The Clinton chronicle. (Clinton, S.C.) 1901-current, May 01, 1969, Image 10
4
*
m
Three Strikes And Out
We think it’s extremely obvious
90W that a majority of people who
(Hire willing to go to the polls do not
want a new courthouse in Laurens
* JCpunty.
The courthouse proposal took a
| third strike last week and we hope the
> issue is out for at least a couple of
| years,
> Three times during the past 18
•3 months Laurens County voters have
5 rejected various proposals calling for
$ a new courthouse. They have been of-
fjeped a variety of combinations and all
f; have been defeated.
Now the county’s legislative dele-
£ gation should take a good look at the
S present courthouse and take what-
z ever steps are necessary to see that it
is efficiently used. First priority
^ should be given to providing a
storage system and place for the
■' {bounty’s records. It has been pointed
•: out many times that a courthouse fire
:] could destroy many valuable county
records. Steps now must be taken to
:• protect those records.
Also, the delegation should look at
: : the current use of courthouse space.
There are several agencies in the
^!'ieourthouse w h i c h don’t necessarily
£ have to be there. Priorities should be
f given to those agencies which are di-
rsctly related to the courts. For ex-
i- ample, is it necessary for the County
: School Board offices, the Veterans
Service office, and the voter registrar
* ^k>n office be in the courthouse?
: Other county agencies, such as the
£ Welfare Department and County
| ^ Agent’s office, are located elsewhere
: and apparently do not suffer from
their location.
The delegation also should provide
a maintenance program for the pres
ent courthouse. It has fallen into a
poor state of repair at least partially
because of poor maintenance. Of
course, maintenance costs money but
it also saves money and the delegation
should provide the necessary oppropri-
atk>n to maintain the building.
Laurens County is going to have to
live with its present courthouse so
steps should be taken to see that we
get the best use from the building.
I
i:
ACCENTUATE THE
POSITIVE
A popular song of yesterday dealt,
as you may recall if you are in the
over-30 bracket, with accentuating
the positive to eliminate the nega
tive. Many people merely accepted
the song as an idle lyric, largely in
tended to entertain bobbysoxers.
Actually, there is a lot of sound
advice in the lyrics. It seems to us
j| we’ve been,'jggrcpwgg the negative too
ji often. In the pages of newspapers, on
" radio newscasts and telecast news as
c well as in private conversation. It is
z the duty of the news media to report
^ the events of the day in unbiased
♦ form. But there are means of telling
: the story in a positive way in many
: cases.
Here is an example: In 1967, a
: g r o u p of anti-war demonstrators
; marched in a New Jersey city. The
: marchers were, in the eyes of the edi-
: tor of the town newspaper, demoral-
* izing the men fighting in Vietnam.
} The town paper’s headline read as fol-
i lows:
346 ATTEND PEACE MAECH
I 23,438 DO NOT
This is an instance of what one
j might call a negative turned into a
? positive. The 436 marchers were as
s' signed their proportional place in the
ij scheme of things.
i
COSTLY VOTES
The box manager at Cook’s Store
has requested that the precinct be
closed and that voters there cast their
ballots either at Grays or Stewart's
Store in future elections.
Cook’s Store manager T. R. Patton
pointed out that only 13 persons voted
there in last week’s courthouse ref
erendum. A box manager and two as
sistants were required at the polling
place for a cost of $36, including $6
for mileage. Dividing the $36 cost by
the 13 who voted means that each
vote there cost $2.70.
Elections Commission Chairman
Joe Medlock has requested that the
County Leglislative delegation make a
survey to study the feasibility of dos
ing some of the precincts. We hope
the delegation will comply with Mr.
Medlock’s request This is an oppor
tunity to study the entire county pre
cinct system with an eye toward
bringing it up to date with some
economy-minded consolidations.
The precinct system was set up
years ago to make voting places ac
cessible to the voters and that is good.
However, times have changed. Peo
ple don’t walk or ride horses to the
polls any more. A few miles this
way or that doesn’t matter any more.
Cook’s Store is not an isolated ex
ample. Only seven ballots were cast
at Renno. At a cost of $36.40 to ope
rate the polling place last week, that
means it cost the county $6.06 per
Renno vote. Only eight people voted
at Dials ($4.04 per vote). Others
which should be studied are Meraa
(14), Tip Top (16), Waterloo (16),
Pleasant Mound (18), and Mount
Pleasant (19).
Of course, it could be that al
though some voting places don’t serve
many voters, they may be needed be
cause the area is comparatively iso
lated. This should be taken into con
sideration but the time has come to
give the entire system a thorough
study.
Wish I’d Said
That
An expert is a man who is
paid whether his advice turns
out good or bad.—Bill Trim
ble, The Ellicottville (New
York) Post.
It was only 25 years ago, we
were told that we weren’t as
smart as our parents. Today,
we are told we aren’t as smart
as our kids. Something must
have gone wrong some
where!—John Maverick, The
Cherryvale (Kans.) Republi
can.
Student For A Dumped Society
The Deficit Dogs
Tax-Exempt Bonds
BY BABSON’S REPORTS INC.
WELLESLEY HILLS, MASS.,-
Having recently completed their
annual accounting with state and
federal tax agencies, investors
are most conscious of taxes and
their effect on income. The high
er-bracket taxpayer is parti
cularly aware of the tax bite and
consequently should seek out op
portunities that will allow him
to retain more of his invest
ment income. Some will look at
oil ventures and cattle ranches,
which, while providing high ex
pense deductions, could prove to
be too risky for most investors.
It is at this point that consider
ation should be given to tax-
exempt municipal bonds.
Issued by cities, towns, and
other local governmental bodies,
“municipals* provide the funds to
carry out major municipal pro
jects. (One may also include in
this group municipal industrial
development bonds, issued to fi
nance commercial ventures with
in a community). Income from
such bonds has been exempt from
federal income taxes and also, in
some instances, from income
taxes of the issuing state. Hence
they bear a coupon rate lower
than corporate issues.
COUPON RATE VS. YIELD
A word about “yield.* Prices
for bonds are usually quoted in
terms of yield to maturity, which
is a reflection of coupon rate
and the length of time the bond
has to run to maturity. This also
translates into a dollar price for
the bonds. (Dollar price runs
counter to yield — as price de
clines, yield rises.) A bond
priced below par will have a
yield to maturity higher than its
coupon. Also, if held to maturity,
a portion of the proceeds could
represent a capital gain. Recent
ly the average corporate bond
yield, as expressed by Moody’s
averages, was 7.21%. On the same
date the average yield on muni
cipal bonds was 5.28%. This latter
rate would, in itself, seem high
ly favorable -- tax exempt! But
the advantage is even greater for
the higher-bracket taxpayer.
An investor in a 50% tax brack
et holding a municipal bond bear
ing a 4% coupon receives the e-
quivalent of an 7% return on a
taxable bored.
SELECTION
With the great number of state
and municipal subdivisions in
existence, there is obviously a
wide choice of municipal bonds
available. However, in selecting
an issue we must look beyond
the purpose of the issue, or even
the yield. While most municipal
bodies probably will not default
on their bonds, this has hap
pened. A measure of the quality
of a bond may be found in its
rating — usually Moody’s --
from highest AAA to the seldom
seen C. These ratings are es
sentially an evaluation of the
issuing body, based on a variety
of factors, roughly comparable to
an individual’s credit rating.
As might be expected, the bet
ter-rated issues will command
higher prices (and produce lower
yields) than those of lesser
quality. This is also true of the
bonds of a large, well-known
community, as compared with
those of a small community; the
bonds of the lesser-known issuer
will be less marketable, espec
ially It small or odd lots. In this
situation it is possible for an
investor to find himself forced to
hold bonds to maturity because
there is no ready market at real
istic prices.
Tax-exempt bond investments,
perhaps more than other types of
investment, must be person
alized. But we offer, as sugges
tions, a few issues which look
BY THURMAN SENSING
Executive Vice President
Southern States Industrial
Council
Nowhere has the tragedy of A-
merican higher education and ir
responsible and fearful leader
ship demonstrated itself more
clearly than in the case ol the
Harvard Corporatiixi, which runs
the university, yielding to the
demands of the extremist left-
wing Students for A Democratic
Society.
The Harvard Corporation gave
way in accepting a Harvard Uni
versity faculty proposal to re
duce the Reserve Officers Train-
mg Corps (ROTC) to an extra
curricular activity. This is pre
cisely what the SD6 had demand
ed in seizing the university’s
administration building and
sparking a student strike.
This appeasement of the SDS
is all the more shocking inas
much as Harvard is America’s
oldest university and long was
considered its finest education
al institution. This no longer can
be considered the case. A uni
versity that regards instruction
in defense of the United States
of America as no more than an
extra-curricular activity cer
tainly is not entitled to respect
and does not stand for the moral
values that underlie a free so
ciety.
The ROTC is an institution
that every college and university
should be proud to have on its
campus. Without ROTC, the Unit
ed States would have had an ex
tremely difficult time finding the
officers necessary to lead the
countless formations fielded in
defense of American freedom in
World War n, and Korea, for in
stance. The service academies
cannot begin to supply the number
of officers needed in times of
national emergency.
The American people, viewing
the action of the Harvard Cor
poration and faculty, have no
choice but to conclude that love
of country, faith in American in
stitutions--patriotism, in a word,
has been terribly eroded at Har
vard. Who now would want to send
a son to Harvard? What would be
learn there? Certainly, there is
no evidence that be would learn
love for this great Republic or
gain any understanding of the im
portance of service to his coun
try.
Some of the radicals involved
in protests at Harvard have ex
pressed resentment of defense
studies conducted at the di
versity and at other colleges.
Perhaps the time has come to
attractive to the Babson’s Re
ports staff. First is the Illi
nois Toll 4-3/4’s of 1998, yield
ing 5.05% to maturity. Second
is the Fairfax County, Va. Water
Authority 5’s of 2007, yield
ing 5.2 %. Also, we like the Aus
tin, Texas School District 4.90%
of 1991, yielding 5.25%.
remove defense studies from’
Harvard and other institutions
where patriotism seems to be
discounted and to transfer the
study programs to other insti
tutions where American values
are cherished and where there is
an environment of faith in the
United States.
Indeed it may be time for the
Congress to consider stripping
all federal aid from Harvard and
other institutions that demon
strate they will not stand by A-
merica in its hour of danger.
It is unlikely that many pa
triotic citizens, reading of the
downgrading of the ROTC, will
want their tax dollars to be
channeled to Harvard for any pro
gram whatsoever or under any
conditions. If Harvard won’t treat
the ROTC with the dignity and
respect it deserves, then a good
case can be made that Harvard
doesn’t deserve a dollar in fed
eral assistance. Let other in
stitutions, where patriotism is
cherished, have the benefit of the
federal activities.
Fortunately, the U.S. is not
without academic leaders who are
willing to condemn current trends
and developments at Harvard. Dr.
S. I. Hayakawa, president of em
battled San Francisco State Col
lege, has spoken out against the
Harvard faculty for failing to
support use of the police against
campus hoodlums. ‘A bunch of
kids come in," be said, “and
bodily carry out the dean. They
occupy the building and start ri
fling secret files. That’s the time
and place to call the cops." He
pointed out, however, that the
faculty wouldn’t support use of
police. Dr. Hayakawa accused the
Harvard faculty of 'deep-rooted
prejudice" against policemen.
It is tragic that university
trustees or faculty members
should condone violence by radi
cal students but instantly con
demn use of lawful force by po
licemen. The trustees and facul
ty members in effect uphold mob
rule.
Something is very wrong with
an “intellectual” who adopts such
a double-standard, who has such
a distorted psychological reac
tion. The Harvard decision re
flects a sick academic society,
an appeasement of brutal and
irrational elements. Something,
obviously, must be wrong with a
Harvard "education” if basic lo
gic and basic values ol a law-
abiding society are rejected by
professors and trustees.
Americans cannot overlook the
seriousness ol the sickness from
which Harvard is suffering. It
needs to be dealt with before it
reaches epidemic proportions.
Harvard Yields!
2-B—THE CHRONICLE, Clinton, S. C., May 1, 1969
SENATOR STROM
THURMOND
REPORTS TO THE
PEOPLE
A FRIENDSHIP CORPS
In the current discussions
about the problems of poverty,
one would think that this nation
is purposely neglecting the
needy. The welfare expenditures
of this nation do not support
such criticism. It is no secret
that in the past eight years, the
combined public assistance pay
ments by Federal, State and local
governments have more than
doubled.
WELFARE DOUBLED
In 1960, the combined total
was a little more than $4 billion.
The Federal government paid
60.8 percent of the total. In 1968,
the combined total of all levels
of government was $9.8 billion
for welfare. These figures in
clude all the Federal-State pro
grams of Old Age Assistance,
Aid to the Blind, Aid to the Per
manently and Totally Disabled,
and Aid to Families with De
pendent Children.
We are spending ten tines as
nuch on welfare today as we did
in the depths of the Great De
pression.
The dramatic increase in wel
fare payments at a time when
the nation is enjoying wide
spread prosperity leads to many
questions. Many psople are won
dering how much of this money
actually gets past the Washing
ton bureaucrats and into the
hands of those who are supposed
to benefit Another question is
why there should be more people
on welfare in a time of pros
perity than in a time of great
need.
CASE LOAD
The goal of this nation should
be to make people productive and
get them off welfare, not to
double the load. In some cate
gories, the caseload has been
declining. For example. Old Age
Assistance has declined from 2.8
million recipients in 1949 to only
2 million today.
On the other hand, the program
known as Aid to Families with
Dependent Children (AFDC)
benefits about six million recip
ients today, and costs the tax
payer $2.9 billion, or three times
what it did in 1961. Moreover,
there has been a fundamental
change in the nature of the case
load for AFDC. Originally, the
major reason for AFDC was the
death of the father. Today, the
major reason for AFDC has been
the absence of the father. In
addition, today 45 percent of. the
caseload is concentrated in Jnst
five States; namely, California,
Illinois, New York, Pennsyl
vania, and Ohio.
These figures reflect the migra
tion to big industrial States, the
increased militancy in seeking
benefits, and the growing cycle
of dependency. One certainly can
raise questions about a system
in which children are bom into
welfare and never have a chance
to become productive citizens.
The system that was meant to
provide stability for families
without wage earners has re
sulted instead in the breakup of
normal family life.
HELP YOUR NEIGHBOR
This is why President Nixon
in his Inaugural Address called
for volunteer workers to'join in
a “help your neighbor program.”
The President said: “To match
the magnitude of our tasks, we
need the energies of our people
—enlisted not only in grand en
terprises, but more importantly,
in those small, splendid efforts
that make headlines in the neigh
borhood newspaper instead of
the national journals.”
The President would like to
see millions of Americans be
come volunteers in s Friendship
Corps that would help bring the
disadvantaged and the disilln-
sioned back into the mainstream
of American society. A recent
Gallup poll showed that some 69
million people stand ready to
answer this call. The poll indi
cated that the typical volunteer
would be willing to donate fonr
hours per week of his time for
such an effort. Six persons in
every ten in the sample indicated
a willingness to help. Signifi
cantly, interest in serving is
greatest among oar young peo
ple, those in their twenties.
The President’s plan utilizes
the talents of the most resource
ful people in the world—the
average American citizen—and
this great talent would be used
for the benefit of all people at
no cost to the taxpayer.
iiw niK* uj nnnifM
TIME FOR TAXPAYERS TO WAKE UP
Employed Americans will work two and a half
hours every day in 1969 (a total of 650 hours) to
pay their federal, state and local tax bills. The 10
percent surtax last year accounted for a big jump
in federal taxes. Of course, state and local taxes
are climbing, too. Federal corporate and individual
income tax receipts are expected to reach $122 bil
lion in the twelve months beginning July 10.
In 1932, these receipts were slightly more than
$1 billion; by 1940 the figure had doubled. In
1950 federal income tax receipts reached $26 bil
lion, and were $54 billion in 1959. In 1968 receipts
had nearly quadrupled the 1950 level . . . with no
relief in sight!
The average American’s tax load has increased
drastically over the years. In 1902, all taxes —
federal, state and local — came to $18 per capita.
In 1948, the figure was $377 and by 1958, $628.
For 1969 the estimated tax hill, federal, state and
local, will be $1,230 for every man, woman and
child in the United States, according to the Tax
Foundation, Inc.
It’s time to rediscover fiscal sanity — by insisting
on redaction in non-essential public expenditures
at every level — federal, state and local.
The only way this can be accomplished is for tax
payers to demand action and keep the pressure on
until they receive satisfaction.