University of South Carolina Libraries
PAGE 2—The Newberry Sun, Newberry, S. C., Thursday, Sept. 26, 1968 nn 1218 College St., Newberry, S. C. 29108 PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY 0. F. Armfield, Jr., Owner "Whatsoever Things By DONALD E WILDMON Second-Class Postage Paid at Newberry, South Carolina SUBSCRIPTION RATES: Six Months $1.25. COMMENT on Men & Things By J. K. BKKKIUN I quote with hearty approval the following editorial from The Wall Street Journal: "Although everyone realizes that the activities of the Fed eral Government are mush rooming, relatively little at tention is paid to the nature and meaning of the growth— partly because it’s all so fast and helter-skelter that it in hibits analysis. Now the Tax Foundation has taken a crack at penetrating the maze. In a useful little pam phlet called ‘Growth Trends of New Federal Programs: 1955- 1%8', it comes up with find ings that ought to interest and alarm the citizenry. First, for an idea of the scope of the activity: ‘In the past seven years 78 new programs have been initiated, and 16 others were proposed in the budget message for fiscal 1968 submitted to the Congress in January 1967. The large maj ority have been put into oper ation in the period beginning in fiscal year 1965’. That does not count the numerous and substantial expansions of ear lier programs. ‘In the corresponding period of the 1950s,’ the study contin ues, ‘only about one-third as many new Federal activities were initiated.’ What are some of these bur geoning undertakings? In ad dition to the big, fresh forays into health, education and wel fare, they pretty much cover the waterfront. Everything from the Asian Development Hank to the Packers and Stock- yards Act, from Great Plains conservation to s u p e r s o n i c- transport development, from rural renewal to the Chamizal Memorial highway. You name it. Obviously certain ones are vastly more expensive than others, but none, from the view point <d the ordinary taxpayer, is exactly cheap. The Tax Foundation estimates the fiscal IPuS cost of just those new programs enacted in the past seven years at 89 billioh. If we take the full Id-year span sur- veyed in the report, the cumu lative cost of 119 new programs will total $84.8 billion by the end of the current 1968 fiscal year. The enterprises almost un failingly cost more as time goes by; initial figures are usually no guide at all to future out lays. For example, the Food for Freedom program, started in fiscal 1956 at about $121 million, is budgeted at $1.8 bil lion in fiscal 1968. And The National Aeronautics and Space Administration spent $89 mil lion in its first year, 1958; it will spend more than $5 billion this year. The F emulation study even discerns a general pattern char acterizing the growth of new programs: ‘Sharp increases in the first two years as the pro grams get into fuller operation, relatively modest increases in the third and fourth years, fol lowed by a steep jump of the $2.00 per year in advance. sort depicting major expansion or legislative extension of the program’. Small wonder the Tax Foun dation observes that the ‘ex penditure history of the new Federal programs set up in the period of this study sup ports the familiar thesis that new Federal Government activ ities, once under way, tradit ionally increase in scope and cost. Few are ever reduced in cost, and even fewer disappear.’ Small wonder, too, that ad ministrative chaos prevails. The projects are casually tossed on top of older ones, with scarcely any effort to examine the relationships among them or the effectiveness of any of them. Duplication, waste, gross inefficiency and mismanage ment are inevitable—so much so that a number of liberals, heretofore devout believers in FVderal omniscience, are de crying the trend. Many comments could, in deed, be made about this scan dalous condition. It is, for one, a fraud on the public, to which the Administration adds the in sult of demanding higher taxes without evidencing any inten tion of cleaning up the disorder which it perpetuates and inten sifies. But for the moment we will merely remark that the Gov ernment is bogging down. The people are not getting good Government; they are getting a Government that threatens to paralyze them in the grip of its own indiscriminate growth. As they used to say, wouldn’t that jar you? We seem to have government by special groups, plentiful out pouring of public money of one sort or another, frequently matters, plan, and so on, of no special benefit to the public. We are still freely spending for this, that and the other. And there are so many groups with free spending proclivities that we of the ordinary class don’t know what it's all about. How ma ,y men and women, their friends and children, ride on Government planes? How many Government officials and employees ride a few thousand miles on Government planes? Another thing: How many men and women now in Eng land, FVance, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Italy on Government pay? Why are they there? How many enjoy special per quisites because they have friends in the service, with the power to purchase things at special prices? Are we operating our services for the good of the service or for the special benefit of friends ? Of course living off the Gov ernment is not a new practice; is was the custom among the sailors operating the Ark al Ararat. But we are magnify ing and multiplying all the ave nues to the Government ex pense. "We talk about Guaranteed Income for everyone, whether he works or not. The British called the same thing The Dole, and it helped make FIngland Socialist and destroy the Brit ish empire. We complacently watch un ions demand and force un earned wage increases w h i e h destroy profits vital to national growth. That’s only one step from the Russians, who abol Let’s legalize prostitution. Now be fore your temperature rises, let me present my case. For judging from past experience, it has some valid ar guments. First of all, you can’t stop people from engaging in it. We have tried, and in many cases it has just made lawbreakers out of otherwise decent, law-abiding citizens. So if we legalize it, we could stop making criminals out of good, solid citizens. Next, we could place a tax on it. And we need money to educate our chil dren. Our schools are hurting for mon ey to provide good education for our children. People are going to do it and we cannot stop them from doing it. If they have to slip and hide to do it, they will. There is no possible way to stop it. So let’s make it legal, put a tax on it, and educate our children. We are letting millions of tax dollars, much needed, go down the drain every year that we wait about making it legal. If we could successfully stop people from doing it, then we would be the first to say let’s stop them. But it has been proven that we cannot stop them. All our present laws have pro ven ineffective. So let’s let them do it, legally, and get that much needed tax for our economy. Our children need those millions in our schools. We are letting them down! Next, by making it legal we would stop our law officers from “selling out.” For we all know that most of the law officers try hard for a while to stop it, but finally see that they cannot and end up selling out to the illegal prostitution traffic. We are making criminals out of our law of ficers by refusing to adjust to the situation. Of course, where there is a breakdown in our law enforcement, our communities begin to decay. So we are destroying good, wholesome, law-abid ing communities because of our failure to legalize prostitution. If we legalized it, law officers would have more time to enforce the law because they would not have to be bothered with prosti tution. Then again, we could bring it out in the open and stop making hypo crites out of our good citizens. For it is common knowledge that a large per centage of people engage in the activi ty, and by our refusal to legalize it we only make hypocrites out of those who engage in it. And by legalizing prostitution we could put government controls on it. We could require those who engage in it to fall under strict controls. Our laws could be rigidly enforced. We could rid our society of those who “bootleg” the product. We could stop the diseases that arise from prostitu tion by imposing strictly enforced health regulations. This would save our country millions in health ex penses arising from illegal prostitu tion. So our choice is between legal pros titution or illegal. Let’s make it legal. Well, that’s my argument. Silly and absurd, you say. It can’t be all that silly or absurd for we have already fell—hook, line, and sinker—for the exact same line from the liquor and gamblng industry. And legalized pro stitution will follow the same line. It could be nearer than we think. —Five Star Features ished profits in favor of the Workingman’s Soviet. We watch our central govern- mexit seizing more and more power, destroying the authority and self-respect of cities and states. That’s what Germany did—and out of it came Hitler. More and more of our income is taken in taxes to support in dolence by people who won’t work but who will support who ever gives the most from the public trough. That’s what sup ports Cuba’s Castro. Criminals are pampered, po lice attacked. Success is sus pect, poverty perpetuated. Gov ernment runs amok in spending money it doesn’t have, and in destroying thrift and hard-won security. All this is the very opposite of what built America. And, continued, this won’t be Amer ica long.” PROPERTY TRANSFERS Newberry No. 1 My ile II. Purcell to Lillie Ruth Gary, one lot on Benedict street $5. Newberry No. 1 Outside Ethel Alston to Hazel Alston Atchison and John W. Atchi son, one lot, $5 love and affec tion. Carolina W. Padgett et al to Newberry County, streets and court at Country Club $5. Cornelia F. Mayer et al to Duke Power Co., 13.3 acres. Whitmire No. 4 Reba Nance Scott to Leona N. Huff, one lot, $5 love am affection. HELP WANTED Skilled & unskilled; carpenters, electric ians, plumbers, sheet metal men, fina. finishers, needed for increased production. Start ing salary $1.60 and above, ac cording to ability and exper ience. Apply EMPRESS Homes KINARDS, S. C. Augl-3t Pomaria No. 5 Luther H. Spears Jr et a.l to Duke Power Co., strip of land $5.00. Louis W. Kinard et al to Sara K. Wicker, 5.8 acres, $5 and partition of real estate. Erin T. Kinard to Louis W. Kinard, 2 acres, $5 and parti tion of land. Little Mountain No. 6 Virginia A. Sandel et al to Charles Shealy, one lot $5’. THE INSURANCE AGENCY THAT GIVES YOU THE BEST SERVICE ON ANY TYPE OF RISK, BAR NONE. THAT'S US! “YOUR PRIVATE BANKERS” 1418 Main Street Phone 276-1422