New Braunfels Herald Zeitung Newspaper Archives

- Page 4

Issue Date:
Pages Available: 18

About New Braunfels Herald Zeitung

  • Publication Name: New Braunfels Herald Zeitung
  • Location: New Braunfels, Texas
  • Pages Available: 250,382
  • Years Available: 1952 - 2013
Learn More About This Publication


  • 2.17+ 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!
Find Your Ancestors Now

View Sample Pages : New Braunfels Herald Zeitung, March 28, 1996

Get Access to These Newspapers Plus 2.17+ Billion Other Articles

OCR Text

New Braunfels Herald Zeitung (Newspaper) - March 28, 1996, New Braunfels, Texas 4 □ Herald-Zeitung O Thursday, March 28,1996 Opinion ■ To talk with Managing Editor Doug Loveday about the Opinion page, call 625-9144, ext. 21 H e Z e i t u * n g Opinion Onlino contact ■ To submit letters and guest columns electronically by way of online services or Internet, or to simply contact staff members, the Herald-Zeitung’s address is “Falsifiers of history do not safeguard freedom but imperil it” — Vaclav Havel Czech president, 1990 EDITORIALPuzzled in Jordan, Mont. Federal agents again find themselves in standoff with anti-government forces The reaction of a majority of ranchers in the Jordan, Mont. area to the appearance of federal officers outside the anti-government “freemen” compound has been relief. The freemen, a group of men, women and children who refuse to acknowledge the federal or local government, had refused to pay taxes or overdue bank loans. They’ve also threatened anyone who might encroach on their 960-acre property, which they call Justus Township — and that includes law enforcement officers. Neighbors and ranchers have been told by the freemen to keep their livestock off the freemen property, or else. And they could very well back up their threats because neighbors have stated the group is heavily armed. Some members of the group are also facing federal and state charges, including threatening to kidnap and murder a federal judge. Yet federal law enforcement agencies have moved slowly, hoping to keep a tense situation from escalating into violence similar to that at the Ruby Ridge, Idaho standoff in 1992. U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno is also playing it safe after enduring Congressional hearings about that standoff and the disaster at the Branch , Davidian compound in Waco. Yet, despite the arrest of two of the Freemen leaders, federal agents are again toting rifles outside an armed compound full of defiant people. Justus Towp^hip’s neighbors have endured the threats and belligerent actions of the Freemen, and many are actually noping for a bloody end to the standoff. The Associated Press quoted one Jordan ranch hand, Terry Kastner, as saying; “They’re so ... brainwashed. I wish they’d go in there and shoot ’em all. It would save the taxpayers a lot of money and time.” Unfortunately, many believe that is the only possible end to this conflict. Which begs the question: After Waco and Ruby Ridge, why hasn’t the government learned its lessons? If federal agents are going to continue to enforce this nation’s laws, then they had better learn to deal with the increasing number of anti-govem-ment groups. Being anti-government is not a cnme. But if these people break the law, they should be punished like everyone else. Now to figure out the best and safest way to go about doing that. (Today s editorial was written by Managing Editor Doug Loveday.) Write us ... The New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung welcomes letters on any public issue. The editor reserves the right to correct spelling, style, punctuation and known factual errors. Letters should be kept to 250 words. We publish only original mail addressed to the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung bearing the writer's signature. Also, an address and a telephone number, which are not for publication, must be included. Please cite the page number and date of any article that is mentioned. Preference is given to writers who have not been published in the previous 30 days. Mail letters to: Letters to the Editor do the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung P.O. Drawer 311328 New Braunfels, Texas 78131-1328 Fax: (210) 625-1224 New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung Editor and Publisher............................................................David    Sullens Managing Editor...........................................................Doug    Loveday Retail Advertising Director..............................................Jack    Osteen Accounting Manager........................................................Mary    Lee Hall Circulation Director....................................................Carol    Ann    Avery Pressroom Foreman...........................................................Billy    Parnell City Editor.....................................................................Roger    Croteau Published on Sunday mornings and weekday mornings Tuesday through Friday by the New Braunfels Herald Zeitung CUSPS 377-880) 707 Landa St., or P.O. Drawer 311328, New Braunfels, Comal County, Tx. 78131-1328. Second class postage paid by the New Braunfels Herald Zeitung in New Braunfels, Texas Camer delivered in Comal and Guadalupe counties: three months. $20 50; six months. $37; one year, $66. Senior Citizen Discounts by carrier delivery only: six months, $33; one year, $62. Mail delivery outside Comal County in Texas: three months, $30.30; six months, $55; one year, $103.50. Mail outside Texas: six months, $78; one year, $118.25. Subscribers who have not received a newspaper by 5:30 p.m. Tuesday through Friday or by 7:30 a m. on Sunday may call (210) 625-9144 or by 7 pm weekdays or by 11 a m on Sunday. Postmaster: Send address changes to the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung, P.O. Drawer 311328, New Braunfels, Tx. 78131-1328.Spend now, pay later plans flawed This Congress has worked to end a quarter-centu-ry of higher taxes, spending and deficits. The Balanced Budget Act is the first step. But balancing the budget is just the beginning. We must also make sure that our spending priorities are fair and balanced to our children and future generations. We must put our children first. For the past 30 years, Washington has adopted “spend now, pay later” budgeting that put our children last. Our addiction to big government has produced an economic time bomb that, unless diffused, will explode on our children and grandchildren. If we continue the status quo big-spending policies, our children will have to pay a net tax rate of 84 percent throughout their lifetimes. This tax explosion would destroy their jobs, decimate their economic opportunities, and prevent future generations of American families from making decisions for themselves and their communities. Washington’s “spend now, pay later” policy is economic self-destruction. The ultimate “something for nothing” is when politicans make campaign promises now, only to leave the bills for their promis es to our children. Every promise made, every dollar that a member seeks to spend, every program that a government official wants to start, will have to be paid for by taking money away from American families. Because of the promises and programs of the past 30 years, we’re on the verge of more than doubling the tax bur-, den for future generations. I recently introduced legislation that exposes the economic folly of “spend now, pay later.” The Children’s Right to Know Act will require that budgets be analyzed using “generational accounting.” That will hold the president and Congress accountable for the level of taxes future generations will have to pay to support current levels of spending. Once we expose “something for nothing” spending policies, and their true threat to our children’s Lamar Smith prosperity, we can end “spend now, pay later” for good. A balanced budget is a good first step — although it’s a first step that we cannot take because of the veto pen in President Clinton’s hand. But to achieve real balance, our budget must do more than just elminate red ink. A balanced budget also requires fairness for future generations — equity for our children and granchildren. \ Earlier this year, even as he vetoed the first balanced budget in more than 25 years, President Clinton proclaimed an end of the era of big government. But talk is cheap. Unless we act to change our policies and soon — future generations will face an era of big government and high taxes that suffocate their jobs, dreams and opportunities. We must commit to a budget that is balanced for all generations and to an end of “something for nothing.” I believe that the Children’s Right To Know Act is the first step.    { (Lamar Smith is a Republican congressman who represents the 21st District in Texas.) He was supposed to Ice road Kill/ so,now wtordo wedo? S '.HI QM/ltfl£erj*ncttM*r*enu»ci Congress forcing Clinton veto of abortion bill By DAVID ESPO Associated Press WriterAnalysis WASHINGTON (AP) — Legislation to ban certain late-term abortions is headed for the White House and a threatened veto as congressional Republicans present President Clinton with a difficult election-year choice. The measure gained final approval Wednesday night on a House vote of 286-129, a lopsided majority that testified to bipartisan opposition to a procedure dubbed “partial-birth abortion” by its foes. At the same time, abortion rights supporters made clear they want the veto the White House has previously threatened “We urge President Clinton to veto this legislation and preserve the ability of women and their physicians to make sound medical judgments free of political interference,” said Jane Johnson, interim president of Planned Parenthood Final passage of the measure came after two hours of debate that was charged both politically and emotionally. Rep. Charles Canady, R-Fla., the chief backer of the bill, said a Clinton veto “will demonstrate he is an extremist on abortion, using any procedure imaginable He’s saying there are no limits. There are no restraints ” “Do your politics on some other issue,” said Rep Zoc Lofgren, a California Democrat. “It’s not going to be an issue ;n campaigns,” added Rep. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "Believe me, it’s too arcane and too gruesome.” The rarely used procedure, which is a variation of more traditional abortions, is referred to by some doctors as “intact dilation and evacuation.” It involves partiallyToday In History By The Associated Press Today is Thursday, March 28, the 88th day of 1996. There are 278 days left in the ye tr. Today’s Highlight in History: On March 28, 1979, America’s worst commercial nuclear accident occurred inside the Unit Two reactor at the Three Mile Island plant near Middletown, Pa. On this date: In 1797, Nathamel Briggs of New Hampshire patented a washing machine. In 1834, the U.S. Senate voted to censure President Jackson for the removal of federal deposits from the Bank of the United States. In 1854, during the Crimean War, Britain and France declared war on Russia. In 1896, the opera “Andrea Chenier,” by Umberto Giordano premiered in Milan, Italy. In 1930, the names of the Turkish cities of Constantinople and Angora were changed to Istanbul extracting a fetus, legs first, through the birth canal, then draining the skull’s contents or squeezing the skull so the head will fit through the birth canal. In House debate, several supporters of the bill described the procedure in graphic detail, and displayed oversized illustrations that showed a fetus, legs dangling, at the moment of abortion. “It’s not a termination of a pregnancy, it’s an extermination of a defenseless little life," said Rep Henry Hyde, R-lll. The measure provides an exception to the ban in cases in which the procedure is essential to save the life of the mother. Otherwise, a doctor performing such an operation may be subject to fines and a prison term of up to two years, as well as be vulnerable to civil penalties. The bill marks the first time that Congress has passed a law to ban a specific abortion procedure since the landmark 1973 Supreme Court ruling that granted a woman (he nght to choose. Outnumbered opponents in the House said the measure was the first step in a full-scale assault by Republicans on the court ruling, and would give the government an unwarranted role in private health matters Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., called it "another step on the road to the back alley.” House passage came with support of 214 Republicans and 72 Democrats — more than the two-thirds of those voting that is needed to ovemde a veto. Opposed were 113 Democrats, 15 Republicans and one independent. Senate passage last year came on a narrower 54-44 and Ankara. In 1939, the Spanish Civil War ended as Madrid fell to the forces of Francisco Franco. In 1941, novelist and critic Virginia Woolf died in Lewes, England. In 1942, during World War U, British naval forces raided the Nazi-occupied French port of St. Nazaire. In 1943, composer Sergei Rachmaninoff died in Beverly Hills, Calif. In 1969, the 34th president of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, died in Washington at age 78. In 1978, a nuclear chain reaction began inside the Unit Two reactor at Three Mile Island. In 1982, voters in El Salvador went to the polls for a constituent assembly election that resulted in victory for the Christian Democrats, led by President Jose Napoleon Duarte. Ten year* ago: Libyan leader Moammar Gad-hafi presided over a rally in which he proclaimed victory over the United States in a just-ended confrontation in the Gulf of Sidra. (The demonstrators danced around, then killed, a black-and-white ox vote — not enough to override a veto. While White House aides have threatened a veto, Clinton’s most recent public pronouncement listed a series of objections to the bill but did not include an explicit veto threat. In a letter to key lawmakers last month, the president said he had “studied and prayed” on the subject, and wanted the bill changed to allow exemptions designed “to preserve the life of the woman or avert serious health consequences to the woman.” Without the changes, he wrote, the bill “does not meet the constitutional requirements” laid down in the Supreme Court’s 1973 ruling. Clinton’s call for an exemption for cases involving the health of the mother was rejected during Senate debate, 51-47. In the House, Republicans used their majority power to deny Democrats the opportunity to offer the proposal for a vote. Of the nation’s 1.3 million abortions in 1993, about 13,300 were performed after the 21st week of gestation, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But there are no official statistics on the use of the “intact dilation and evacuation" method. An aboirion rights group estimates it at 500; opponents estimate many more than that Abortion rights supporters say late-term abortions, in the second or third trimester of pregnancy, typically are done only in cases of profound fetal difficulty such as anencephaly, in which the fetus lacks all or a major part of its brain. But supporters of the legislation say women sometimes simply opt for late-term abortions. with the name “Reagan” written on it.) Five years ago: Tens of thousands of supporters of Boris N. Yeltsin marched in Moscow in defiance of President Mikhail S. Gorbachev’s ban on rallies. Fire seriously damaged the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. Former President Reagan declared his support for the so-called “Brady Bill” requiring a seven-day waiting period for handgun purchases. One year ago: In Japan, Mitsubishi Bank and the Bank of Tokyo agreed to a merger to create the world’s largest bank. Today’s Birthdays: Former Secretary of State Edmund S. Muskie is 82. Former White House national security adviser Zbigniew Bizezinski is 68. Sen. Frank Murkowski, R-Alaska, is 63. Actor Ken Howard is 52. Actress Dianne Wiest is 48. Country singer Reba McEntire is 41. Thought for Today: “lf you do not tell the truth about yourself you cannot tell it about other people.” — Virginia Woolf (1882-1941). ;