Page 2
P o rtla n d /O b s e rv e r
Thursday June 7, 1973
WE SEE THE WORLD
SUPPCMC COURT AFFIRMS
RICHMOND DESEGREGATION
PLAN UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
THROUGH BLACK EYES
mml
NUDINO
ALFRED LEE HENDERSON
EDITOR/PUBUSHER
Editorial focus
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■J
No quotas from Nixon
The q u e s tio n o f q uo ta s has a g a in co m e to
a tte n tio n as R oger K e lle y, re tirin g assistant secre
ta ry o f d e fe n s e fo r m a n p o w e r, said th e re w ill be
no ra c ia l q uo tas in the m ilita ry . This is a w e lc o m e
sta te m e nt to m a n y persons w h o a g re e w ith the
N ixo n A d m in is tra tio n th a t th e re sh o u ld be no a t
te m p t to g u a ra n te e o p p o rtu n itie s fo r m in o ritie s in
the va rio u s fie ld s o f e m p lo y m e n t.
M ost Black p e o p le w h o h ave b e e n in v o lv e d in
the stru g g le fo r e q u a l o p p o rtu n ity in e m p lo y m e n t
a n d e d u c a tio n a re n ot so o p p ose d to quotas.
It
w as o n ly th ro u g h th e im p o s itio n o f quotas,
e n fo rc e d by th e th re a t o f w ith d ra w a l o f fe d e ra l
m o n e y , th a t Blacks w e re a llo w e d to e n te r m an y o f
th e trades a n d professions. It w as o n ly because o f
the im p o s itio n o f quo tas th a t Blacks w e re a llo w e d
a n d e n c o u ra g e d to a tte n d th e b e tte r schools.
It
w as o n ly because o f th e im p o s itio n o f quotas that
Blacks w e re p ro m o te d to positions s o m e w h a t com -
m e n so ra te w ith e d u c a tio n a nd a b ility .
So Blacks d o not fe a r quotas. W e re a liz e th a t if
Black p e o p le a n d o th e r m in o ritie s w e re a llo w e d a
tru e e q u a l o p p o rtu n ity in e d u c a tio n , in housing
a n d e n v iro n m e n t, in h e a lth care, in e co n o m ic
pursuits, th e re w o u ld be no need fo r quotas. The
p ercen ta ge s in e m p lo y m e n t a n d th e professions
w o u ld a p p ro x im a te the p e rc e n ta g e in the g e n e ra l
p o p u la tio n .
A typ ica l excuse a p p e a re d in a lo ca l w h ite
d a ily . . . " I t w o u ld c e rta in ly slo w th e g a m e to
a p p ly a 13.5 p e rce n t Black q uo ta to p ro fe ssio n a l
b a s k e tb a ll." O f course this is rid ic u lo u s — w e
speak o f b ro a d p e rce n ta g e s a nd th e im p lie d
o p p o rtu n ity -- n ot d e c im a l points.
O r let us
carry it o ne step fa r t h e r . . . lim it th e troops in the
fro n t lin e tren che s a nd th e b a ttle ca sua ltie s to 13.5
p ercen t Black.
Portland schools immune
On M a y 21st th e U n ite d States S uprem e C ourt
a ffirm e d the d e cisio n o f the Fourth C ircu it C ourt o f
A p p e a ls, h a ltin g the d e s e g re g a tio n o f the Rich
m on d, V irg in a schools.
D ese gre ga tion by c o m
b in in g the m a jo rity Black city schools w ith m a jo rity
w h ite su b u rb a n schools had b ee n o rd e re d by a
lo w e r court. The d e cisio n w as a c tu a lly a 4 to 4 tie,
w h ich d id n o t d e c id e th e m erits o f m e tro p o lita n
d e se g re g a tio n .
A ll o f this is a p p a re n tly o f no conse qu en ce to
P ortland -- since th e P ortland P ublic Schools
have
not b e e n
e ffe c te d
by
p re v io u s court
decisions.
It m ig h t seem
strange,
but
P o rtlan d
has
re m a in e d im m u n e to th e " la w o f th e la n d " .
The court has fo u n d " fre e d o m o f c h o ic e " to be
u n c o n s titu tio n a l, b ut it is used in P ortland.
Both
Black a nd w h ite paren ts can tra n sfe r th e ir c h ild re n
to o th e r schools, su p p o se d ly to p ro m o te , b ut a lso to
a vo id , d e se g re g a tio n .
O n e -w a y b u sin g has bee n fo u n d to be u n c o n
s titu tio n a l since it p laces th e b u rd e n u n fa irly on
Black c h ild re n a n d parents. Yet o n e -w a y busing is
the o n ly fo rm o f " d e s e g re g a tio n " p ra ctice d by the
P ortland P ublic Schools.
As a re su lt w e fin d m o re se g re g a tio n in the
p u b lic schools in P ortland th a n th e re w as w h e n the
B ro w n d e cisio n w as re a ch e d in 1954, or w h e n
Black P ortland b e g a n ta lk in g a b o u t school s e gre
g a tio n in 1962.
Yes P ortland seem s im m u n e to th e la w , fo r th e
o n ly p la ns w e h ea r a b o u t is th e u ltim a te g o a l to
close the A lb in a schools a n d send th e c h ild re n w h o
liv e h ere o u t to o th e r schools.
C le a rly this is
u n c o n s titu tio n a l, a cc o rd in g to p re vio u s co u rt fin d
ings.
The p u b lic school a d m in is tra tio n has b e e n sittin g
on this p la n fo r tw o years, re p o rte d ly w ith the
m o n e y a v a ila b le to in itia te it, w a itin g fo r the rig h t
m o m e n t to sp rin g it on us.
MEMBER
NÊW pn A PER
Astocialion - Foundad 1885
I’ ubltsled e v e ry Thursday by E xle Publishing Company, 2201
N . Killlngsw ortb, Portland, Oregon 97217. M ailin g address,
P .O . Box 3137, Portland, Oregon 97208
Subs nptions $5.25 p er y e a r - T ri-C o u n ty a re a , $ 6 .0 0 per year
- outside Portland.
Iclepbone, 283-2486.
Second Class Postage Paid a t P ortland, O reg on
T t * O bserver's official position is expressed only In itr
P u b lis h er’ s Column (The O bservation Post) and the E d ito r's
lie s k . Any other m a M rla l throughout the paper is the opinion
of the individual w r l a r o r sub m itter and does not necessarily
re fle c t the opinion of the o b s e rv e r.
■
:
What other Black
Papers say
;
!
[From the L o u isville D e fe n d e r]
A t a tim e w h e n p u b lic c o n fid e n c e in the W h ite
House is at an a ll tim e lo w . a nd also w h e n the
W a te rg a te e s p io n a g e is e x p lo d in g b e y o n d a n y
o th e r n a tio n a l g o v e rn m e n t scandal, it b e h o o ve s the
N ix o n A d m in is tra tio n to c o m p ly w ith b o th fe d e ra l
court orders, w h ic h insist that he a p p ro p ria te
h ig h w a y fu n d s a n d th a t he not d is m a n tle OEO.
The d iffe re n c e b e tw e e n the tw o signs w as th a t
th e h ig h w a y case w as a rg u in g th a t C ongress is the
o n ly o n e th a t can stop the d isb u rse m e n t o f fu nd s
a n d n ot the W h ite House.
They a lso c la im th a t
u nd ue harm had b ee n d o n e to thousands o f re s i
dents in M a ry la n d because o f th e fu n d s b e in g
im p o u n d e d in d ire c t c o n tra d ic tio n to the la n g u a g e
o f the le g is la tio n .
In the OEO case, la w y e rs fo r fh e p o v e rty
p ro gram s e ffe c tiv e ly c la im e d in an "e m p lo y e e s
s u it" th a t a tre m e n d o u s a m o u n t o f p s y c h o lo g ic a l
a nd p hysical h arm w as b e in g d o n e to th e w o rk e rs
in the p o v e rty p ro g ra m by h a v in g th e ir fu nd s im
p o u n d e d a nd the D irector instru cted by N ix o n to
d is m a n tle a ll o f the o ffic e s in W a s h in g to n , as w e l
as a ll re g io n a l o ffic e s a nd loca l CAP a g e n cie s
n a tio n a lly by June 30, 1973.
The suit c o n te n d e d th a t any d is m a n tlin g o f OEO
w as c o n tra ry to the 1972 OEO a p p ro p ria tio n s b ill
th a t Congress passed last ye ar w ith the expressed
la n g u a g e th a t OEO w as not be d is m a n tle d , d e c e n
tra liz e d or te rm in a te d in a n y fa s h io n .
The law
w e n t a h e a d to p o in t o u t that fu nd s w e re v o te d and
set a sid e fo r a c o n tin u a tio n o f the a g e n c y u n til
fisca l 1975.
W h a t fe d e ra l ju d g e W illia m Jones said was:
" A n a d m in is tra to r's re s p o n s ib ility to carry o ut the
C on gre ssio na l o b je c tiv e s o f a p ro g ra m does not
g iv e h im th e p o w e r to d is c o n tin u e that p ro g ra m ,
e s p e c ia lly in the fa ce o f a C on gre ssio na l m a n d a te
to c o n tin u e the p ro g ra m ."
A d m in is tra tio n la w y e rs are saying th a t m a n y o f
th e th o rn y le g a l issues in v o lv in g im p o u n d m e n t o f
fu nd s a n d o th e r a d m in is tra tiv e actions u ltim a te ly
w ill reach the S uprem e C ourt.
They are correct in this assum ptio n b ut fhe
D e fe n d e r b e lie v e s th e y w ill lose also at this le v e l.
N o court, reg ardle ss o f fhe o rig in o f som e o f it's
judges, is g o in g to ta m p e r w ith the h isto rica l
b a la n c e o f p o w e r in w h ic h the fo u n d in g fa th ers
very c le a rly s p e lle d out th e fu n c tio n s a nd responsi-
b ilite s o f each branch o f g o v e rn m e n t in the
c o n s titu tio n .
There a re at least 15 le g a l cases
a lre a d y on the books to su pp ort this p o s itio n a nd
w e c a n n o t see the S uprem e C ourt g o in g a ga in st
these le g a l p recedents.
N o President has ever
crea ted as m a n y C o n s titu tio n a l crises as N ix o n .
The o th e r im p ra c tic a l aspect o f th e W h ite
H ouse's strategy is th a t a t the present tim e these
fe d e ra l court ru lin g s can be e x p a n d e d on to a ffe c t
o th e r a d m in is tra tio n decisions to im p o u n d funds
and d is m a n tle o th e r program s. W e w e lc o m e the
case b e fo re the S uprem e C ourt because it m ay
p e rm a n e n tly put an e nd to N ix o n 's e ffo rt to im
p o u n d or d is m a n tle p ro gram s he d isa pp rove s o f
p rim a rily because th e y do n ot have his p ersonal
p o litic a l la b e l.
PEW CAN PRETEND TO HAVE FORESEEN HOW
THE NATION THAT RESPONDED TO THE CIVIL R IP U T O
ELOQUENCE OF PRKIN6-AMD LYNDON JOHNSON-
W0DLD PE6RESS IN THE NITON EttAT
JAMES A WECHSLER NE POST
Scrapping Desegregation ? ? ?
I
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Fishing trip brings fines
To Whom It May concern.
On May 5. 1973 I decided
to get my Fiancee a fishing
license and take her fishing
somewhere close.
We decided to check the
*7.'fcsynopsis oi> fishing regu
lations, or should I say, she
did. fn doing so, she read
winter regulations and it was
th o ro u g h ly m isunderstood.
So we decided on Eagle
Creek in Estacada.
While
driving on the road along
Eagle Creek, we noticed quite
a few cars and thought that
this would be a good spot.
NO TIM E FOR EDITORIAL COMMERCIALS
By Ron Hendren
W A S H IN G T O N -T h e Supreme Court last
week lent its support to radio and tele
vision broadcasters in deciding that
neither the Constitution nor federal law
requires them to sell commercial air time
for editorial statements on controversial
subjects.
Chief Justice Warren E Burger deliv
ered the majority opinion, which dealt
an all but killing blow to a recent
movement aimed at forcing the communi
cations media to open the airwaves to
persons and groups who wish to grind
their axes in public.
The Federal Communications Com
mission had already sided with the broad
casters in refusing to require them to
sell editorial advertisements. However,
Burger’s opinion, in which he was joined
by six other justices, reaffirmed the appli
cability of the FCC’s “ fairness doctrine”
which requires balanced treatment of
controversial topics.
Two justices-Thurgood Marshall and
William J. Brennan, Jr. dissented. “ Any
person wishing to market a particular
brand of beer, soap, toothpaste or de
odorant has direct, personal and instan
taneous access to the electronic media,”
Brennan noted. “ Yet a similar individual
seeking to discuss war. peace, pollution or
the suffering o f the poor is denied this
right to speak.”
But the majority of the court took the
view that editors are just that persons
whose job it is to select material for
broadcasting or publication-and so long
as the general guidelines of the fairness
doctrine are followed, there is no require
ment to open the airwaves to “ self-
appouited editorial commentators.”
The axe grinders had hoped to extend
their fight for time and space to the
newspapers as well This defeat at the
hands of the high court is likely to end
those hopes
We have tended to recognize one basic
difference between broadcast and print
media in this country. Anybody who has
the talent and money is free to crank out
his own newsletter, magazine or news
paper. And one glance at the annual
attrition rate among periodicals will as
sure any skeptic that plenty o f people
try, even though very few are able to
survive the stiff competition. (This writer,
still in his fledgling second year of syndi
cation, notes appreciatively that the same
is true of columnists.)
There is only a li mi ted amount of air
space, however, either for aircraft or for
radio and television signals. For this
reason, the airwaves have traditionally
been considered public property, and the
FCC has the responsibility to issue broad
cast liscenses, which must be renewed
periodically, on a competitive basis Thus
there is necessarily a significantly higher
degree of government regulation in broad
casting than in the print media
But in this most recent decision the
court refused to extend that regulation
and thereby shackle the hands of broad
cast editors Said Burger, after admitting
there was some radio and television edi
torial abuse, "Calculated risks of abuse
are taken in order to preserve higher
values ”
He might have added that that premise
is an important cornerstone in the foun
dation not only o f freedom o f the press,
but of all freedoms
Syndlcattd 19 7 J by
W A SH IN G TO N W E E K L Y , Inc
All right» rsssrvsd
So we pulled off down this
side cutoff and parked. We
got out of the car. grabbed
our fishing poles and headed
for the creek.
When we
arrived 1 pointed out to
Cindy that there were two
fishermen at the base of the
lad d e r fish in g , which is
strictly against the rules, and
so stated that we should go
further down stream.
We
spent most of the time teach
ing her to cast and getting
her line loose from snags.
A fter approximately 1 hour,
we derided to go to Promi
lory Park, since we had no
luck and other fishermen
were accumulating and it
was getting a little crowded.
While we were leaving, a
state patrolman appeared and
asked us for our licenses,
which we showed him.
He
then asked if we had any
luck, end we told him "no".
Then he asked if we knew
we were fishing in a closed
stream.
1 told about the
reading of the synopsis and
explained to the officer that
we had mis read it end would
not have been fishing there
had we know that it was
closed. In spite of all pleas
the officer (»170 11, R.H.
Ellsworth) issued a citation
to each of us for thirty seven
dollars each and as we drove
off he grinned at both of us.
On May 16, 1973, at 9:30
a.m., we appeared before a
traffic judge at room 304 of
the Oregon City, Clackamas
County Court House.
My
fiancee, Cindy, appeared first.
The judge proceeded to ask
her if she knew that the
stream was closed and she
stated "no”. He asked if she
had read the synopsis, and
she said she did not know
what it was for sure but that
she had evidently mis read
it. He then explained to her
. . they have more arrests
on Eagle Creek than any
other stream in the state and
that they haul them out of
there by the car load every
weekend!"
Then he asked
her if she had ever been
fishing before; she said "no".
He chuckled and suspended
her $25 fine to $13.
Next, I was called on the
stand. He asked me if I had
every been fishing before. I
said "yes" and explained that
I had taken Cindy fishing for
the experience. He fined me
$25 and that was that!
I do know a couple of
people who have received
tickets in the same area for
the same reason and they
were equally ignorant of the
formal rules. Now, my con
tention is, if they have that
much of a "racket” going on
there on that creek. I feel
the state has reaped enough
profit from that particular
creek. I feel, and I am sure
there are thousands of other
fishermen that feel the same
way. My main point is that
this stream. Eagle Creek,
and others should hr posted.
It is only fair.
We pay
enough in angling fees to
allow for the cost of posting
a few streams. There a lot
of people who enjoy fishing
in Oregon waters and not
because they feel they are
getting away with something
illegal.
It would be a pleasure to
hear other Oregonians who
have something to say in this
m atter to speak out!
Respectfully submitted.
H erb ert "Mike" Howard
W averly passes test
Dear Editor:
A few weeks ago the
Observer published a front
page picture of children in the
care of the W averly Chil
dren's Home sleeping on the
floor.
Since the Children's
Services Division contracts
with W averly, I undertook a
review of this particular sit
uation as it relates to our
continuing program arrange
menls with the agency.
It should be pointed out
th a t W a v e rly C h ild re n 's
Home provides emergency
shelter care for children on
referral by the Children's
Services Division, or in many
rases, by local police agen
cies, when for any number of
reasons it ia necessary for
youngsters to be removed
from their homes or when
they are found by neighbors
or police at home without
proper supervision. In every
instance these situations are
referred to the juvenile court
immediately for review and
further planning,
W averly provides the only
group emergency shelter care
facility in the Portland M e tra
politan area, making avail
able aproximately twenty
five spaces for emergency
placement. Ordinarily emer
gency placem enta are of
short duration until the child
is returned home or placed in
a foster home.
The Observer's picture of
children sleeping on the floor
was taken at a time when
there was an unusually large
number of children in emer
gency care. In such a situa
tion, the agency does find it
necessary to utilize sleeping
bags or mattresses to ac
commodate the overload. Rut
again, this situation ia quickly
remedied as other children
move out and make beds
available.
T he p a rtic u la r situ atio n
highlighted by the Observer's
picture was due in part to
the construction program
now in progress at W averly,
and it is my opinion that the
need to utilize sleeping ac
commodations of this sort in
the future will be minimal
when new quarters are avail
able.
From my perspective, the
W a v e rly C h ild re n 's Home
provides a critical service to
the children in Multnomah
County. I would invite the
Observer's editor to visit
personally with M r. Jack
H e n ry , d ire c to r of the
agency, to see the program
in action.
Sincerely,
Don M iller, Administrator
Children's Services Division
Dept. of Human Resources
(Editor's note: We would
like to know the scope of Mr.
Miller's investigation before
calling the m atter cloaed.
1) Did you question staff
members and former staff
members of W averly about
treatm ent and attitude to
ward the Shelter Care chil
dren?
21 Did you ask CSD staff
why W averly ia used only as
a last resort?
3) Did you ask Juvenile
Court Counsellors what they
have seen or not been al
lowed to see?
4) Did you question why
CSD social workers and court
counselors are not allowed to
visit the children's living
quarters as they are free to
do in your own Children's
Farm Hbme?
5) Did you wonder why
the emphasis and conversa
tion always returns to the
treatm ent of the mentally
retarded children rather than
shelter care?
6) Did you find out why
children are accepted for
care when there are not ade
quate facilities for them?
7) Did you question why
complaints have continued
over a period of years when
construction now taking place
ia a temporary concern?)