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

OCR Text

Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - July 30, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa Needed: '*'<* - y    it'¥    "TT I - , Tjr.'.oinxmi Uh* Ct4tint IhtpitU #rt3<“Hc Editorial Page Tuesday, July 30, 1974 No enforcement problems off-of-hook strategy for GOP the senate would be given to discuss would In* iii tht* first instance the constitutional points rather than the chicken* thief points. It having been established to the satisfaction of all realists that the house of representatives will indeed vote for impeachment, attention is directed toward the dissenters, in particular the Republican dissenters. They share the spotlight with the Republicans who will vote impeachment and return to their constituents to try to survive the Coventry into which they will be put by the Nixon loyalists Now a possible strategy looms, lf, on the eve of the vote, President Nixon were to take once more to the airwaves and say something that would reduce as follows: “Tonight I ani addressing myself to the* Republican members of the house of representatives. Gentlemen, the house is resolved that questions have been raised concerning my conduct of the presidency, and will accordingly vote impeachment. “I am confident that as regards my own ethical conduct I shall in due course satisfy the senate that I behaved properly. “But I consider that the events of the last month have crystallized grave questions unanswered by the Constitution. As you know , I took a position different from William F. Buckley, jr. that of the supreme court on executive privilege. As you know, I acted on my own initiative to defend the national security when I thought it was threatened during the years IWW. ’70 and 71 “It is the feeling of the majority of this body that I exceeded the authority granted to me by the Constitution Naturally, I do not feel that I did. But quite obviously it is now an open question whether I did or whether I did not. And this is not a question that can be settled by the supreme court. The only effective instrument for settling it is the impeachment process. “The vote will then be cast by the senate of the United States, which will, in a sense, be acting as a constitutional convention, called to refine points left unclear by the Constitution itself “I see nothing at this point to be gained by bringing these questions to the supreme court under factional auspices. Though my personal fate is involved in the senate's decision, I share with you a curiosity as to what the determination will be because after that determination is made, the Republic will need to continue with a refined idea of the authority of the Chief executive “I shall vigorously defend my own position iii the senate, but this is not the time to put forward those arguments “Meanwhile. I urge y*i t<fjoi#mei!n the effort to elevate the spirit of this proceeding to genuine constitutional inquiry - by voting unanimously for impeachment on tin* first count. I do not believe that any such vote commits any representative to more than agreeing that the majority of his colleagues are resolved to take the matter to the senate and that under the circumstances in order to make the senate’s mandate clearer, the house will vote — with my blessing — unanimously.'' Safer record If the senate, taking up die first series of charges, proceeds to vote against Nixon, he stops being President as of that moment. And the other articles of the impeachment go untransacted, which is not to the disadvantage of Nixon, the Republican party or history. But meanwhile, the November election will be freed of the incubus of how-did-you-vote-on-impeachment, and one would hope that Americans of both parties, if they truly honor the democratic ideal, would welcome this turn in American political preoccupation Washington Star Syndicate Bad consequences possible Bus ruling paralyzes school desegregation I think we took a wrong turn somewhere back there . . . Among the latest to on- dorse the present 55-mile per hour speed limit as a semi-permanent or permanent ceiling are U.S. Sen. Charles Percy of Illinois, who will appear in Cedar Rapids Friday night, and Chairman Maurice Van Nostrand of the Iowa commerce commission. Percy recently declared for setting the limit permanently at 55. Van Nostrand predicted that it will not be repealed in the foreseeable future. Both cited the safety factor as the chief reason for retaining the 55 limit, and with good reason; there is no doubt but that hundreds of lives have been saved as a result of the lower limit. Van Nostrand predicted that 150 lives will have been saved in Iowa by the time Thanksgiving rolls around this November. Percy set the national figure at 6,000 lives. Nothing in the record prompts a contradiction of them on this matter. But another of Van Nostrand’s statements does invite concern: that “statistics will show we’ve had little problem with enforcement regarding speed limits.’’ Maybe so. But statistics don’t always tell the whole story. Unquestionably, more arrests have been made and more speeding tickets paid for exceeding the 55 miles-per-hour speed limit than the previous 65-75 limits evoked. But statistics don’t tell how People's forumLibrarians risk jobs To tilt* Editor: The public library controversy iii Iowa City can be stated in a few words. Iii appointing an unqualified candidate as director of the library, the library board engaged in discriminatory hiring practices In this instance it was not un equal opportunity employer. This action is contrary to public policy. In spite of abuse and the threat of the loss of their jobs, seven members of the professional library staff have questioned the action of the library board I iulute these dedicated, courageous librarians. Iowa City can be proud of them. Frederick Wezeman Iowa CityEntertaining To the Editor: Three cheers fur the Olde Barn Players. Last Friday night (July 26) I attended the opening performance of “Oklahoma” being put on by the Olde many motorists were able to use the interstate highways at speeds well in excess of 55 and escape arrest in the process. This came to mind during two recent trips to Des Moines as auto and truck after auto and truck whizzed past without a state trooper in sight. To keep the record straight, we yield to no one in admiration and respect for Iowa’s troopers and the efficient way they handle their many responsibilities. But there is reason for concern when not a one of them is spotted during some 300 miles of interstate driving. Here, a small confession on the journeys to Des Moines: After one careful observance of the 55 maximum and a consequence of being passed by almost everything on the highway, a step-up to BO on the next trip, and then to 62, produced the experience of still being passed by truckers and other motorists who must have been in the 65-70 range. This experience is not uncommon. It seems to be the rule, rather than the exception, judging from comments of many other drivers who testify to similar results. The only possible conclusion is that Mr. Van Nostrand probably is right when he says Iowa has had no enforcement problem with the 55 limit. There won’t be one, either, so long as the law isn’t being enforced worth a darn. Barn Players, a new community theater of Marion, at the Longbranch convention hall This was the third show Eve seen h\ this organization this summer I’m glad to see such good, clean entertainment available during the summer months locally. I hope everyone who enjoys live theater will see this production I must hand it to the entire cast of “Oklahoma” for its grout show — so well done and full of fun. John A Kuba 1035 Second street SETraitors To the Editor I have always wondered how there were so many Democrat lawmakers iii Washington until the Watergate impeachment vote, when about one-third of the Republicans (i.e., Railsback, of Illinois, Fish of New York. Hogan, of New Jersey, etc.) are “Republican-Democrats” (Mayor Daley’s tactics). It might be advisable for the Republican party to better screen its candidates before they vote them into office. A traitor is no good to his party. Not one Democrat failed his party. Even the judge, who should be impartial, voted for impeachment. The last electoral vote of Nixon is still burning in the hearts of the Democrats Ray Col lieut t 2H04 O avenue NU By William F. Buckley, jr. T I’ IS A MATTER of days and hours, -v and still there is no apparent Republic an strategy Strategy in the best sense strategy directed at the following objectives listed in the order of their importance: I Spare the American people a reversal of the lf)72 presidential election by an overwhelming election of Democrats to congress. 2. Assist Republican candidates running for re-election and torn, by conscience and by practical political considerations, by the necessity of having to vote for or against impeachment 3. Give Richard Nixon, while he still has the opportunity to effect arrangements, the opportunity to give precedent not to such grubby matters as whether he feathered his own nest but whether he took executive power beyond the lengths contemplated by the founders of the ConstitutionBatting order You see, in the next few days, congress will he agreed on a chronology. As things now stand, up front are the personal derelictions of Richard Nixon (allegedly seven at the last count). Behind that are his abuse of executive power (allegedly eight times, at last count). Now it would not be a great matter to reverse the order of these two major divisions so that what By Tom Wicker NEU YORK — Mr Justice Marshall probably was right to say in dissent that the supreme court decision in the Detroit school case w as “a reflection of a perceived public mood” rather than “the product (*f neutral principles of law .” There is no doubt whatever that public opinion has turned massively against the kind of cross-busing that would have been required to unify Detroit schools with the 53 surrounding suburban school systems: and the court could not have been unaware of that. The “perceived public mood,” Mr Justice Marshall said. was “that we have gone far enough in enforcing the Constitution’s guarantee of equal justice.” Many of the suburban white families who opposed having their children bused into heavily blac k Detroit, as well as having black children bused out to suburban schools, would protest that they are not fighting “equal justice” — only the busing of their children away from neighborhood schools It is true, moreover, as Chief Justice Burger wrote for the narrow 5-tn-4 majority, that a lengthy list of administrative. financial and logistic problems would tx* raised by combining 54 school districts, with nearly a million pupils, into one. As numerous analysts of school integration have pointed out, there is little evidence to show that the educational test scores of minority group children has been improved in those districts that have Ixrn integrated.Insulted Many blacks, In fact, are offended by the notion that sitting in the classroom with white pupils will improve their children’s education So even in the black community there is considerable opposition to busing — particularly “one-way busing" of black children to white communities Granting all that, the conclusion is only the more warranted that the Detroit decision has brought the 20-year period of school desegregation in America virtually to a halt. Thai means, as southerners always believed would happen. that once desegregation began to affect the people of the North, who had approved it for the South, desegregation would be quickly stopped. The chief justice s ruling, for example. said the “target” of desegregation was “clear and forthright the elimination of state mandated or deliberately maintained dual school systems with certain schools for negro pupils and others for white pupils. Such dual systems were maintained mostly in the South, and have now been abolished, often bv busing Most cities of the North and West nevertheless have school systems as tightly segregated a> the South ever wa-* Detroit’s schools are about 70 percent black Other cities with similar problems include Boston, Hartford, Wilmington, Indianapolis, Cincinnati and Cleveland, the list could go on. While it may be maintained that segregation in these cities merely follows population patterns, in most of them it can Im1 shown that government action — zoning regulations, housing restrictions, school location policies, school adminis tration and the like — have contributed heav ily to segregated schools.Tight Focus Even where such a pattern could be shown to have been strong enough to provide the kind of “target” Chief Justice Burger cited — as was conceded bv the supreme court to In* true of Detroit — the new ruling means that the remedy of court-ordered desegregation can he applied only within the district where the pattern of official action occurred. The clear meaning of that is that largely black central cities, surrounded by white suburbs, will continue to have largely black schools, no matter how the pupils are shuffled about within the city districts; and the flight to the suburbs of the city’s remaining whites will probably be speeded. The ruling.and Mr Justice Stewart in a concurring opinion, suggested that interdistrict desegregation plans might he approved if school district lines could be shown to be deliberately discriminatory, or if action in one produced segregation in another. These conditions will be too hard to find to qualify many metropolitan desegregation plans. Most northern cities, as a result, will continue to have heavily segregated schools, and with the tacit blessing of the supreme court of the United States Maybe the states will now devise means to pour money into black school systems to enrich their educational programs Probably blacks will have greater control over black school systems Surely the suburbs can relax about the threat of busing to their white school systems. It may be argued that these practical considerations even form a more useful whole than a continued pursuit of “equal justice.” The retreat from a noble goal is no less melancholy for any of that, and may yet have consequences no one could desire. New York Tunes Sef vicf Showing congressional worth Good vote gauge: campaign funding vote By Roscoe Drummond WASHINGTON - The outlook is that the house of representatives will pass a weak, ineffective measure designer! to make it look as though it was really trying to take money corruption out of federal elections The senate has done well It has passed a strong campaign financing reform hill The house is doing badly As presently drafted, the house version would add weakness to the senate bill at nearly every pointCosmetics? Sometime in the next few weeks the members of congress will vote aud thereby disclose whether they favor reform or only an appearance of reform. Come November, the American people will vote in 435 different districts whether they want to keep their congressman or turn hun in for another How their congressman stood on cam-paign-financt* reform will be one good measure of his worth. The purpose of this column is to provide for voters ways to measure whether the legislation which finally emerges is reform or nonreform. • The exclusion test — The senate lull provides a mix of private and government financing of presidential and congressional elections. Its premises are that men and women of limited means should not he excluded from elective politics because of inflated campaign costs and that the* candidates should not have to depend on favors from big donors, whoever they are, who want to buy a piece of the government The house bill excludes senators and representatives from this provision It does so, in part, because incumbent congressmen are favoring themselves It is far easier for incumbents to raise campaign money than challengers Incumbents have other built-in advantages — like no-cost mailing privileges and special TV and radio facilities — which they don’t want to share with those who run against them. Big. purposeful donations don t go only to presidential aspirants In the 1972 election, spending bv eonurressional can didates ran to $77 million, and it came mostly from wealthy and powerful contributors who know what they arc1 after. I he way the bill now stands the house seems willing to reform the financing of presidential elections as long as they don’t have* to reform their own' • The enforcement test — Even a strong house bill would be a hoax if it rests on anemic* enforcement. The present bill is designed to be without teeth It would put enforcement in the Insight* Money Hoi little value to its possessor unless it also has value to others l^lsynrl StrynforH hands of those who would benefit ny nonenforcement by having the* clerk of the house, the sec retary of the senate and the comptroller general, who is an agent of congress, plus four other members of congress in control of enforcement. This is a method of guaranteeing feeble enforcementWatchdog with teeth The senate provisions would c reate an independent enforcement agency rather like* the Watergate special prosecutor, a provision which the house rejects as too v igorous. • The advisory test — The house administration committee, which devised all these weaknesses, conceived still another It net only puts enforcement in the hands of its own agents hut it also retains for itself a veto pawer over the way they do their job. Just conceivably, the majority of the house may vote to repair these grievous weaknesses lf not, you can decide iii November whether you like what they did —■ and vote accordingly i s Ana* i< f >n<    '    'I    utr Name preoccupation EVERY TIME tho boiler heats up for a fairly big election — as ifs heating up now for next fall — the name of the game becomes “name recognition.’’ He who lacks that out among the voters has no chance, the feeling goes. He whose name is recognized by goodly numbers has a great plus going for him, something all but indispensable. Hence the great attention, cash and effort paid to name recognition: Walk the state, ride a horse, ride a bike, anything to gain your name a spark of recognition by the time election day begins. At any office-seeking level, this element indeed may be indispensable. But as a campaign concept, name recognition does something worse than sound clumsy. It puts in dismal light the quality of what goes on in voting bewiths. Implicitly: the average voter looks at two names for an office. Yeah, I’ve heard of him, the voter’s mind clicks, and this other guy — he doesn’t ring a bell. So “click’’ goes a vote for the one who had name recognition. Never mind the whole array of qualities ■    -x—    ... and views that should determine an intelligent choice. A name merely known is the main thing it takes. Accurate or not, that sort of assumption underlies the great concern devoted constantly to name recognition as a political value. Correspondingly devalued are solid information and discriminating judgment as a basis for attracting votes. Straight-ticket voting — for the party rather than the man — may be the only other concept that demands less from a voter and treats the content of his mind with less respect. Most regrettably of all for vot-ing-quality idealism, there is little evidence that politicians have been too far wrong in their belief that simple name recognition does help quite a bit in pulling votes. The whole election process seems unlikely    to show    much improvement until what people recognize is that it it takes far more than name-know ledge to do the job right. . f $    rn-**    ** ;

Clippings and Obituaries for the Cedar Rapids Gazette