Cedar Rapids Gazette, July 4, 1974, Page 6

Cedar Rapids Gazette

July 04, 1974

View full page Start A Free Trial!

Issue date: Thursday, July 4, 1974

Pages available: 49

Previous edition: Wednesday, July 3, 1974

Next edition: Friday, July 5, 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, July 04, 1974

All text in the Cedar Rapids Gazette July 4, 1974, Page 6.

Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - July 4, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa >, z, •« >**• (tfclur- ftnpitUKennedy, Wallace lead in early running U>M Editorial Page Thursday, July 4, 1974 Tolerance index dips low WORD PAINTING in skillful broadbrush * caricature on this page, Russell Baker characterizes fellow Americans as bloody Tories whose revolutionary past is written on the wind. Indeed, he stops barely short of adducing that Benedict Arnold was born 200 years too early. Exaggeration aside, Baker’s skewering of modern attitudes merits a moment’s reflection. Many of the country’s foremost thinkers agree that it is nearly impossible to remember that the United States was born of rebellion and achieved greatness through revolution. The redoubtable Henry Steele Commager has written (for example): “The Declaration of Independence has some claim to be considered the most subversive document of modern history. Members of the Daughters of the American Revolution and the John Birch Society would do well to ban it from schools and public libraries ” The country’s indifferent and uninspired approach to the 1976 bicentennial celebration seems to confirm Commager’s thesis. If initial plans are followed, the revolution’s leaders will be remembered mainly as bewigged elders spouting aphorisms bv the bushel, not as the long-haired band of 20- and 21-year-olds who formed the hardcore nucleus for revolt. What’s more, moviemakers doubtless will ignore the bicentennial, recalling that revolutionary war flicks bomb at the box office. How serious can such apathy — or antipathy — toward the bump tious past become? Another brief session with Commager is instructive: “We have discovered, to our dismay, that those who subscribe to the principles that Jefferson called ‘self-evident’ are in the minority among the peoples of the globe, and that we are now required to vindicate those principles as never before in our past.” Though Russell Baker advances the thought with tongue in cheek. no one is suggesting seriously that Jeffersonian principles are as forsaken here as they are in less enlightened parts of the world. But how well prepared are Americans to “vindicate principles’’ abroad (as Commager says they must) if they depreciate their own revolutionary charter? At worst the situation is that described by Pogo Possum: “We have seen the enemy and he is us.’’ The judgment here, however, is more optimistic: The national tolerance index merely is running low. What better way to recharge batteries than to look beyond the revolutionary era s curious artifacts and re-examine the towering ideals which flourished there? Isn t It the Truth? By Carl Riblet, jr. Iii days of old, manhood was proved with a hatchet in the other fellow’s skull. Then civilization buried the hatchet elsewhere and taught man how to do in his enemy with a political device that came to be known as the official leak. This is a second cousin once removed of gossip — demonstrating that the tongue is the sharpest weapon given to man and sometimes it is long enough to cut its own throat. A so ft tongue breaketh the bone. " — Proverbs XXV, 15 InterOcecm Press Syndicate Should the federal government require that most radios receive FM signals?The Arguments YES THE AM-FM bill “is intended to assure that the American people receive the maximum radio broadcasting service available,” said Sen. John 0. Pasture (D-R I ) during senate debate. According to figures gathered by Pasture’s communications subcommittee, listeners whose radios do not have KM bands miss “nearly 42 percent’’ of the stations now on the air. About till percent of home radios receive PM. but almost 72 percent of car radios have AM only. So most PM stations don't have access to what is called drivetime — the most lucrative time of the broadcasting day, when advertisers have a captive audience of commuters. Because of all this. Pastore said. "many FM channel assignments are lying fallow and many PM stations which are on the air operate at a loss." "The American consumer is probably not aware that we have reached the limit on AM frequencies . . . and that v irtualiy all new radio stations will be PM stations," said Sen Prank E Moss (D-L’tah) "They buy radios today unsuspecting of the fact that they are vastly limiting their horizons ” The expansion of PM will give a much needed boost to public, noncommercial radio with its excellent coverage of government affairs, Moss said. "You get some high-class cultural music over PM.” Pastore added He also argued that the added price consumers will be forced to pay fur AM-FM radios would be insignificant, citing studies presented to his subcommittee bv PM supporters showing that the cost of adding PM to a car radio was about $7 — and even less for home radios "If the consumer is being gouged at all." Pastore said, it is the fault of auto makers who artificially jack up the price of AM-PM receivers. ‘‘Whatever encroachment the legislation would make on the public’s right of free choice is minimal.” Pastore concluded, "and is far outweighed by the attendant benefits the public wdl receive from a flourishing PM service ” "OI QIBy Louis Harris The Harris Survey CPN PDW AHI) Kennedy lias widened ^ his lead as the preferred nominee of the Democratic party for 1976 in the latest Harris Survey among Democrats and independents. Gov. George Wallace of Alabama has also increased his support since last March as the first choice for the nomination Between them. Kennedy and Wallace are the preferred choice ut 56 percent of all Democrats and independents surveyed. Among Democrats alone, Kennedy and Wallace walk off with 63 percent of the vote. All other potential candidates tested have either declined in support or did not improve their standings of last spring. Some Democrats have raised the prospect of putting together a Kennedy-W’allaee ticket for their party in 1976 in the presidential election, on the assumption that the*two men represent opposite ends of the political spectrum within the Democratic party, and thus could maximize the potential vote on election day. Others view such a prospect as a highly cynical and even unprincipled move, likely to boomerang if tried. It was just a year ago today that Senator Kennedy appeared with Governor Wallace in Alabama to participate in an Independence day ceremony. Early in June, the Harris Survey asked a nationwide cross-section of 1.132 Democrats and independents: Here it a lit* of people who have been mentioned at potable nominee* for the Democratic party for Pre*ident in 1976 (Hand respondent card), lf you hod to choose right now, who would be your first choice for the Democratic nomination for President in 1976? June March Nov 74 74 •73 Sen Edward Kennedy 35 32 31 Gov George Wallace 21 18 16 Sen Henry Jackson 9 14 9 Sen Edmund Muskie 8 12 I I Sen George McGovern 6 6 8 Sen Walter Mondale 3 4 3 Sen Birch Boyh 2 3 2 Sen Lloyd Bentsen I I I Gov Dale Bumpers I I X Gov Reuben Aske* I I I Former Gov Terry Sanford I I I None or Not sure x—not asked 12 6 16 Kennedy’s lead among Democratic Insights vtiters is larger than when the sentiment of independents is included In fact, one t*f the weaknesses of the Massachusetts senator is his inability to maintain his appeal outside the rank-and-file of his own party. This fact is significant when it is estimated that the number of voters who view themselves as Democrats has been calculated to shrink from 51 to 41 percent in the period between 1968 and 1976 Among independent voters, now estimated to rise from 18 to 38 percent of the electorate over the period from 1968 to 1976, Wallace is stronger than he is among Democrats and stronger than Kennedy with this group. Senators Jackson, Muskie and McGovern also run better with independents than with members of their own party. While in most states independents will not be able to vote in Democratic primaries, their pivotal swing vote in a close election can be an important consideration for any Democratic nominee in 1976. Here is the standing of the candidates among Democratic and independent voters from this latest survey: The worst thing about being the top candidate is that you have to speak last, after everyone has already said everything. Adlai StevensonBy Congressional Quarterly WASHINGTON — Congress is considering a proposal PM radio broadcasters have been promoting for the past five years — a requirement that most radios come equipped to pick up both AM and PM signals. The PM broadcasters and their congressional supporters say it will put these stations on an equal footing with the older, more prosperous AM stations, and offer listeners a wider range of choices. But others object that the government has no business forcing people who want Democrats I ride pendents Kennedy 43 20 Wallace 20 22 Jackson 7 12 Muskie 7 IO McGovern . . 5 7 Mondale 3 3 Boyh 2 2 Aske* I I Bentsen I t Bumpers I I Sanford . . I I None or not sure . . 9 20 only AM receivers to buy more expensive radios with PM bands as well. On a close 44-42 vote, the senate passed a bill June 13 that would authorize the Federal Communications Commission (PCC) to require all radios costing more than $15 to have both AM and PM bands An unusual coalition of liberal con-sumerists and anti-big government conservatives almost defeated the measure, surprising the bill’s supporters and making house approval more questionable than they had hoped. Should the federal government require that most radios in* equipped with both AM and PM bands'.’The ArgumentsNO **\1I7HILE IT may not be a fun-TV damentally important bill. it is one of those irritating busybody laws that pass unnoticed and take away just a little bit more of our ‘unimportant freedom.’ ” argued Sen. James A. McClure (R-Idaho). I lie Gazette's opinion Color it trivial ALL WHO seek sanctuary from the “screamer’ station cacophony polluting the AM radio band doubtless would applaud the standardization of the AM-KM receiver. The innovation would be especially welcome among motorists who prefer limbeck’s beat to tile Beach Boy’s wild water-skiing weekends. But compelling as the cause may be to legions of listeners, the AM-PM squabble is not important enough to merit the attention of congress. Clearly, the senate should have tossed out the radio bill faster than you can say “Wolfman Jack.” Yet the thing hogged the arena for a time, then passed by a whisker. Ordinarily, the house could bt1 depended upon to give such trivia the deep-six, hut the success of last year’s Great TV Football bill suggests that the AM-FM question may sail through without much static. That fiasco, followers of congress will recall, saw lawmakers lift the TV blackout on sold-out home football games. Meanwhile, the energy crunch, inflation, anandal-in*goveminent and a raft of other heavy matters marked time. Congressmen do need occasional respites such as the mock senate debate over the merits of southwestern U.S. chili. But the radio-frequency fiddling was no coffee break. In light of the tender care given the lightweight matter, it s a wonder that a six-month. $450,000 study was not commissioned to speed the proposal toward reality Senator Kennedy has kepi up a busy pace, close to that which a near-can-didate for the nomination would be following at this time He has been a sharp critic of the Nixon administration, is a major sponsor of a new health insurance bill and has said that he will make up his mind whether or not to run "sometime in 1975 ” He is expected to campaign extensively for Democratic candidates in off-year elections. Governor Wallace, whose new-found respectability among voters was reported in last Monday's Harris Survey, went through the recent Democratic primary in Alabama not only refusing to say he would serve out his full term, but virtually suggesting that if he won. he would once again be bidding for the Democratic nomination in 1976 Senators Jackson and Mondale have had busy schedules traveling around the country, but off-the-record admit to being potential candidates if they can muster up the popular and financial support to sustain such a campaign Senator Muskie had steadfastly said that after his 1972 abortive effort he will not run again This far ahead of the election, backing usually is spread among a wide assortment of potential candidates, especially in the case of the party which does not control the White House. Yet, with the Democrats, time appears to be helping Kennedy and Wallace, not the other most prominently mentioned possibilities At this point, the Democratic senator from Massachusetts and the Alabama governor must be viewed as holding dominant positions Chicago Tribune Ne* York News .syndicatelouis Harris Revolting development Wrong George feted ‘‘I am one ol the people here who generally are labeled by the critics as overeager to regulate what shall be put on the market," added Sen Philip A. Hart (D-Mich ). "I plead guilty to being overeager to regulate something if it affects my health and my safety, but beyond that I suggest we ought not go." Requiring car radios to have PM bands probably would cost consumers more than $7 per car. Hart said. One car radio manufacturer had told his antitrust subcommittee that the figure was more like $15 or $26. and Ford Motor Company put it at $55 "Very frankly ... I can’t accurately predict what effect the legislation may have on price,” FCC Chairman Richard P Wiley confessed during hearings The consumer will not be able to take the PM supporters' study to his car dealer and say, " I want an PM radio and I will pay you $7 more. . . * Instead, the consumer has to fork over $126," argued Sen Roman I., Hruska (R-Neb ). "More PM receivers, and more public interest programs are a socially desirable goal, but those two factors must be brought together bv something congress cannot provide — audience appeal." Hart said To dramatize the point. McClure proposed an amendment that would require anyone who subscribes to one newspaper to subscribe to at least two "lf AM is good, and PM is good, and we can mandate the people to have both. why not mandate that they have both newspapers ’" he asked. Hart suggested a refinement that would require the paperbuyer to choose his second subscription from among “the    ^ learned journals whose economic sur-    ¥ vival is questionable, but whose wisdom, iii the judgment of many, is enormous " Congi essioritjl Qua' lf < Iv By Russell Baker WK ARE celebrating revolution again this week It has become a curious rite this annual Fourth of July bow to bloody upheaval, for most of us are ill at ease with Washington, Adams and Jefferson. are only slightly less Tory than Lord North and pay huge tax bills each year to suppress revolutionary movements around the earth We are, in fact, much closer in sympathy to King George III than George Washington, who overthrew the government by force and violence. This sympathy for the tyrannical party is quite natural. We are now the great world power that England was in 1776 and it is the destiny of great world powers to collaborate in the oppression of the unruly. And so we give our sympathy and our money to dictators in Greece, Chile, Saigon, Spain and a dozen Latin states with generalissimos willing to maintain gun rule while freighting boodle to Swiss banks. At home we yearn for the monarchy of strong Presidents and tolerate the incumbent’s claim to privileges which King George himself would have been reluctant to assert. Though some may be restive with Nixon’s insistence that he is the law. most of us would be appalled by a proposal to revolt against him We are quite comfortable with the ruin of Madison's separation of powers and probably concede, though perhaps a bit unhappily, that Caesarism in the White House is preferable to the blunderings of democracy in the congress. Large numbers of us sympathize with the government’s demand that the press confine itself to printing only what the government wants known Most of us are indifferent when some small rabble is jailed by the troops for expressing revolutionary sentiment at the doors of the justice department or the gates of a national convention. We abide and even praise an economic order that makes the rich richer by bilking the middle class and keeping the poor impoverished. We uncomplainingly pay taxes to subsidize vast corporations, yet abuse the poor for shiftlessness. We excuse our richest men and most powerful companies from taxation, and pay more taxes ourselves to compensate for the amounts not paid bv the great. We tolerate a legal system which most of us cannot afford to use because the rich and the powerful have priced us out of the market in their demands for its services. In consequence, we see the law’s favors bestowed on the rich and the powerful and its scourge laid upon those who cannot afford to buy into it. In short, like all good conservatives, we like things the way they are Nothing is more likely to set the hair upright on the back of the national neck than a call for revolution We are Tory to the core Why then must we go on with these annual tributes to the glory of revolution? George Washington, after all, is not a man we feel emotionally involved with. He is too remote, too severe. His rigorous honesty is largely joke material these days, like his lith-rate false teeth How can we possibly feel anything in common with an honest politician, with a man who didn t even know about $5.IMM! dental caps? Who wore wigs and knee britches? And Jefferson, with that business about periodically refreshing the tree of liberty with the blood of patriots — ah, Jefferson. If you were alive today talking like that, we would happily set* you do hard time in Attica. I’nnatura! effort is required to generate enthusiasm for the revolution. It is already much more remote from us than the English revolution was from George HI by 1776 If Englishmen could go from revolutionaries to conservatives in slightly more than a hundred years, why should Americans not accept the fact that they have traveled from rev elution to reaction in 260? It is time to close the book on the Fourth of July. It was splendid once, but it no longer becomes us. If we must go ahead celebrating it for years to come, it would make more sense to treat it as a day for honoring King George UL whose principles we so roundly endorse Par better, to abolish it altogether, perhaps by turning it into one of those four-day holiday weekends which should be celebrated at the start of August, and by renaming it the Sentimentality day weekend. There is no likelihood of early abolition, unfortunately The government is determined to preserve it through the bicentennial celebration in 1976, which, everybody believes, can Im* a good shot in the arm for business. Ne* York Times Service Still lighting the way ;

RealCheck