Cedar Rapids Gazette, January 15, 1974, Page 6

Cedar Rapids Gazette

January 15, 1974

View full page Start A Free Trial!

Issue date: Tuesday, January 15, 1974

Pages available: 31

Previous edition: Monday, January 14, 1974

Next edition: Wednesday, January 16, 1974

NewspaperARCHIVE.com - Used by the World's Finest Libraries and Institutions
About Cedar Rapids GazetteAbout NewspaperArchive.com

Publication name: Cedar Rapids Gazette

Location: Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Pages available: 2,913,870

Years available: 1932 - 2016

Learn more about this publication
  • 2.10+ billion articles and growing everyday!
  • More than 400 years of papers. From 1607 to today!
  • Articles covering 50 U.S.States + 22 other countries
  • Powerful, time saving search features!
Start your membership to the world's largest newspaper archive now!
Start your genealogy search now!
See with your own eyes the newspapers your great-great grandparents held.

View sample pages : Cedar Rapids Gazette, January 15, 1974

All text in the Cedar Rapids Gazette January 15, 1974, Page 6.

Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - January 15, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa ®h* &tdnt ihtpidh GtytHt Editorial Page Tuesday, January 15, 1974Nixon’s tax proposal ‘Leveled for strip mining in I 974, this arca was later restored by engineers from Disneyland' LAST SPRING President Nixon proposed a drastic tightening of the income tax law which, had it been adopted by congress, would have caught the Chief Executive himself in a bit of a vise. But, fortunately for him and others with high incomes, congress has yet to act. The proposal would remove many loopholes from the so-called “minimum” income tax law now on the books. If and when those loopholes are removed, the President will be among the wealthier individuals required to pay more tax. To find out how much more the President would have paid for 1969-72, had the proposal been in effect that far back, the Wall Street Journal put some tax specialists to work They applied the terms in the administration’s proposal to income and deduction figures the President released to the public recently. From this they calculated his taxes would have totaled $278,0(10 or more for 1969-72 instead of the $78,651 taxes he paid. Administration treasury officials still want congress to adopt the proposal. But they are realistic enough to know — aren’t we all? — that congress isn’t about to pass such a tough law that it might affect the financial status of individuals frequently tapped by some of its members for campaign contributions.Super flop Resigning themselves to the audience pull of CBS’s Superbowl VHI telecast Sunday, competing networks and local affiliates turned to throw-awav programming. A local station’s showing of “Beach Blanket Bingo” was fairly representative. We may never know how much channel checking occurred at midgame, but one suspects that the adolescent spooning by Frankie Avalon and Annette Funicello (in “Beach Blanket...’’) was more diverting than the Miami-Minnesota football fiasco. The Dolphins’ drubbing of the Vikings thus provides a lesson tor TY planners: Never give up when another network has the Superbowl. Even the Game of the Century can prove a clunker. There is a lesson, too, for every inveterate fan who spent the past two weeks ingesting each morsel of Su per bow I pregame ballyhoo, then chased the kids and dog from the TV den Sunday: Don’t get too keyed up; after all, this month is a mere extension of a year of sports fizzles—the Mots in the World Series, the Riggs-King tennis ms.-match and, locally, the Iowa football debacle.Admiration reconsidered TO SAY that someone is the most admired person in the world for Americans, it seems, is far from saying So-and-So is most people’s man or woman of the year. The mini-ballot test we ran on this a while back produced a No. I hero, all right. (See summary below.) But when the top cat’s name shows up in less than one in eight of all the mentions for the public’s top three most-admired persons anywhere, that hardly qualifies as far-reaching glory. If the same pattern holds for the national polls on this matter (where no one documents the roster with percentages), the exercise’s meaning dims. Without some indication of the relative appeal of those who lead, a simple one-through-ten positioning of rank says little. Our main conclusion, therefore, is that most-admired polls in their customary form are all but worthless in significance. Two further judgments are that: (a) When men and women luminaries are considered jointly (as they were in the Gazette test), male heroes heavily predominate among both men and women, (b) Nearly all respondents volunteer their most-admired choices from the prominent or famous; very few here nominated the obscure, their personal acquaintances or relatives. Let these stray comments from the voters w rap it up: 'Tm glad you’re doing this. That other poll never seems real.” “I think ‘respect’ would be a better word than ‘admiration.’ Americans have lost much hero-worship.” “You ask, why so strong to governmental figures?. . . Did anything else happen in 1973?” “Three top choices of the LEAST admired would ha\e been easier.” Nature needn 't suffer Oil lode reachable? By Jack Anderson 1X7 ABINGTON — VV XI, nix Min ca lei * * excitement, the Federal Energy Office is investigating a revolutionary technique for extracting oil from shale at a (heap $1 IK a burrel without massive ecological damage Energy Chief William Simon is talking privately of an all-out government effort. on the scale of the Manhattan Project which developed atomic energy, to drain the mountains of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming of critically needed oil. An estimated 1.8 trillion barrels of oil, nearly three times the world’s present proven reserves, is locked in the shale rock formations of the Rockies At the current rate of consumption, this would be enough to supply United States oil needs for HO years. The problem is separating the oil from the rock Previous proposals called for extensive strip mining, which would devastate' tin* western scenery. The shale would be heated until the oil dripped out. But the heat would also expand the rock, which would have to be discarded iii huge, unsightly piles. New mountains of discarded shale literally would be created But now Occidental Petroleum has developed a way to extract the oil inside the mountains, without the massive strip mining and monstrous shale dumps Even more promising, the Occidental process would reduce the cost from around $5 to $1 IM a barrel. The cost estimates were made by ail independent Stanford research group, which studied Occidental's pilot project in Colorado. The final cost of delivering the oil to suppliers, after all the puniping and piping has been figured in. would run between $2 and $1 a barrel The Occidental method consists essentially of blasting a chamber inside the oil-bearing rock formation. Natural gas is then injected into the chamber and fired This produces intense temperatures, which separates the oil from the rock The oil seeps to the bottom of the formation, where it is pumped away. The expanding shale gradually fills up the chamber and the mountain is left virtually undisturbed except for the mining shaft required to gain entrance Occidental’s enterprising chairman. Dr. Armand Hammer, showed a movie ut the new process the other day to Simon and Ins staff Simon’s experts then questioned the Occidental technicians thoroughly. Highly impressed. Simon is now preparing to send his specialists to Colorado to study the Occidental operation firsthand. A crash program, say the Occidental engineers, could relieve the U.S. oil shortage within three yours. United Fcotures Syndicate Jaworski's hands tied? Grand jury rules pose ironic dilemma By Anthony Lewis "DOSTON -- By his performance as the Watergate special prosecutor. Leon .laworski has quieted early questions about his ability to be independent from the President who appointed him. He has held together the staff picked by Archibald Cox; he has pressed the investigations; he has kept his distance — and his freedom — from the White House. All that must be acknowledged as preface to consideration of the important statement that .laworski has just made He said that he could “see no way at the present time” to make material obtained from the White House available to the house judiciary committee for its impeachment inquiry. There is no doubt of Jaworski's good faith in reaching that position. He had obtained presidential documents and tapes by asking on behalf of grand juries, he felt, and he was therefore bound by personal honor and the rules of grand jury secrecy not to disclose them elsewhere Nevertheless, it must be recognized that the view he indicates raises extremely serious problems for the impeachment inquiry. Indeed, the unintended result just could l>e to immunize President Nixon from any effective retribution for w rongdoing. Consider the burden placed on the house committee's impeachment staff, headed by John Boar The exceedingly skilled lawyers of the special prosecutor’s office have worked for six months on all the threads of evidence, and they are just about ready to ask the grand juries for major indictments If Dour and his colleagues have to start at ground zero now , they would face an enormous task in trying to collect the evidence afresh There is a severe problem of time. Dour may well ask the President's lawyers to turn over relevant information voluntarily, but it is already indicated that the answer will be no. If the house then grants needed subpoena power, the White House lawyers will doubtless contest that, too. In the end the courts would almost certainly find that the constitutional process of im -peuehment carries with it an overriding right to information, but the litigation could take many months. Of course there is a mass of material available apart from what the special prosecutor has got from the White House. And there are numerous possible grounds for impeachment that rest on published facts, for example Nixon’s 19711 approval of a secret security plan authorizing the use of illegal wiretaps and burglaries. But for sound political as well as legal reasons tin* house committee will surely be intent on exploring the leads closest to the President—any evidence linking him personally with the crimes of Watergate and the cover-up. The committee will be looking for public support; and much of the public, for all its disbelief in Nixon, has indicated a reluctance to undertake impeachment without some showing of direct criminality Suppose that .laworski acquires, or already has, sonic evidence linking the President to criminal acts. What does he do with it if he does not refer it to the house judiciary committee? He could present the evidence to a grand jury and seek an indictment of Nixon. Many legal experts see no constitutional barrier to prosecution of a President, but Nixon and Ins lawyers naturally disagree •laworski is said to have reached no firm conclusion yet. lf he were not prepared to bring such a case, how would the facts ever come out? Would the country have to wait for testimony in someone else's trial9 When if ever would that come? All this makes clear the serious nature of the dilemma that has arisen It is ail ironic situation. Congress originally insisted on a special prosecutor for Watergate because of the possibility that the President might be involved Yet the special prosecutor's work may now turn out inadvertently to have obstructed the process established by the Constitution to correct presidential wrongdoing Fortunately, the situation is not frozen .laworski has expressed the desire to cooperate with the house inquiry as best he can. And there is room for compromise and adjustment. For one thing, grand jury secrecy is not an absolute in our law. Judges can release the minutes of grand jury proceedings for a variety of reasons. Federal testimony is communicated to state prosecutors, defendants may have claims on it, and so forth. The ethical and legal restraints that Jaworski feels apply to him as prosecutor would not be the same in relation to Judge John Silica, and Jaworski could seek a ruling from him. The point is that judge and prosecutor and all concerned have obligations to a larger public interest, to congress, to the (nuntry, to the constitutional process of impeachment. It would be extraordinary if the fact that evidence had been before a grand jury stood in the way of an impeachment proceeding. The public is likely to understand that, and to see in the dilemma another if unwitting coverup York times Service People s forumRisky site AnotherInterference Watergate scrappers admired, too Local poll puts Henry highest AS A COUNTERPOINT to the (ballup Poll’s perennial rundown on the past year’s most-admired men and women. The Gazette invited readers Jan 6 to send a ballot on their own hero choices for ’73 (See editorial above J From nearly a hundred responses, with anybody in the world qualifying and with both sexes grouped together, this was the result (percentages show rate of mention from the total): I. Henry Kissinger 12 2. Richard Nixon 7 3. Harold Hughes 4 6 4. Alexander Solzhenitsyn 4 2 5. John Sirica .... 3.3 6. Billy Graham 2 8 7. Sam Ervin 2.5 (tie) Rolph Nader 2 5 9. Golda Meir 1.6 (tie) Pat Nixon 1.6 (tie) Elliot ‘Richardson 1.6 Henry Jackson. Pope Paul VI, Barry Goldwater. Golda Meir, Pat Nixon, Hose Kennedy, Shirley Chisholm. Indira Gandhi, Mamie Eisenhower, Lady Bird Johnson, Jacqueline Onassis, Queen Elizabeth II, Ethel Kennedy and Margaret Chase Smith (tied). The Gazette ballots, asking for each respondent’s top three choices in order came from men and women in identical numbers. One interesting sidelight was an almost even split in frequency of mention for persons closely involved in the presidential controversy centering on Watergate. White House side (the President, Mrs Nixon and Julie Eisenhower): IO percent. Prosecution side (Senator Ervin, Judge Sirica, Archibald Cox, Richardson and William 1 Ruckelshaus): 9 percent Below the top dozen or so, choices were distinguished more for their variety than their frequency Roughly grouped by specialty or otherwise, the most-admired individuals for Eastern Iowans who mailed in the form included: POLITICS or PUBLIC AFFAIRS — Wa„«n &ory«r. Frank Church, Dick Clark, H Denenberg. Thorne* Eagleton, Gerald Ford, John Gardner, H R Cion, Hubert Humphrey, John Lindsay, Walter Mondo!®, Edmund Muskie, Robert Roy, Nelson Rockfeller, William Simon, Lowell Wearer international Sip»b, Kart Waldheim Andrei Sakharov, Helvi The Gallup listings (separately for men and women) had their top-tens running this way last year (first to tenth in order); Henry Kissinger, Billy Graham, Richard Nixon, Edward Kennedy, Gerald Ford, George Wallace, Ralph Nader, Henry Kissinger ENTERTAINMENT, ihow butine** be art* Leonard Bemjiem, Marion Brando, Dick Covert, Aluta* Cooke, 0»*>e Davi* and Ruby De®, Jane Fonda, Bob Hope, Tom Snyder JOURNALISM Jerk Anderson, Erma Bon beck. Art Buchwald, William F Buckley, \t , Nor mon Cousin*, Harry Rea*on®r, Gordon Sinclair, Howard K Smith, Barbara Walter, Cod Bern*tem and Bot) Woodward WOMEN — Ro*anne Contin, Mamie Enenhower, Vivion Kellem*, Joan Kennedy, Martha Mitchell, Ayn Rand MISCELLANEOUS ~ Richard Armour, Coetar Chavel, Jacques CouOeou, Barry Commoner, Ll ll ion Dickson, Re« Humbord, Ted Kennedy, if , Jam®* C Milota, Williom A Roach, Robert Schulter, Jute* Stem SPORTS — Henry Aaron, Billie Jean King, O J Simpson, LOCAL AREA — Robert Armstrong, George Cor I sot i, Hugh Gibson, Reid Motley, Eleanor Taylor, Wally Sheets, Robert Wilson (Collins Radio head; To the Editor We must become concerned with our safety and securitv because the Iowa Electric pronouncements that the Duane Arnold Energy Center is a good neighbor do not jilt with guidelines earlier set down by the Atomic Energy Commission. In a 1902 report to the President on civilian nuclear power, a major policy statement, tile AFC declared ” for safety reasons, prudence now dictates placing large reactors fairly far away from population centers ’’ Iii April of 1962, the AFC formally adopted and published its guides t«» reactor site selection. These guides were in effect when the DAFF was being planned and sited However, the AKC did not then discourage building reactors closer to populated centers It was interested in promoting nuclear energy, and being closer to the delivery point would make nuclear energy production cheaper but not necessarily safer III the Brookhaven report of the AFC in 1957, it was hypothesized what would be the consequences of a major accident with a I (Mi,000-200,IHM! kilowatt reactor The DA EC has 537,WHI kilowatts In the projection the reactor was 30 miles from a population center with more than UMI (MHI people The report estimated that there would be 3.4(H) deaths 43.IKM) casualties and $7 billion worth of property damage The AEC has refused to issue an updated “Brookhaven” based upon the enlarged capa* tty of new plants The DAKU is located within ll miles of more than UMI.OOO people In the Environmental Defense Fund newsletter for November, 1973, it stated that the AFC staff concluded that plans should riot continue to build a nuclear plant ll miles north of Dhiladelphia It recommended moving it 35 miles south of the city. I don t want to grow up and be a consumer " By what logical process docs our government conclude that it is “better" to risk destruction of a “small” midwestern metropolitan area than a large city of more than one million? Testifying before the joint committee on atomic energy in the spring of 19H7, Nuncio J. Dalladmo, chairman of the AFC's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards for 19H7, and Dr. David Ok rent, the chairman for 1906, said The AC RS beleve* that plot mg bf ye nuclear rear br* clove to population center* will require connderabl# further improvements in *afety, and that NONE OF THE LARGE POWER REACTORS NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION IS CONSIDERED SUITABLE FOR LOCATION IN METROPOll TAN AREAS (Emphasis mine ) We must s|>cak up because Iowa electric is planning on expanding its nuclear plant There is an Information meeting on nuclear energy this Thursday (Jan 17), 7 ill p iii at the Cedar Rapids public library Katherine A Goldstein 41H Dunreuth drive NF To the Editor Freedom is never secure While our minds are on the energy crisis, there is another crisis on the horizon in this country. At this moment there rages a controversy between the welfare department of Texas and a church operated home in Corpus Christi The Rev. I/ester Roloff, a minister of over 40 years, has been denied the opportunity to convert wayward boys and girls to Christ. The state is invading the domain of the church and state The attorney general of Texas has aligned himself with the state welfare department in denying the Rev Mr Roloff certification, on highly dubious grounds Have we forgotten the First Amendment of the Constitution? “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof." Texas claims the homes are not properly staffed, that diets are improper, discipline is too rigid and that TV and other type's of recreation are not provided However, this Christian man has taken alcoholics, drug addicts, runaways and the most profoundly disturbed, and brought them to themselves. They have been returned to society ut no cost to the taxpayer or to those benefited The crisis is between church and state The slate could not help many of Koloff’s lases The state wants his homes operated by “professionals" and to align itself with “worldly” standards Roloff refuses. The unconverted cannot comprehend Jesus’ methods The unbeliever is earthy and is not spiritually discerned The “degreed" people rely on reformation through the manipulation of the mind and environment The born again Christian moves by faith in Christ and believes iii regeneration as opposed to rehabilitation l une into EM 104 5 KTOF at 9 every evening for all the fact's Richard M Wallace 1135 () avenue NW I I < ;

RealCheck