Cedar Rapids Gazette (Newspaper) - October 30, 1974, Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Wednesday, October 30, 1974
Better futures monitoring
After weeks of implying veto, President Ford has signed the commodity futures trading commission act. The new law will replace the agriculture department’s 38-year-old Commodity Exchange Authority (CEA) with an independent five-member futures trading commission. It was the new commission’s proposed autonomy which provoked objections from the justice department and the Office of Management and Budget. Those misgivings in turn triggered Mr. Ford’s initial disfavor of the bill.
The President’s approval Oct. 23 (the last day for signing of the legislation) coincided neatly with his Oct. 24 barnstorming in Iowa. Mr. Ford said in Des Moines that the new regulatory’ structure to apply to all commodity futures trading is “an objective which I finally fully support.” (Futures contracts are agreements to buy or sell some quantity of a commodity on a specified future date for a price set at the time of the agreement.)
Iowans should be pleased with the President’s change of stance
and with the significant roles Sen. Dick Clark and Hep. Neal Smith played in preparing the legislation. Futures market analysts generally agree that the CEA lacked the legal clout to protect investors and consumers from shady market manipulation. The infamous 1972 wheat sale to Russia dramatized the possibility that in the absence of proper surveillance, large grain companies or even foreign countries could manipulate commodities markets at great expense to C. S. farmers and consumers.
The importance of day-to-day scrutiny (which Sen. Clark insisted upon) cannot be overstated. More than $500 billion in futures contracts changed hands in 1973 — nearly twice the volume of stocks traded the same year. With food shortages and increased demand pushing commodity prices higher, the number of speculators trading in futures is expected to go nowhere but up. It will be reassuring to have a fulltime, independent government commission monitoring the action.
A kingdom for terHorst?
When President Ford issued the blank-check pardon of Richard Nixon that otherwise* pleasant September Sunday, the first White House official to bail out, shout “Geronimo!” and yank the ripcord was Jerald F. ter-Horst, press secretary of one month’s tenure.
Most Americans probably viewed terllorst’s act as one of towering self-sacrifice, a refreshing antithesis of another who floated down from the heights the same weekend, the mercenary Evel Knievel.
Indeed, terllorst is to be commended for his grit. Few professional newsgatherers would part with the prestigious job (if they ever could land it) after just one major clash of principles. Lest observers think terllorst returned to mundane duties, however, a brief glance at the express secretary’s new career is instructive.
As a now widely-read Washington columnist for the Detroit News, terHorst is doing quite well, thank you. His syndicated column has won at least 75 new subscribers in the past two months, and his book, “Gerald Ford and the Future of the Presidency”, is set for a Nov. 8 publishing splash. (Excerpts are being serialized now.)
This is not to begrudge terHorst the fine things obviously flowing his way. The point is that everyone who even dipped toes in Watergate or its backwash seems
to be getting reminiscences into print. Politicians, newsmen, defendants, convicts, exiles, Capitol Hill has-beens, never-wases, hangers-on and even their wives are cashing in on the scandal.
Surprisingly, several of the authors are turning into literary heavyweights. It will be interesting to see if terHorst’s critique of Ford’s career will land the newsman in the winner’s circle.‘J’ or ‘G’?
Question: Does President
Ford spell his nickname “Jerry,” as do most of the world’s Geralds, or does he prefer “Gerry”? Newshounds who bird-dog his steps and pundits who analyze his every utterance seem unable to settle on a spelling — or style, as it is called in the trade.
Since the world’s greatest authority on how to spell a given person’s name is that person himself, Mr. Ford ought to be approached on the matter.
As a plain-folks fellow, he may not care how his nickname is handled in the press. Hut presidential tradition forbids equivocation. Just as Harry S Truman revealed what the “S” initial without a period stood for (nothing except “S” sans punctuation), President Ford ought to clear up the current mystery: Gerry or Jerry?
Way with wordsPuzzlers
By Theodore M. Bernstein
Tin-* seems lo In* a day for seminally questions Question No. I comes from a chap with an undecipherable signature who says he has used the word cooIth lur sears hut < an find no backing lur it lf we have the warmth of the afternoon he writes, we cer-tainJs must base th* coolth of the evening
At first he seems to have a point Coolth does app* >r r < * r a J dietionar »es. hut it is designated humorous Hut when you stop to think of it a ii,ore logical solution would m- to get rid of the th following warm rattier than to add a lh to cool Warmth '<m to twilit* odd fellow w* floe * a. hotth r heafth or coIdth
Question So I. submitted bs B< r nard Biumstein of Philadelphia r ut (•erns what salutation to u * in a letter addressed to two women Dear Sci Gentlemen is Used for two mer; out Dear Ladiet. he sass sounds so unlit, crated Dear Mesdames sounds » , * * worse (lf course, these days there is ,i,
vs ass the possibly of Dear Mss. Maybe the best solution is to write them separate letters
VV hat ought to be said Some purists insist that the auxiliary verb ought must be followed by an infinitive including the word lo In most instances they an* right The to certainly should Im* inserted in this sentence “( ar owners ought drive carefull.'
But omission of the to is permissible and idiomatic in a sentence like this: ‘ t ar owners ought never exceed the speed limit ”
Two experts on usage explain this by saying that omitting the to is proper in a negative statement. That is true, hut we can go further arni say that the to may (not must) tx* omitted if any qualifier negative or not. intervenes Im*-tween the ought and the main verb f ur instance ‘The police ought always Im* un lookout for muggers' or “Your rn wspaj>er ought no matter what the weather Im* delivered to your door •
Ward oddities In another sense ought (or aught) means zero That is aho t)i* meaning of nought (or naught! lf the beginning the word was nought out when people used all indefinite artI (ie ,m< id of if instead of av mg a nought f?n . tended to av an ought T I; j wa ti new word created one lhat i- now on a par with the old out
,»• * /iji• lif t
Ford question marks unsettle the worldBy James Reston
WASHINGTON - The relations between the United States and both the Soviet Union and China have changed in subtle ways since President Ford moved into the White House
Washington’s policy toward the two major communist states remains the same, but Moscow and Peking are being very cautious about Ford, who is a new figure on the world stage, and they are wondering what he's like. how long he will last. and who will succeed him
All the civilities and diplomatic courtesies of the last couple of years were extended to Secretary of State Kissinger in his latest mission to Moscow but progress toward the control of nuclear arms was slight at hest, and for obvious reasons.
Any really serious agreements to end the nuclear arms race could not begin to Im* effective for two or three years, and would limit the freedom of action of the major nuclear powers thereafter. But who would be President of the United States in three years? Ford, whom the Soviets don't know? Or maybe even “Scoop” Jackson, the Democratic senator from Washington, who is regarded in Moscow with almost as much suspicion as Mao Tse-tung and Chou En-lai?
So there is a pause now in the talks among the representatives of the big continental and nuclear nations Nobody knows what is going to happen after Ford in Washington or after the aged leaders in Peking. They are all willing to meet but not to decide, and particularly, not to lock themselves into long-range policies for a future nobody can foresee.
There is another change in the propaganda of both Moscow and Peking recently They seldom agree these days in their relations with one another, but lately they have been agreeing about the economic crisis in the capitalist world. Both have been dramatizing the problems of inflation in Europe*, the United States and Japan; the crises of colonial-
ism in Portugal, the transition from fascism to monarchy in Spain
Both also have been supporting the Arab oil states against the industrial capitalist states, and seeing in the “energy crisis” a new economic opportunity to weaken the free world, and a new strategic opportunity to blockade Fu-rope, Japan and even the United States at the sources of their oil and industrial power in the Middle Fast
Brezhnev, by all reports, was very tough on Kissinger in Moscow. He was hitter about Jackson's insistence on the immigration of 60,000 Jews a year from the Soviet Union to Israel. He was astonished that Jackson would Im* allowed to come out on the White House steps, and define, inaccurately, the compromise
Kissinger was furious about all this. Ford ignored it at first and finally had to correct it, but Kissinger had to deal with this political confusion in Washington when he got to Moscow
Ford. out campaigning for Republicans in the house and senate, is not really putting his mind to this world problem. He is looking for Republican scats in the house and senate, and arguing that somehow this will deal with these larger world questions.
The truth is that even his own cabinet. trying to deal with inflation, the balance of payments, the Russians and the Chinese, thinks he is not only wasting his time but raising doubts about his judgment
In the next two or three years, the leadership of the United States. China and probably the Soviet Union, is going to pass from the old generation to the new
In the United States, it may pass from Ford to Rockefeller, to Jackson, or even to a third-party conservative coalition of Reagan and Wallace. In China, it may even pass from the anti-Soviet leadership of Mao Tse-tung and Chou Fn-lai to a new military junta that will revive the Soviet-Chinese communist alliance against the West.
Nobody knows, so everybody is waiting. Kissinger hoped when he came to Washington that he was going to define and organize the arrangements of the coming world. But it is not working out exactly as he had hoped.
There is no political, economic or financial stability in tho world today.
The central political figures are insecure in Washington. Peking, Moscow. Tokyo, Lindon and most of the other major capitals. So everybody is waiting. Everybody is talking but not deciding. The Russians and the Chinese, just as much as the Americans, the Europeans, the Japanese, the Indians and the underdeveloped nations are struggling with their immediate problems
Last year, it seemed that the major powers were coming together on the control of arms and the avoidance of war. and they are still trying to do sn But on the problems of food. energy and population, and on the organization of a new order of the world, they are still deeply divided
In fact, the political trend now is toward division and confrontation. The communists are seeking economic disarray of the capitalist world as confirmation of their Marxist prophecies. The Jacksons and Reagans in America are swinging American politics toward
nationalism and anti communism, and the Russians and Chinese are watching all this with their usual skepticism.
The result is that no big deals about disarmament or anything else are likely to be made in the next few years with either the Russians or the Chinese or even the Europeans. They know that American power in the world is probably decisive, both economically and militarily, hut they don’t know how Ford is going to use that power or who is going to succeed him
So the Russians have been polite with Kissinger in Moscow, and the Indians will probably do the same in the next few days arid so will the Chinese when he goes to Peking later on. But nobody is in a mood now to make any long-range commitments
We are now in a holding-operation for the next few years. Waiting to find out who is going to come after the temporary leaders who now preside over the major capitals of the world.
New york Time* Service
Promoting calm acceptance
UFO reality as ‘alien spacecraft’ toutedBy Roscoe Drummond
WASHINGTON - UFOs are in the news again and with mounting evidence that they are real, not imaginary.
They will remain in the news because the time is getting nearer when the U. S. air force will have to abandon its longstanding tactic of concealment or be repudiated by the department of defense
Some degree of repudiation is already in the making
The evidence of this is contained in a revealing letter which Secretary of the Air Force John L. McLucas has just received from Maj Donald E Key hoe (retired), for 13 years director of the National Investigation Committee on Aerial Phenomena and author of the recently published book. “Aliens from Space — the Real Story of Unidentified Flying Objects".
Major Keyhoe’s letter discloses
I That “a startling UFO film. a doc
umentary prepared with defense department aid. contradicting past air force denials,” will soon be released for nationwide theater and television audiences.
2. That this documentary “contains hitherto classified film and convincing evidence (contrary to all air force disclaimers) that UFOs are alien spacecraft.”
3. That Col. W illiam T. Coleman, for several years the top air force debunker of all UFO sightings, is now ready to reveal an impressive UFO encounter which he himself had
On this point Maj details in his* letter:
Key hoe adds these
“As Coleman will disclose, he was piloting a B-25 bomber with two airmen aboard when a disc-shaped metallic craft suddenly approached the bomber
"If it had been hostile the crew could not have escaped — the UFO’s speed was too great But the spacecraft abruptly turned away. When Coleman went to full power for a closer look, the ITT) raced out of sight
“For years, under air force orders, Coleman continued to deny UFO reality and to ridicule witnesses His encounter was kept secret.”
In the forthcoming film, this coverup — familiar word — is discussed by Coleman himself, by two other retired air force UFO-debunkers, Ll. Cols Hector Quintella and Robert Friend, and also bv a former AF-UFO consultant, astronomer Allen J Hynck.
While the air force apparently still (lings to secrecy and denials of all
possibility of alien spacecraft surveillance of this planet, the defense department appears to Im* adopting a new tack It is either pursuing an independent policy on UFOs or quietly telling the air force that it better get in line.
Dr. Hynck. for example, confirmed the department of defense’s cooperation in producing the UFO documentary and praised it as “surprisingly good."
The film is produced by Allen F. Sandler and Robert Emmenacher. Unless the defense department has been cooperating in helping produce a document it disapproves — which seems unlikely — this film represents the first approved step toward revealing the long-concealed records of authentic UFO sightings
Major Keyhoes letter ends with a strong appeal to the air force secretary to take the lead in getting all the facts into the open and in preparing public opinion for a calm and realistic acceptance of UFOs.
Los Angeles Times SvncJirole
However brought on, departure justified
Election eve futility:whitewashing Nixon
By William F. Buckley, jr.
As the Watergate trial proceeds, subtle adjustments are being made on the narrow question of Richard Nixon’s simple guilt, as charged by the house of representatives
This is very important for the stability of the Republic, and we will all know. as we experience the political rhetoric in the closing days of the political election, whether the American people have. as a whole, accepted the fact of Richard Nixon’s guilt
A year ago. after the resignation of Spiro Agnew, there was something of an emotional convulsion among his supporters. But it was. from the beginning, internalized. There were no demonstrations in the streets, as for instance in protest against Truman’s firing of Mar Arthur 20 years ago The defense was too well organized, and events moved too fast Agnew resigned, the 40-page documentary attesting to his guilt was immediately published, his successor was named at a White House celebration at which Agnew s name was not even mentioned, and when Agnew was given his promised half hour on national television to insist on his innocence nobody much paid him any attention The symbol of his desolation came the next morning, when if transpired that President Richard Nixon had riot even bothered to listen to Mr Agnew A
broadcast He was too busy. entertaining
The mall suggests only these two residual reservations on the Nixon matter There are those who say that though it s apparently true that Nixon was guilty it was the special animus against Nixon that caught him up A Kennedy , or a Johnson would have got away with it. thev say
What is the appropriate answer to that charge? Surely that one can only encourage, not discourage, the cultivation of a special animus (a) against doing the kind of thing Mr. Nixon did; and (b) against thereupon insisting, in a series of television broadcasts to the na- a • *
tion, that he had not done such things. MUSI
The second line is that history will soon ignore the little foolishness of Watergate, and revere the great undertakings of President Nixon
What is the appropriate reply to that observation? Well. it depends of course on one s estimate of the undertakings of Richard Nixon There is the school of thought that says that history will ignore Nixon s Watergate, because it will he much too much preoccupied with Nixon’s inflation, and Nixon’s emasculating detente that led to the hegemony of the Soviet Union over Europe, and of the People’s Republic of China over Asia
But this — or its optimistic complement — is no answer, really, unless one
is willing to say that no President should Im* impeached for acts of lesser magnitude than those for which he is responsible as a statesman
What will Senator Dole Im* saying, during the last week of his perilous campaign in Kansas? Facing an audience of die-hard loyalists, what will he answer for instance to the question from the floor “Senator, don’t you think that the media showed a great bias against Richard Nixon?” Ile can answer here: “Yes, the media did show such a bias But" — he can coniine — “it wasn’t this bias that created the conversations di
vulged in the tapes.” It was the that led to his resignation.
W 11 VT We . el nill ut life i- iii dii• 11 |m11|HninHi in wIi.ii we put int*i it
III HBI It I ll I I IIM \\
And now you have John Ehrlichman. Nixon’s principal domestic adviser, taking the position in court that Nixon ordered him to disobey the law. And you have the special prosecutor telling tinwork! that before the trial is over, it will have been established beyond peradventure that Richard Nixon knew about Watergate within a matter of days after the commission, and began the coverup operation as of that moment
A recent poll asked Californians whom would they vote for in a senate race. Nixon against Tunney. Tunney won by 58 points. The public is through with Nixon And those who wished to stand by him only to protect him against impulses towards sadism — prosecuting him, and sending him to jail, for instance — feel released by Ford s pardon There are no outstanding obligations, they feel What he deserves now is privacy
It is only to torment hun to try lo keep alive the notion that he might not have lieen guilty, as charged bv the house judiciary committee, of crimes of such character as the founding fathers. who were not instruments of (TIS or the Washington Post. clearly designated as impeachable offenses
Witnhinylon Villi 'n min Clin