Northwest Arkansas Times from Fayetteville, Arkansas on September 25, 1974 · Page 6
Get access to this page with a Free Trial
Click to view larger version
September 25, 1974

Northwest Arkansas Times from Fayetteville, Arkansas · Page 6

Fayetteville, Arkansas
Issue Date:
Wednesday, September 25, 1974
Page 6
Start Free Trial

Page 6 article text (OCR)

Editorial-Opinion Page The Public Interest Is The First Concern 0\ Tins Newspaper 6 WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 1974 Readers Prompt Wit/i Slogan Response Mostly A Matter Of Numbers Okay, now...quickly (no peeking), identify what Amendment 54, Amendment 55, Amendment 56 and Amendment 57 stand lor. You don't have to decide whether you're for or against them. You don't have to explain what their major provisions are. Just pin a tag on 'em. Chances are the great majority of. Ark- an'sans can't remember which is which. That obviously is a serious challenge for proponents of the measures. They must not only try to sell the public on a particular vote, but must educate the public, also, to differentiate which is which. The good ones must somehow be separated from the bad ones. The major promotional campaign to date is being underwritten by state lending and credit-extending institutions on behalf of Amendment 57. That is the amendment which would allow the state Legislature to set interest rates above the present constitutional limitation of 10 per cent. . A flock of slick, four-color leaflets are being distributed and a series of traveling speakers are beating the civic luncheon circuit on behalf of Amendment 57. Meanwhile, labor, consumer groups, and a majority of the state's newspaper editors are urging caution; caution not only in evaluating the relative merits of the 10 per cent limit, but more specifically the wisdom of turning go important a matter over to the Legislature to regulate. Where a dollar is concerned, people in credit-sales and lending business may not be the best of all possible judges as to what's best for the run of-the-mill voter, says opponents. It is a bit like asking the Arabs to set the price of oil; To give credit (no pun intended) where credit is due, proponents and opponents of this issue bid fair to acquaint a majority of the public as to the identity of Amendment 57. Therein lies a plus and a minus. Know- ing one harrows the problem of identifying others, If we know about 57, there are only three remaining. But, if a majority of voters disapprove of 57, and they fail to get the others clearly and affirmatively fixed in their minds, the unavoidable tendency will be to vote "no" across the board. This poses a problem for the remaining three, particularly since Amendment 54, which would revise the state's printing contract laws (allowing considerable savings and doing away with a considerable area for favoritism and kickbacks), is so technical that it will be difficult for the average citizen to understand. In addition 54 has no organized advocacy. Amendment 56 gets a shot in the recognition arm, it seems to us, when Wally Moon of Siloam Springs, one of the co-chairman pushing the proposal, launched a campaign to sell the amendment at Fifty-Six, Arkansas (Stone County). Amendment 56 would modernize county government, eliminating the inherent lack of checks and balances in the state's existing county judge-quorum court set up, and is a progressive measure, in our view. Amendment 55, which Gov. Dale Bumpers says he will help support and promote, would raise limits on elected officials' salaries, .and is essential for improved state and local government. If it doesn't pass this time, it will be tried again. The danger to good amendments, such as 55 and 56, is that 57 is shaping up as something of an albatross, and 54 lacks the sort of imperative that commands public awareness. As of the moment, we would surmise that Amendments 54 and 57 are in trouble, and 55 and 56 will be, too, unless a majority of the voters have somehow been made familiar with all four when they cast their votes Nov. 5. Those who know the amendments will vote selectively (as they should); those who don't, will probably vote "no" right down the line. From The Readers Viewpoint Who Pays? To the Editor: Who should pay, and how? This past week I attended a lession of the Hearings held by the Public Service Commission on the coal-fired electric generating plant proposed to be built by SWEPCO and AECC near Gentry on Little Flint Creek. It is planned to use 312.5 tons of coal an-hour which will be delivered by rail from strip mines in Wyoming three limes · week. Many people who live close to the chosen location are concerned about the affect the plant will have on the people and the agriculture of the area. Perhaps the most serious concern is the amount of sul- phates that will be put into Ihe air. Coal low in sulphur will be used but even with this precaution the actual amount of sulphur will be large because of · Ihe enormous consumption; 312.5 tons x 24 hours equal 7,51)0 tons a day x 365 days a year equal 2,727,500 tons a year, at full capacity. Most of the smoke particles will be trapped but about l'£ per cent of the ash particles will be sent into the air unless special methods are used to remove them. This will amount to about 5 million pounds a year of fine particles to settle on the ground or float in the air. People who are concerned about the effects of sulphur and ash particles believe that more careful attention should be Billy Graham's Answer For the past few months, and . It may be related to some of th« events our nation is going through, I have had a great fear I've never had before. At times I think I am dying, and lit times I wish I were dead. I hear you speak of peace and happiness, and I wish I could know them. But I have this lurking fear that something dreadful is about to happen. Please help me. M.M. The events of the past year «nd a half have been enough to upset anyone. These have certainly been grave days for the nation. But, as pur new president, announced with hope, better days are ahead, and if millions of Americans will repent of their sins this could well be. The Iruth of the matter is that without God, fear is only natural. The Bible speaks of the last days of civilization when "men's hearts shall fail them for fear." Fear was unknown until man sinned. It was then that Adam hid himself f r o m God and was afraid. But the Bible ofiers a cure for fear. It says, "Perfect love casteth out fear." And who is "perfect love?" Jesus Christ! He spent a great deal of his time on carlh casting out fear. When His disciples trembled with fear on stormy Galilee, He appeared to them and said, "It is I, be not afraid." In the absence ol fear is Ihe Presence of Christ. Let Him come into your life and give you His peace to counteract those flighting fears. Bible Verse "In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood ·and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink." John 7:37 Only Chrisit knows Ihe real longing of every life, and He alone can fill il. Why wonder in the wilderness ignoring His invitation? "Come unto me. i . I will give you rest." By JACK ANDERSON WASHINGTON -- Our appeal for a Bicenlenniiil slogan -"the right words," we urged, "to r e a f f i r m - o u r failh in America" -- has brought an outpouring of sentiment from Ihe hearts of Ihe people. We have received thousands of suggested slogans from all corners of the country. As we had hoped, most of the offerings are sincere and thoughtful. They reflect our highest ideals, not just patriotic emotion. There is » power in slogans, for good or ill. They help lo mold opinion and their influence can linger for generations, providing impetus for a wise policy or a crutch for a foolish one. The tragic conflict of the past decade between successive presidents and the nation at large can be seen, in a way. as a conflict betvyeen Ihe differing ways of looking al America embodied In two slogans of more than a century ago. One was Stephen Decalur's "Our Country Right or Wrong." The other came from Carl Schurz, the friend of Abraham Lincoln: "Our Country, When Right lo he Kept Right, When Wrong to be Put Right." Both have a certain appeal. But when you think about it, the first could serve as a jingoistic motto for any country will! a dubious- cause lo promote. The second has a ring to it peculiarly suited lo a country founded on the proposition that the government exists, not as a good in itself, but to protect the rights and advance the ideals of the populace. They'll Do If Every Time The Washington Merry-Go-Round In recent years two Presidents, one a Democrat, one a Republican, holli with liiyli purposes and'memorable achievements to their credit, have been forced to slep aside because they did not make the above distinction, while the nation as a whole did. The selling of the Vietnam War to the American people, and ils expansion and prolongation long after its original purpose was clearly beyond attainment, were accomplished by . misrepresentations and manipulations out of Lyndon Johnson's White House. These acts wove participated in by often-honorable men because of the general idea that once the nation's pride and prestige are committed to any venture, right or wrong.wise or foolish, a dispensation on honor and reason is in effect, and we must bull through to the end no matter what tiie costs. This rationale of loyalty divorced from principle had its sequel in Watergate. In the minds of those who conceived and covered up the various acts of Watergate, by tlieir own admission, ' the Nixon presidency had usurped the place of country. It was now "Our President Right or Wrong" whose power, prerogatives and prestige had to be protected at all costs, even by means of crimes. But the nation at large, when at length it tasted the sour fruits and penetrated the deceptions, determined that error must be discarded even though the flag itself be wrapped around it. and wrong must be put right even though the nation be tormented by governmental paralysis and shamed by the public disgrace of its most revered office. It was in this spirit Hint most · of our contributors composed their slogans. Their motivation, is clear not only in the motlos themselves but in the moving letters thai came with them. "I feel this is hardly an opportune time for arrogant nationalism or self praise," wrote Alva K. Fancher from Lakeside. Calif. · "We have many things to he proud of, and some things hat should be c a u s e for shame." He suggested: "We Are Trying." ' Margaret Stern of New York City contended: "The lessons of Watergate should never be forgotten and should arouse us to a new moral stance. We remember 'The Alamo' and we remember 'The Maine' and we remember 'Pearl Harbor' -each representing a low point in our history. And we rose above each, as we can now -remembering -- rise above Watergate." She proposed: "Remember Watergate." Also , stressing the lessons of the past, Norma Thomas Colvin of Tacoma, Wash., suggested: "We've Got a Good Thing Going iti America. We Know Where We've Bean." · Other suggested slogans are eloquent in their simplicity, such as "I Love America," given to remove the finest particles. Higher smoke stacks and-or s c r u b b e r s a r e requested. Scrubbers involve passing the emissions through moist limestone to remove the particles which contain compounds of such substances as lead, zinc, mercury, chromium, nitrogen and sulphur to prevent them from polluting the air and soil. The installation of scrubbers and their maintenance will be expensive and therefore t h e utility companies are reluctant -to install them. Citizens who helieve that every possible effort should be made to protect the well-being of the people in the area advocate srubbers to prevent harm to the people and their livelihood. It has been proven that the effects will be fell chiefly by the older people and the very young and people- with breathing and bronchial problems, (asthma, emphysema, etc.) with possible effects on poultry and farm animals. The amount of sulphur deposited on the soil, will tend to make it more acid and will affect the sensitive crops. If scrubbers are put into use it is likely that all users of the electricity will eventually p a y through increased electric bills. This expense will be shared by all electricity users. II t h e s e precautions are not taken, the people in Northwest Arkansas will bear the burden through reduced health, increased doc- lor bills, shorter life spans, and reduced agricultural output as well as the unpleasantness of polluted air. I was disappointed to read that utility company officials were so unconcerned about the effects of possible pollution that they dismissed as unimportant the written testimony of four well qualified experts because "They haven't said anything." As a layman I admit that I do not have all the answers, but stil have an open mind and ' am willing to learn. Public util- · ity officials may be concerned about the financial stability of the company, but it would also be beneficial if their concern included the health and well- being of citizens. It is encouraging that many young people are willing to be involved in decision-making and are concerned about people, the future belongs to them. They will live with the results of the decisions that are being made today. The proposed generating plant would operate for many years. We as citizens all have Ihe responsibility to express what we want for the f u t u r e . H has been estimated that 1520 per cent of Ihe national population are in a group showing high health risks due to sulphates, fn NW Arkansas, this percentage is certainly higher, due to the larger number of retired and elderly persons living here. Who do you think should pay for the convenience of electricity? Should those in high risk health groups bear more responsibility than other groups of users? I believe that every precaution possible s h o u I d be taken to protect everyone, therefore all users should share in the lotal cost of clean electric energy. Sylvia Swarlz Fayetteville ^K^A^j^^^^^^i^^r^^^i^^^V^ ^^^^^^^^^mrnSF^^^- Herblock it taking a lew weeks o// to finish, a ST. book, touts posr-tx*pAT£H A Potpourri Excerpts From The World Of Thought which was first proposed by Miami's wise Hank Meyer. Evelyn M. K t r o m a n of Wayne, Pa,, suggested the Bicentennial might take ils slogan f r o m tho Negro spiritual, ."We've Coma This Far by Faith." Most suggestions put the main emphasis on the nation s 200lh birthday. "From Mmule- mcn lo Spacemen" was proposed by Kalherine Gilmartm of Union, N.J. Stephen A. Levine of Villanova, Pa., suggested: "200 Years and' Counting -- On You! From Newport News, Va., Howard L. Ooshorn came up with a ringing slogan: "The United Slates: Born in Turmoil. Matured in Freedom, Enduring in Equality." Ralph M. Jones of Philadelphia offered this: "Our Freedom --· Toughened on the Anvil of Justice. Refined in the Flame of Liberty." Jack Gilliam of Alburquerque suggested: "The Greatness of Our Past has Built the Road for our Future." And Irene Prommer, who wrote from Fair Oaks, Calif., of the setbacks she has suffered over a long life, lold of her failh in America a n d urged the slogan: "America for Liberty, Unity and Progress." We have been deluged not only with slogans but with offers of prizes for the best slogans. We will sort through these offers and announce them in a future column. Meanwhile, please keep your ideas coming. Send your suggested slogans lo Slogans, e-o Jack Anderson, M01 16th Slreet, N.W., Washing- Ion, D.C. 20036. --Unileil Feature Syndicate Just How Wealthy Is Rockefeller? WASHINGTON (ERR) -- "If . I never had a cent, I'd be rich as Rockefeller," said the lyric of an upbeat song of the lat« 1920s. The reference was to John D., founding father of Standard Oil, not his grandson Nelson A. Now, almost half a century later, Nelson Rockefeller is about to undergo the ordeal of congressional confirmation as Vice President of the United States. The uppermost question in everyone's mind is not whether Rockefeller is qualified for . Ihe office but rather how much he is worth. A definitive answer may be impossible to arrive at. In a preliminary report filed wilh the Senate Rules and House Judiciary committees, Rockefeller placed the value of his immediate personal fortune at $.13 million. That sum, while substantial, fell far short of earlier estimates that Ihe Vice President designate might ba · worth as much as $301) million. A revised report put Ihe value of Rockefeller's fortune at $182.5 million. The assets listed in the previous report were revalued to reflect Ihcir current worth instead of their acquisition cost. In addition, Rockefeller disclosed for the first time that most of his assets arc in two trusts valued at a tolal of $120 million. II is entirely possible that the second report understates or overstates Rockefeller's net worth by many millions of dollars. For one thing, any appraisal of his substantial holdings in art and real estate is bound lo be an educated guess at best. The only sure way to determine the, value of assets like these is to sell them -- and how many persons would be able or willing to purchase such a property as Ihe vast Rockefeller estate in Pocantico Hills, N.Y.? E V O L U T I O N . Judith V . Grabiner and Peler D. Miller, "Effects of the Scopes Trial," Science, Sept. 6, 1974, pp. 832837. "In 1925, John Thomas Scopes was tried for violating Tennessee's law against teaching the theory of evolution in the public schools..The trial became a major ballleground in the war between science and fundamentalist Christianity. Scopes was found guilty, but the verdict was later reversed on a technicality. Nevertheless, regardless of the verdict, it is usually held that the procvolution forces were victorious in Ihe forum of public opinion." "If the fundamenlalisls were so discrediled in 1925, how could Ihe same issue be revived i n ' t h e 1 9 6 0 ' s a n d 1970's?..Believing that Ihey won in the forum of public opinion, the evolutionists of the 1920s in fact lost on their o r i g i n a l battleground--the teaching of high school biology. T h e s c i e n t i f i c community-failed t o f o l l o w through." "As a result, the teaching of evolution in the high schools-as judged by the content of the average h i g h school biology textbooks--declined after the Scopes trial..Whatever the lesson one wishes to draw from the history of biology textbooks since the Scopes trial, we think the story itself is worth knowing. That the textbooks could have downgraded their treatment of evolution with almost nobody noticing is the greatest tragedy of all." BLACK STUDIES. Ernest Van Den Haag, "Black Cop- Out," National Review, Aug. 30, 1974, pp. 970-974. "Black studies hava little or nothing to do with African studies, long pursued at pur universities by anthropologists and political scientists. Black studies..were offered in practically all instances as solutions, palliatives, or placebos for a ·ocial problem or a problem of student behavior..The administration that yielded to demands for black studies wished to appease a restless a n d , at times, dangerous student body which had demanded them." "White students and faculty members--whose pressure or, at least, support was everywhere decisive--backed the black demands largely because Ihe demands were black a n d , therefore, appealed to feelings of obligation and guilL.In the main it appears that black students wanted to be accepted by, and to participate in, white institutions, yet to be separated from Ihcm." "Culture and cultural pride and a self-image of adequacy cannot be produced by t li e p u r e l y intellectual manipulations universities function to provide. Least of all can Ihey be produced on short order without doing violence lo reality and lo historical truth..Political group therapy is not likely lo work. At any rale the university is not the place for it. The most effective way to help blacks and thereby the black self-image is to foster not black studies, but studies by blacks." T H E M I S S - M R S . - M S . DEBATE, "Should We Say Farewell fo Mrs. and M'ss?" Nation's Business, Seplcmber 1974, p. 17. "There is no legal requirement for using Miss or Mrs., and a growing number of women apparently prefer Ms. because, like Mr., it docs not divulge marital statu.s. Why, women ask, should they ba expected lo identify their status wilh Miss or Mrs. while m e n do not with Mf? Why. t h e y ask, should society place so much emphasis on whether or not they're wed?" "In these day of increasingly common marriage breakups, a divorcee can turn lo Ms. without having to choose between Miss or Mrs., neither of which is slriclly accurate in her case. Many businessmen prefer Ms. because in writing letters they do not have lo determine beforehand if the addressee is a Mrs. or a Miss." On the other hand, many w o m e n want Ihdr marital stalus shown. They want to use Mrs. so Ihe world will know they're .married, or to use Miss so It will know they aren't. Some like the idea that the term Miss shows they are available for marriage. Still another, and important reason favoring Ihe use of Mrs. and Miss is tradition. And, tradition is always a lough opponent." CONTEMPORARY RADICALISM. R i c h a r d Pnirer. "The Aesthetics of Radicalism," Partisan Review, No. 2. 197'!, pp. 176-196. "It is possible to be committed to the radical cause and, at the same time, to Ihe posilion that technology is not necessarily 'bad,' that it incorporates and promotes acts of imaginalion at least as powerful as any simultaneously at work in the arts, and that it can be serve m a n k i n d ' s continuing self- creatio ." "Much as I share the radical critique of existing structures creation." . . . the aeslhelic criterion of contemporary radicalism in America and Europe seems lo me prcsumplous about the value of literature and high c u l t u r e , condescending o r ignorant about the native wit and wisdom of ordinary men and women, and elitist in a self- protecting and finally unin- quisilive way. Radicalism is failing because it is preposterously afraid of science and technology." "Part o! the fear of technology as expressed in the Shellcyan promotion of art and of the artist is really a fear among certain cultural elitists about the continued predominance of the written word, of literature, and of the edified past. It is odd that contemporary radicalism is--if looked a I radically--so finally conservative. Bui it is". HISTORIANS WHO have tried to determine the wcallh of Presidents have run into similar problems. George Washington, for example, owned real estate that would be worth about $20 million in current dollars. But the first President was what in known a,s "land poor." Although his land holdings were worth a great deal, he sometimes was hard pressed for cash. No impoverished man has ever been elected to the presidency, and few chief executives were men of great wealth. Of th four presidents who actually were born in log cabins -Pierce, Buchanan, Lincoln-and Garfield -- all had become moderately well-to-do by the time Ihey reached the White House. T H E A M E R I C A N public clearly is of two minds about Ihe wisdom of electing wealthy men to high office, the affirmative view was stated in an article that appeared in 1887 in the Chaulauquan, organ of Ihe Chautauqua movement. In defending politicians who were rich, the author asserted lhat the "impecunious but unprincipled politician may do as much to damage political morals and corrupt the purity of government as any rich man will be likely to do." Nevertheless, a contributor lo American Heritage noted, "Ihe public as a whole remained uncomfortable lhat men of wealth should run for the presidency,, although not so uncomforlabla lhat it would not elect them. As a result, a boyhood spent in poverty could be (especially for the millionaire candidate) an important advantage." It is important, though not essential, that wealthy men. running for high office possess Ihe common touch. John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and tha two Roosevelts had this quality, but Herbert Hoover did not. As for Nelson Rockefeller, no one has ever accused him of being stuffy -- or poor.

Get full access with a Free Trial

Start Free Trial

What members have found on this page