Low Resolution Image: Become a member to access this full resolution image at 375% higher quality.

OCR Text

Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - July 28, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa nm-' l^be Unpitta Editorial Page Who will vitalize the dormant greatness? Sunday, July 28, 1974 Amtrak through C.R.? WITH ALL the precision of a prince seeking the nymphet whose foot fits the glass slipper, a yet-unnamed consultant for the Iowa department of transportation is to determine which of four transcontinental train routes in Iowa is most adaptable to Amtrak use. If the state legislature votes to pay two-thirds of the passenger service’s operating loss, it appears Iowa will get a second line to complement the Burlington Amtrak route, which crosses the state’s southern counties. Hail lines under scrutiny will be the Rock Island (running from Davenport through Iowa City, Des Moines and Atlantic to Omaha), the North Western (Clinton, Cedar Rapids, Marshalltown, Boone, Carroll), the Milwaukee (Sabula, Marion, Madrid, Manilla), and the Illinois Central (Dubuque, Waterloo, Fort Dodge to Sioux City). If population pockets and traffic counts on nearby roadways were the only requisites for attracting suitors, the Davenport-low a City-Des Moines run doubtless would outshine the others. The capital city after all is, reportedly, the largest in the country without passenger rail service; Iowa City has many potential train riders in its huge student population; and interstate 80 runs parallel to the tracks. But in the most critical area of all, condition of the roadbed, the Rock Island line through Des Moines emerges the homeliest of stepsisters. In fact, Maurice Van Nostrand, state commerce commission chairman, says the Rock Island route has the worst trackage of all the five transcontinental lines. Significantly, the Burlington line — a loser in proximity to ridership generators — became an Amtrak route because its tracks were the best in the state at the time (1970). Which routes, if any, are able to accommodate passenger trains rolling at 7ft miles per hour? Van Nostrand, whose knowledge of Iowa roadbeds is encyclopedic, says the North Western (through C edar Rapids and Ames) is up to Amtrak standards. Numerous improvements have been made the last four years. The attribute should prove helpful next month when a Cedar Rapids delegation visits the U.S. department of transportation to petition for a Milwaukee line Amtrak routing. If the study now aborning at Iowa DOT shows what everyone expects it to — that the Rock Island route would be derailment prone — residents of Iowa City and greater Des Moines needn't feel disfranchised. The 30-mile trip from Des Moines to the railhead at Ames after all would be shorter than the journey to Osceola now required of train passengers. (Ames, too, has a siz* hie student population.) And the trip from Iowa City to Cedar Rapids would be three times easier than the present detour-infested trip to Fort Madison. Probably the most elusive part of the Amtrak feasibility thrust will be finding out how many Iowans would use the train, for vacations or shorter hops, if a passenger line were established within an hour or two car ride from home. Those pleased by Iowa’s aim to get a better share of Amtrak service can help by letting policymakers know of their enthusiasm. Patriotic pork-barrel IF VENERABLE U.S. Rep. Wright Patman (D-Texas) has his way, congress soon will reconsider legislation allowing some of the profits from the sale of Eisenhower silver dollars to be given to Eisenhower college in Seneca Falls, N.Y. v As proposed last year, when the house rejected it, 230-183, the measure would require that $1 for every proof Eisenhower silver dollar that was minted and issued be granted to the college. (Some $65 million was earned from such sales — $10 for each Eisenhower dollar — in 1971 and ’72.) In addition. IO cents of each dollar given to Eisenhower college would be distributed to the Samuel Rayburn college in Bonham. Texas (as part of an agreement between the two institutions). The library is located in Rep. Patman’s district. This time around, Patman reportedly plans to tack the measure onto a Bureau of the Mint bill giving the treasury secretary the power to change the alloy of the one-cent coin. On its face the proposal seems worthy of bipartisan enthusiasm. After all. what two leaders of the recent past evoke more poignant thoughts around Capitol Hill than President Eisenhower and House Speaker Rayburn? Patriotic appeal aside, though, the proposal to funnel the public’s Eisenhower dollar profits to the small private school in New York clearly discriminates against all other financially-strapped nonpublic institutions. Moreover, Rep. Patman’s proposal to rechannel a portion of the Ike-dollar profits into his own district amounts to a double helping of pork-barrel politics: The Rayburn library’s beneficiary status is a surefire guarantor of Democratic support, and Patman is up for reelection this year Clearly, the congress should have none of it.By James Reston NEW YORK — In the agonizing crisis at the beginning of the last world war, when Neville Chamberlain was departing as prime minister and Winston Churchill was coming forward to take command, a loud cry went out across the House of Commons:    “Speak for England: ” We could use a little of this spirit in th** impeachment debate in the house of representatives The first days of the televised proceedings have been courteous and orderly On the whole, members have been solemn and dull, and have spoken for themselves, or for or against Richard Nixon, but who will “Speak for America?” The supreme court answered the question. “We will,” the judges said, and by a unanimous vote cut across all the personal and party arguments and defended the Constitution. It is an old American story: There really was no “Roosevelt court,” as FOR discovered when he tried to pack it; and now we know there is no “Nixon court,” for he appointed three of the eight men who voted against him. There is only “The Court” and it reaffirmed the principle that the judicial branch, and not the President, will decide what the law is. It is interesting and significant that the court narrowed its decision in order to expand its support on the main point. Sometimes, Robert Frost once said, you have to cut away all the secondary issues and “come out clear and plain as a joke. ” In a divided country, the court apparently felt that some institution had to be unanimous on something, and compromised to come down 8-0 on the main thing. If our information is correct, and it is hard to be sure, there were members of the court who wanted to be much more precise in defining the limits of the President’s authority in keeping diplomatic and military information beyond the reach of the courts. And who also wanted to go further and state that when the President is personally involved in charges of criminal wrong-doing. he has a conflict of interest and cannot be involved in judging what evidence will be made available to the courts and congress. In the end. however, the justices restrained their rhetoric and their reach and settled for a plain judgment on the principle of judicial supremacy in determining the law The congress has a harder job, for it has to deal with the imponderables and ambiguities of human behavior, and decide, not only on what evidence must be produced, but what it means. But the court has given them a model. Even if the legislative branch were as careful to find a consensus on the main thing, it will not lie easy. For the court has stated that the tapes must be turned over from the President to Judge Sirica, but it didn t say when, and time could be a critical fat tor in the final decision Special Prosecutor Jaworski did not miss this key point. There was never much doubt that the court would order delivery of the tapes, and the White House has insisted from the start that the congress settle this prolonged agony as fast as possible and “get off the President’s back.” But during the months of debate over the issue, the White House apparently did not transcribe and index the tapes, and now the President’s lawyer, James St. ( lair, i> saying that he will “take whatever measures are necessary to comply with (the court’s) decision in all respects," but that this will now be a “time-consuming process.” This could take weeks and even months and raises all kinds of awkward problems for the congress For example, though th<» hearings in the judiciary committee are now going forward on television, the committee is being asked t# dm*& Cst- SUPREME COURT 8 WHITE HOUSE 0 to interrupt its inquiry until the new evidence compelled by the supreme court is available. If it agrees to do so (which it didn t), the whole impeachment process will be side-tracked, and the attention of the country will be diverted by other things, but if it insists on going forward with the articles of impeachment, it will undoubtedly be charged with trying to impeach the President without waiting for the evidence on the tapes the supreme court has turned over to Sirica. This, obviously, can lead to endless debate; meanwhile an election is coming up in November, which raises other fundamental questions. If there is a long delay in producing the tapes, the fate of the President could be decided after the election by a congress that has been changed by the votes of the people. Should a lame-duck congress sit on theDemos 76 dilemmaStonewalled impeachment of the President? Or the present congress insist on settling the issue before it hears the tapes the supreme court has released? This is the tangle of obscurities the men on the judiciary committee are going to have to face. They are not really having a debate on the fundamental issues. as the supreme court did. They are making recitations before the TV cameras, and reading scripts, written usually by their staffs or somebody else. Unfortunately, this produces endless arguments over secondary issues, bad law , and boring television. Occasionally, fundamental questions are raised on the TV For example, what the test of impeachment should really be — this is the critical, threshold question — but after this is raised, time runs out and some different congressman comes on for 15 minutes with some totally different question, and the primary issue is not followed In short, the procedures of the judiciary committee, and the time-consuming” tactics of the White House are keeping the “debate,” if that’s the right word, on secondary and tactical questions. But despite this, something is happening in the congress since the supreme court spoke. There are quiet echoes of the past along the benches in the judiciary committee and the low rumble of a distant drum. “Greatness is lying in the streets of Washington these days,” Henry Kissinger said the other night, “and somebody may pick it up.” In other words: Somebody may “speak for America,” but it hasn t happened yet in the congress. New York Times Service Burning issues, tepid leadersBy Roscoe Drummond WASHINGTON — Thinking about 1976, most Democratic party leaders across the country are optimistic but also worried They are confident that all of the political advantages are on-their side for recapturing the presidency but are worried that they may not be able to turn up a winning candidate. They candidly admit that they have a very thin stand of presidential timber Following is the main thrust of what Democratic leaders say in talking privately with political reporters: • The idea is widespread that Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) is the nearly inevitable choice as the 1976 nominee. • There is a considerable opinion that. while it would be easy to nominate Kennedy, it would be hard to elect him t • There is a growing apprehension that Gov George Wallace of Alabama is more likely to desert the Democratic party in 76 than stay within it. Reason: There is little prospect that the platform or the nominee will be acceptable to him, • Sen Henry Jackson (D-Wash.) — just back from China — is lighting no political fires although there is smoke in the underbrush He is today the most influential Democratic member of the senate and, if Kennedy stands aside, he will emerge as a formidable contender Roscoe Drummond What with Watergate, inflaton. a plunging market, high food prices and an energy shortage, the Democrats would normally have every reason to look upon the coming presidential election as a walkover The conversation ought to be lighthearted. It isn’t. The outlook ought to be unrelieved^’ bright. It isn t The haunting feeling is that they have the issues but not a candidate who can effectively exploit them. It is not the reporters who raise Chap-paquiddick; it is Democratic leaders who do so in private conversation. Jack W Germond, political correspondent of the Washington Star-News. in an article tm “Kennedy and the Democrats” adds this finding to that of others: If Kennedy becomes a candidate, he writes, then “the first — and critical — question is this one: ’What conclusions can voters draw about the way Kennedy would perform as President from the way he performed after Mary Jo Kopechne drowned at t'happaquiddick in 1969?’ “Or, put another way, will the voters perceive Kennedy as a candidate capable of standing up under the pressures of the presidency in times of crisis?” This kind of concern is expressed by Democrats sympathetic to Kennedy. They see it as an inescapable question for themselves and others. The senator may himself choose to face this matter at the polls in 1976, rather than a later election year. If so, there is little doubt that he can be nominated Gov. Wallace is showing new strength — and new weakness His new strength is evident in the (act that a number of southern blacks in public office supported him for re-election and speak favorably of his changed attitude. His new weakness is evident in the very few pro-Wallace delegates who are tieing elected to the midterm Democratic Conference to be held in December. It indicates that, while his southern support is growing, his support outside the South is waning. Jackson tried in 1972. He bunted and was out at first base. He is trying again with a heavier bat. And then there are Sen Walter Mondale (D-Minn.) and a few other dark horses. But have the Democrats a Hank Aaron anywhere in their midst? Lo* Angeles Times Syndicate A letter for Heather, at four Bad year for leaders, fine for tiny girls People’s forum By James J. Kilpatrick QCRABBLE. Va. - Dear Heather Grandfather K., meaning me, had his own fourth birthday in the same week that saw Calvin Coolidge trounce John W. Davis. It must have been a turbulent time in our Oklahoma household, for my father — that would have been your great-grandfather — was supporting the Republican Coolidge and your great-great-uncles were voting for the Democrat Davis. Your great-great* grandfather. a Confederate captain, was down in Louisiana spinning in his grave. Now you are having your fourth birthday in the midst of presidential earthquakes far more severe than those of 1924. I will tell you something I do riot remember one blessed thing about Coolidge, Davis, LaFollette, or for that matter, about the election of Herbert Hoover four years later The first President I remember was Roosevelt, and the first political event I remember was Repeal All this is over your head Rut it occurs to me that it is more of a blessing than a pity that you are likely to remember nothing at all about President Nixon, impeachment and Watergate If vour memory is like mine. these events will wash over your recollection and leave no sediment behind. Years hence, when you read about Nixon, you will say. “Well, after all, I was only four that summer.” It is a pretty good age to be rn the summer of 1974 The memories that we store up for you, and put away with your outgrown toys, are certain to be more pleasant than memories of a President at bay If this last year has been a bad year for Presidents, it has been a great year for little girls. This birthday, your fourth birthday, will be your first one at Hawthorn Here you have your very own room, with big windows looking out at the Blue Ridge mountains, and you have WM) acres, more or less. to run off your wiggles in. The old brick house was built about 1812. high on a hill that looks to everywhere, by a young doctor named Aylette Hawes who married a girl named Frances Thornton A very long time after that, in 1961, your other grandfather — Grandfather Stone — bought the property and made it beautiful again Now you are growing up in the hills and fields and ponds of Hawthorn, and these art1 the things you may remember; You may remember a summer-softJames J. Kilpatrick evening in June, when you and your cousin Michael chased fireflies on the lawn You were wearing a long dress, because it was a little awd that night, and you had to hitch up the dress with one hand and grab for light nm bugs with Hoot her Michael caught all th*- fireflies, but hi-was a southern gentleman He let you put them in the Mason jar You ran to and fro under the great maples for nearly an hour, until it got too dark to see. and then you let all the captive fireflies free “sit they could go back home to their mommies and go to bed ’’ You may remember fishing with your father, sitting very still in the center of the canoe, not wiggling even a little bit, and most difficult of all, not even talking You may remember the dark green iridescent fish, wet and shining; and the summer ducks that landed on the water and the frogs that croaked by the banks You may remember the discovery of secret places on the farm — the cool sweet-sour smell of the barn, the empty horse stalls, the machine shop and tool shed, the hutches and pens where Grandfather Stone once raised pheasants and quail You may remember discovering groundhogs and rabbits and chipmunks and a big bluck snake You may remember squatting in tin* straw of the cowshed, your chicory-blue eyes big with amazement, watching a cow being milked Or perhaps we will remember all these things for you, and hold the memories in the warming ovens of our hearts: Heather learning to swim, Heather learning to “take turns,” Heather holding a bottle for baby brother Douglas. Heather saying “good grief! ” 20 times an hour All this is Heather at four, and all this, my love, is happier to remember than to remember this summer as the summer they impeached Richard Nixon Grandfather Washington Star Syndical*-‘Womens world’ Tit the Editor h or as long as I have been reading The Gazette. I have been annoyed by the “Society for Women” page Women have broader interests than that page allows.LETTERS The Gazette's editorial page welcomes readers' opm onj, subject to these guidelines. length limit 400 word* One ie Mer per writer every 30 day* All may be condensed and edited without changing meaning None publuhed ononymoutly Writer i telephone number (not printed) ihould follow nome, oddrett and readable handwritten tincture to help authenticate Content* deal mote with itiuet and event* tho* per*onalitie* *No poetry 'W anti many of them go so far as to read the entire newspaper. The introduction to your classified column No. 93 “Women's world” is insulting. Women's world is more than sewing machines and needle point; women’s world is No. 66 “Trucks and trailers. No. 76 “Bicycles and motorcycles,” No. 120 “Business opportunities.” and probably any other activity or service which is a part of “men s world ’’ Nancy IV Van /.ant Mi VernonSafety town’ To the Editor The Cedar Rapids police department is to be congratulated for development of the wonderful Safety Town idea for small children. Safety Town provides creative and effective traffic safety training for our young people. Thanks to the recreation commission tot lot youngsters are receiving this training this summer Compliments also are due all Hic- other organizations responsible tor Safety Town Mrs Rat Mi Hartland 2618 Bevor avenue- SE ;

Clippings and Obituaries for the Cedar Rapids Gazette