are you going to Cape Cod to visit Aunt Rose or aren't you?" "As soon as I get the car fixed, Pops. Send me the money care of Western Union. You don't want the man to fix the dented door at the same time?" "Your car had no dented door." "It does now. I have to go, Dad. Some kids I met are going to take me white water canoeing. Goodby. And, Pops - have a nice day." Los Angeles Times MADRID - The mpst striking thing about contemporary Spain is the gen-' eration gap that divides every aspect of society. There is a contrast itTattk tude between younger priests and older bishops. Army officers are.split between coming youngsters and the last of the civil waf's crop of generals • and colonels. . Universities bubble with undergraduates who often don't understand their professors. Children of the grow-, ing middle class happily horrify their, parents with the informality of their dress, easygoing sex habits and disregard for tradition. Even in the royal family there is a generation gap between the exiled Don Juan, Count of Barcelona, and his son, the designated heir apparent, Prince Juan Carlos. In a paradoxical sense this is a reverse gap, with Don Juan aspiring to a relatively liberal role and Juan Carlos gagged by his official position. Were Franco to die this year (as he almost did last summer) Juan Carlos, now 37, would become Europe's youngest chief of state. Yet he would still be older than most of his subjects, two- thirds of whom are under 40. This is one of the. world's most youthful countries, a fact mirrored in every institution but the government itself. Don Juan became legal heir to Spain's nonexistent throne when his father, Alfonso XIII, died in 1901. Just before World War II ended, there was much allied hostility to Franco and many thought he would be pushed from power. Don Juan, then living in Switzerland, seized the occasion to publish his "Lausanne Manifesto",urging Franco to resign and let Juan form a liberal monarchy. Franco's controlled press attacked Don Juan for summoning foreign powers to intervene. Although Madrid was diplomatically isolated; the generalissimo rode out the storm. He proclaimed a law of succession providing for a monarchy to follow him - but kept Don Juan away. Instead, he persuaded the pretender to send Juan Carlos to Spain for his education. As a result, the prince has spent the better part of 27 years here. ' When the Korean War erupted, the western boycott ceased and Washington initiated negotiations for U.S. bases. But, despite occasional meetings, Franco remained suspicious of Don Juan and the latter scarecely concealed his own mistrust. After his marriage, Juan Carlos was given a large estate near Madrid and a generous budget for his household. In 1969 Franco officially designated him as his successor, bypassing Don Juan. Juan Carlos wrote an affectionate letter to his father explaining how sad and embarrassed he was. Last summer, when Franco was gravely ill, Premier Arias appointed Rockefeller A Liberal? NEW YORK - The lingering power of an image was never better demonstrated than in the decision of the President Ford Committee to make no effort toward the nomination of Nelson Rockefeller for vice president next year. Howard Callaway, the campaign chairman, said he had no intention of alienating "persons who don't want Rockefeller" - obviously meaning conservatives who have been demanding an "open convention" for the choice of a vice presidential nominee. Leaving Rockefeller to fend for himself is no doubt sound strategy and good politics, even though it seems somewhat incongruous after President Ford nominated him last year to be vice president. But the wonder is that the Republican conservatives - still a powerful party element - continue to think of Nelson Rockefeller, after all these years, as a liberal. The reason can only be the powerful memories remaining from Rockefeller's epic battle with Barry Goldwater for the 1964 Republican presidential nomination. One of the bitterest of modern campaigns, it ended with the unforgettable spectacle of Rockefeller being booed and howled down by a convention thoroughly dominated by Goldwater conservatives. The truth is, however, that Rockefel- ler even then was not the mushy liberal on foreign affairs that the conservatives thought him; and since then he has moved steadily to the right on domestic issues, too. The conservatives may want one certifiably of their own - Ronald Reagan or James Buckley - on the ticket, but they have little more reason to oppose Rockefeller on political grounds than they do Ford himself. Once a strong advocate, for example, of civil rights bills that apply mostly to the South, Rockefeller has not been heard from lately on this issue - except to observe that nobody had asked so many blacks to move into American cities. In his last years as governor of New York, he made numerous efforts - as he put it in 1973 - "to get the cheats and chiselers off the taxpayers' backs," including two separate bills to prevent welfare payments to persons living in New York for less than a year. The Supreme Court struck down both. Rockefeller's last major proposal as governor was one of the most severe crime and drug-abuse programs ever approved in this country. It imposed long mandatory sentences for drug offenses, sharply limited the possibilities of parole and plea bargaining, and established mandatory prison sentences Juan Carlos acting chief of state. Don Juan saw him ;privately in Majorca and pledged suppor/ of his son if he^ would keep his position of authority even should the generalissimo recover. Don Juan Urged the prince to proclaim publicly that he favored a democratic monarchy and promised to re- ' nounce his own claims if this were done. However, Juan Carlos felt the only, way to make such a political coup stiqk would be with .military support. He didn't want to be king of the Spanish .army, but of Spain. Franco recovered - and resumed authority. Last month,, in Estoril, Portugal,/ where he lives, Don Juan made a speech reasserting his claims to the Spanish throne. Later he implied Juan Carlos was too conservative to rule. This hurt the son, confused the royalists, and harmed the monarchist cause. Franco was irked and banned Don Juan from re-entering Spain. Politicians see the father attempting to re-" play the Lausanne Manifesto - 30 years later. Father and son have been in touch since, and maintain affectionate personal relations, but both seem bewildered by the event. Juan Carlos feels he can establish a modern reformist government which will oversee drafting of a new constitution. But the last thing he wants to do is stir a needless rumpus between left and right or old • and young before he legally takes over. The easiest way the problem of the Spanish succession could be settled, giving political evolution a chance to catch up with the social progress in every other field, would be for Franco to hand over power now, pronto. But that is most unlikely to happen. Meanwhile the royal father has shown restiveness with his son, who remains discreetly silent. The people of Spain, for their part, could eventually become impatient with the entire issue if the present antediluvian system is allowed to totter on indefinitely. . New York Times Service Law For Today Report Within 24 Hours Q. Is there a law requiring persons to report suspected cases of child abuse to authorities? A. Yes. Medical practitioners, public and nursery school teachers and ad- • ministrators, social workers, registered nurses and law enforcement officers suspecting child abuse are required to report the case by telephone, in person, or by mail within 24 hours to the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services. Persons not in any of the above categories are urged to contact local law enforcement officers as soon as possible. -Illinois State Bar Assn. TOM WICKER for all second offenders. A person convicted of possessing or selling less than an eighth of an ounce of a drug had to be sentenced to a minimum of a year in prison, with mandatory life time parole - a singularly harsh provision that the New York State Legislature has just softened substantially. Originally, Rockefeller had proposed life sentences even for first-time selling of small amounts of hashish. On the deepest and most divisive political issues of the last decade - Vietnam and Watergate -: conservatives can hardly fault Rockefeller. He always supported the war and called for the bombing of North Vietnam a year before President Johnson began it. He never publicly criticized Richard Nixon or spoke out on Watergate, except to insist that it was "a tragedy of individuals" rather than of the Republican party. In 1972, Rockefeller earned the.ulti- mate acknowledgement of these efforts. Sen. J. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, guru of gurus on the right .wing, after watching the governor place Nixon's name in nomination for the presidency ("I say to you ... my fellow Americans, we need this man"), observed that while Rockefeller might still be a little "too liberal for the South ... the general feeling is that he has moved toward the conservative side." Congress Moving The Wrong Way WASHINGTON - The House of Representatives last month voted 341-70 to extend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for another ten years. Before the end of July, the Senate will approve substantially the same bill by about the same margin. Who can argue with five-to-one? Permit me the privilege. The pending bill is characterized by good intentions and bad mechanics. It provides one more example (as if one more example were needed) of the legislative cure that is worse than the political ill. This is brain surgery for a morning-after headache. The original Voting Rights Act also was drastic legislation, but it addressed a serious condition. For roughly a century, in flagrant defiance of the Fifteenth Amendment, the Southern States had discriminated against the black voter. By trickery, sophistry, intimidation and brute force, the South had denied blacks what was plainly theirs: the right to vote. It was a plausible surmise that this pattern of indefensible conduct was responsible for voter turnouts of less than 50 per cent of the potential electorate in the presidential election of 1964. Congress prescribed strong medicine. Through the mechanism of the "50 per cent trigger," Congress imposed a kind of political Reconstruction on the South. Six whole states, plus a part of North Carolina, became Military Districts in which no political change could occur without approval from Washington. Federal registrars moved in. The Southern States sputtered, but the national reaction was: So what? They had brought this on themselves. 5-Year Renewal The strong medicine worked. In 1970 JAMES KILPATRICK Congress renewed the 1965 act for another five years. The decade has seen phenomenal increases in black registration, black voting, and black office- holding. Except in a few isolated areas, Southern Negroes are today as free as Southern whites to register and vote - or not to register and vote. Under these circumstances, it would appear that the time has come for Congress to release the patient under some form of mild supervision. The original 1965 act was expected to be temporary legislation. Its harsh provisions, as Justice Hugo Black often observed, do grave violence to basic principles of federalism. The affected localities have been strait-jacketed too long as it is. But Congress is now moving in precisely the wrong direction. The pending bill not only extends the original punitive law for another ten years, but also broadens its scope to take in "language minorities." Back in 1965, the "50 per cent trigger" had some plausible basis. Clearly, black citizens had been denied the right to vote "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." No such body of evidence supports the proposed expansion. Extend Federal Reach This bill would extend the federal reach to every political subdivision in which more than 5 per cent of the voting-age population are members of a "single-language minority." Here English-only elections would be prohibited: AH voting notices, forms, instructions, ballots, and other material would have to be prepared accordingly, which is to say, "in the language of the applicable language minority group." The sweep is too wide. The bill would apply, for example, to Alaskan natives who speak 20 different dialects. Most of these languages are oral; only in the past few years have writing systems been developed, and some of the languages have no word for "vote" and "ballot." The same situation occurs in certain Indian tongues. Spanish, of course, would present no problems in translation, but the fundamental question remains: Is any such Federal law necessary? Before so heavy a hand is laid upon the States and localities, surely the existence of a gross evil should be demonstrated. The legislative hearings contain no such evidence. In the case of Texas, with a large Mexican-American population, the evidence is to the contrary. No significant disparity exists between white registration and Mexican-American registration. If Texas today is denying any citizen a right to vote on account of race or color, the denials are minimal. Under our. federal system, Congress has an obligation to act with restraint, not with fury, in areas of traditional state responsibility. A wise policy would apply large measures.to correct large wrongs; but for small wrongs, a wise policy would apply small measures - or none at all. It is immaterial, m my view, that the House voted five- to-one for this bill. The measure is unwarranted, and unwise. Washington Star Syndicate

What members have found on this page

Get access to Newspapers.com

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

Try it free