Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Portland observer. (Portland, Or.) 1970-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 28, 1982)
Page 4 Portland Observer, January 28, 1982 EDITORIAL/OPINION The challenges of 1982 by Rep. Ron Wyden 'Federalism' is not not new! President Reagan’ s proposed new “ feder alism’ ’ is nothing new: it is an effort to turn the clock back 50 years. For minorities the prospect is especially frightening. Why was the responsibility fo r social pro grams shifted from the states to the federal government in the first place? Because many states did not or could not provide for the basic needs o f their citizens— food, health care, decent housing, education. In many states—especially those without industry to support their tax base —people were in abject poverty. Many starved, were uneducated, had no opportunity for em ployment. During the Great Depression social security legislation was passed, setting up a federal sys tem to provide retirement benefits. Additional programs— subsidized in part by the federal government— followed: unemployment insur ance, w orkm en’ s compensation fo r injured workers, welfare for children, the disabled and blind, rehabilitation for the handicapped. Indirect federal subsidies include support to health care, education, housing, public works, highways, research, etc. By the 1960s, w'hen the C ivil Rights Move ment was sweeping through the South, the fed eral government acknowledged that many states discriminated against their Black citizens in the provision o f services. Along with the War on Poverty and the Mode, Cities Programs, respon- sibility for many social programs was shifted to the federal government. This gave the federal agencies the power to enforce anti-discrimina tion regulations by w ithholding funds. Each state that applied fo r funds fo r specific pro grams had to adhere to strict guidelines that not only forbid discrimination but set requirements for levels o f service. Monitoring o f expenditures and service is the responsibility o f the federal government. Reagan earlier proposed that, rather than fund specific programs, the states be provided “ block grants’ ’ for broad areas -education, so cial welfare, etc., which could be used as the states see fit. There would be no federal require ments— no required service levels, no ban on discrimination. Reagan’s newest proposal goes a step further. He would allow the states to be fully responsible for welfare, food-stamps and other social pro grams. In turn, the federal government would collect less taxes from the states, theoretically leaving the money for them to fund these pro grams. Not only is this plan unfeasible because the decline in the national economy has le ft the states without adequate funds to provide these services, but it would remove all the safeguards and all the rights that the residents o f the states possess as citizens o f the U nited States. We would go back thirty years to the time when the citizens o f Minnesota had more rights than the citizens o f M ississippi. It w ould leave the Black, Indian and Chicano citizens w itho ut access to government services. And for those who live in the liberal Northern and Western states like Oregon, all is not secure. We have seen that only the threat o f loss o f fed eral funds has made the Portland School District move a little step toward equality. An end to federal supervision and the threat o f loss o f funds would deal a death blow to civil and human rights. Letters to the Editor American poor denied basic citizenship rights. To the editor: Brother M a rtin L uther K ing's co n trib u tio n to A m erika and the world was his willingness and deter mination to confront a sick, insane and visious A m crikan system. He confronted Amerika’s national sick ness with her own health chart— the U nited States C o n s titu tio n . He inarched under the banner o f the Constitution, and was jailed, beaten and fin a lly k ille d . A ll the while Brother M ariin confronted Amerika with the haunting question: can a nation whose rights are so clearly de fined and so loosely interpreted ex pect to survive? It is not at all surprising that the vicious system which D r. King ex posed over and over again would do everything it could to destroy him. But in so doing, others were enlight ened concerning the nature o f the system. As a result, a more militant determination has taken root among both Blacks and Caucasoids, a deeper probing o f the depth o f Amerika’s sickness and a more radi cal com m itm ent to changing the Amerikan system. You sec Brother M a rtin clearly understood that there is nothing in herently wrong in a human being who is poor But there’s something inherently evil and sick about a so ciety that perpetuates poverty. By and large, unemployed Black youth are demoralized and degraded, and they know it. They know there is lit tle they can do about it, and many know why. Living in the wealthiest, most technologically advanced soci ety in history, condemned to urban ghettos, they alread y realize that their immediate challenge in life is to escape a fate devoid o f opportun ity, purpose and productivity. The question begs to be asked, why? Why are such dangerous levels o f unemployment countenanced as part and parcel o f the A m erika n "fre e enterprise” system which, in re a lity , translates in to a creed o f rugged individualism for the poor and social welfare for the rich? Why is the shortage o f jobs fo r the young, with its attendant demorali zation, rising crime rates and degen eration o f the quality o f life, toler ated with such complacency by our national leaders and so many o f our citizens who have jobs? The poor and the unemployed, in effect, are the by-products o f the functioning o f the Amerikan system — the exhaust, as it were, from an economic engine. Thus, unlike the gentle rain, unemployment does not fall on everyone equally. It falls first on the poor, longest on the Black, and hardest on Black you th . The fact o f the matter is that after a gen eration o f renewed struggle for ra cial justice the only explanation for the discrepancy between the unem ployment rates o f Blacks and C au casoids is that it is a matter o f color. No other conclusion is ra tio n a lly supportable. The Amerikan culture demands, on one hand, that a m an, to be worthwhile, must support himself and his dependents, a process that contributes to the overall function ing o f society. Y e t, on the other hand, generation after generation, am ounting to m illions o f young people, and adults as well, are de nied this basic passport to citizen ship— a jo b . D r. M a rtin L u th er King, Jr., believed, to deprive a per son o f work is to negate a portion o f his or her humanity. The criminal justice system— the police, prosecutors, courts, and pri sons— aggravates and compounds the problems o f Black youth which stem from the racism and poverty that surround their lives. Rather than re habilitating youthful offenders, the system o f criminal justie reinforces criminal behavior in the manner in which it selectively punishes Blacks. Along with the schools, it conspires to keep young Blacks in th e ir de graded status on the pain o f remov ing them from society altogether. U n til a movement for economic justice arises, "democracy” will re main a meaningless aphorism and " e q u a lity " an empty slogan. Con sidering the billions in taxes the peo ple o f this country channel each year in to the federal budget, it would seem that our society should be able to meet the particular needs o f its wom en, youth, seniors and o f the population as a whole. This apostle o f the purest Chris tian idealism served the cause o f Freedom and Peace w ell. H e was sustained by a great sensitivity to the suffering and needs o f his fellow hu man beings at a time in history when the land o f his birth had become the main cause for much o f hum anity’s suffering and deprivation. D r. King fought its racism, its militaristic ar rogance, its hypocrisy and its apathy. Dr. Jam il Cherovee Field D ir. for C O R E Portland Observer ML MBL * Oregon News poper Publishers Association T h . P o rtland O b it r r e r (U S P S »6« 6801 it p u b h .h .d . v . r y Thursday by Exw Pubtwhmg Company. Inc , 2201 North Kilting, worth, Portland. Oregon 87217. Poar Ortica Box 3137. Portland Oregon 97206 Second daee poetage perd at Portland. Oregon Subecriptione: »10.00 per yeer in Tri-County area Poetm aeter Send addreee changea to the Portland Observer P .0 Box 3137 Portland. Oregon 97206 MEMBER NêWAiPEh A. Lee Henderson. Publisher A ! McGilberry, Managing Editor A I Williams, Advertising Manager National Advertising Repreeentatlve Am algam ated Publiehera. Inc. When the Reagan Administration first took office, there was a lot o f talk about something called " N e w Federalism." At the center o f this New Federal ism was to be a fresh partnership be tween federal, state and local gov ernments— a partnership in which the federal government would take a back seat to local entities. State and local governm ents were to have more control over their own affairs — and everybody was supposed to come out ahead. Unfortunately, with a year o f this New Federalism under our belts, we find that all it has delivered is more bills— and fewer services. State and local governm ents have m ore re sponsibilities, all right, but no mon ey to pay for them. In other words, all we have is a tax shift— to state and local govern- ments. So the taxpayer pays just as m any taxes— but in to a d iffe re n t coffer. And services are reduced be cause states like Oregon cannot even a ffo rd to pay fo r services they a l ready o ffe r— let alone picking up w hat the federal governm ent has dumped in their laps. The most unfortunate thing about this whole sorry situation is that it could have been avoided. Certainly we need to cut federal spending. Balancing the budget is critical to get our economy moving forw ard. But there are plenty o f places to cut without leaving the states high and dry. F or exam ple, consider what we could save by elim inating waste in the defense budget. •376 million, the cost o f reactiva ting two decrepit World W ar II bat tleships, w ould cover the $350 million cost o f completing Oregon's interstate system. $44 m illion, the cost-overrun to date on just two F-18 fighter planes, would more than cover the $43 m il lion (fiscal year 1982) cost o f refor esting some 145,000 acres in Oregon and Wasington— thus ensuring the longevity o f our forests and the in dustries which depend on them. And then there are the billion dol lar handouts to oil companies— and the millions o f tax dollars squan dered to prop up corrupt dictators abroad. I feel strongly that Congress must resist this kind o f fiscal shell game. It must dem onstrate the w ill to stand up to its responsibilities. And as we move in to the 1982 Congressional session later this month, I intend to do my best to see (hat this is the case. Dick Bogle Perhaps no single act by President Regan has enraged as many citizens. Black and w h ite , as much as the adm inistration’s move to grant tax exempt status to nearly a hundred colleges that discrim inate against Blacks. The reversal changes a policy in effect since 1970. Two colleges. Bob Jones U n iv e rs ity and G old sb oro C h ris tia n Schools o f G o ld s b o ro , N .C . appealled to the United States Supreme Court. The p o licy shift came when Justice D ep artm en t lawyers filed papers w ith the c o u rt. No exp lan atio n o f the change was contained in the papers. A fte r the strom o l p ro test, the President issued a statem ent decrying racial discrim ination and said he w ill support legislation to attack the problem. W h ite house spokesman D avid Gersen said Reagan was disturbed by and regrets the perception that his adm inistration is retreating on civil rights. ‘ ‘ I am u n alte rab ly opposed to racial discrimination in any form . I would not knowingly contribute to any o rg an iza tio n that supports racial d is c rim in a tio n ," the President said in a brief statement. The President says there is another issue at stake which went to the heart o f the decision by Treasury and Justice, and it involved "adm inistrative agencies exercising powers that the Constitution assigns to Congress.” In o th er words, Gersen said, Reagan still objects to agencies like the 1RS taking such broad actions without the benefit o f legislation. "S u ch agencies." Reagan said, " c a n n o t be allow ed to govern by adm inistrative f ia t ." That was the sole basis o f the decision, I regret that there has been a m isunder standing o f the purpose o f the decision.” •••• It was a very wise thing fo r P ortland Black leaders to call that recent news conference disputing published reports o f extensive gang activity in Albina. I recall a few months ago, after hearing rumors o f Southeast Asian gangs, I checked with a variety o f sources and determ ined that no Southeast Asian gangs exist. At the same tim e , I asked about other possible gang a c tiv ity . A ll the sources I asked said there had been only a couple o f feeble attempts to organize and that after a very short existence, they collapsed. However the people I talked with did say the possibility exists that gang activity could begin. So the Urban League and others are wise to create programs to fill a void which leads to the inception o f gangs. One void is the absence o f adult male role models. We can look forw ard to some big brother type programs and others which could go a long way to blunt the organization o f criminal gangs. Some o f you may rem em ber a loose group o f individuals called the Bandana Gang back in the sixties. In some people’ s minds that " s o called" gang actually existed. It just so happened that during the peak o f the "process" hair style, a number o f those youngsters wore (h e ir bandanas on the street. Sure, they knew each other and many o f them were engaged in crim inal activities, but they were not a gang. The one thing they shared in com mon was wavy, close to the head hair. Cure can be worse than sickness by Jonathan Marshall In a huge coordinated raid this A ugust, federal agents in M ia m i rounded up 44 suspected drug tra f fickers who, over a two-year period, had laundered nearly $200 million in profits through an FB I undercover fro n t. This successful " s t in g ” followed earlier arrests this year that netted some o f the largest marijuana and cocaine rings ever busted. Yet officials o f the Drug Enforce ment Adm inistration (D E A ) admit that they still intercept only a tiny fraction— on the order o f 5 per cent — o f the illicit drugs pouring across our borders. In fact, D E A agents are warning o f a new heroin " e p i demic” as the bumper opium crops o f South and Southeast Asia come to m atu rity. Despite the vast sums o f money spent each year on drug control— upward o f $10 billion, by some estimates— we are no closer than ever to stamping out drug use. Now, in desperation, both houses o f Congress, with support from the Reagan adm inistration, have voted separate bills to permit the U .S. m il itary to jo in federal and local law enforcement agencies in doing battle against the drug traffic. But the experience o f numerous o th er countries suggests that it would be an enormous mistake to embroil our military and intelligence agencies in the drug war. Almost in v a ria b ly , such policies elsewhere have led to a steady erosion o f civil liberties and dem ocratic rule— the very considerations that prompted Congress to ban m ilitary and C IA spying in the United States. M ore over, the enormous profits from the drug trad e also have corrupted many high-ranking foreign military and intelligence officials so that the drug traffic has become better pro tected than ever. The classic example o f this phe nom enon occurred in n atio n alist China after 1928, when the regime o f Chiang Kai-shek first turned drug tra ffic control over to the m ilitary under the guise o f opium “ suppres sion.” Instead, the m ilitary sought to m onopolize (he d istribution o f narcotics to raise money for its own operations. D uring W orld W ar I I , C hiang transferred control o f the tra ffic to the head o f his secret po lice, who traded opium across enemy lines with the Japanese. Iron ic a lly , m any o f those very police were trained by unwitting agents o f the F B I and the U .S . Federal Bu reau o f Narcotics. The same pattern is repeating it self today almost everywhere that the m ilitary has taken a m ajor role in internal policing and security, o f ten with U.S. aid and training: • In Sao Paulo, Brazil, the leading drug tra ffic k e r has been identified as Sergio Fleury— who was appoint ed head o f the city’s criminal inves tigation department in 1977. Fleury also is said to direct a notorious local "death squad” that liquidates opponents without formal arrest or trial. •L a s t year’ s "co c ain e c o u p " in Bolivia actually put a group o f drug- trafficking colonels and generals in charge o f the government, much to the displeasure o f the C arte r and Reagan administrations. •T h e Paraguayan arm y is p ri m arily financed not through taxes but through trade in contraband, in cluding heroin. The three top tra f fickers, according to U .S . govern ment files, are General Andres Ro driquez, commander-in-chief o f the arm ed forces; counterinsurgency chief General Patricio Colman; and c h ie f o f the investigative police, Pastor Coronel. • In 1978 CBS-TV implicated Col ombian presidential candidate (since elected) Julio Cesar Turbay and de fense m inister G eneral A b rah am V a ro n in the flo u rish in g cocaine trade. Among those already jailed fo r drug co rru p tio n are a form er head o f the judicial police and num erous military officers. •A t his 1975 trial a top Burmese heroin smuggler, Lo Hsing han, fin gered many governm ent o ffic ia ls and military officers in President Ne W in ’s government as having taken bribes to protect his trade. These revelations brought the tria l to a quick halt. The U nited States sup plies equipment and training to Bur ma s a nti-d ru g forces, who use it against political rebels while p ro tecting the top pushers. • In 1971 NBC News reported that South Vietnam’s President Nguyen Van Thieu and Vice President Nguyen Cao Ky had financed their campaigns out o f heroin p ro fits , and that chief intelligence adviser General Dang Van Quang was "th e biggest pusher in South V ietn am ." Numerous reports also confirm ed (he C IA ’ s role in supporting V ie t namese generals who moved opium and refined heroin into world m ar kets. These examples all come from the Third W o rld , but the West hasn’ t been im m une fro m the same disease. W hen " F re n c h C onnec tio n " traffick ers began talking in the early 1970s, they quickly im pli cated leading members o f S D E C E . the French intelligence agency, and o f the Gaullist " p a ra lle l p o lic e,” SAC, in running the traffic for their own personal and institutional pro fit. Thus fa r, A m erica has escaped the worst o f these abuses only by keeping its drug enforcement opera tions d ecentralized. C ritic s com plain, rightly, that past enforcement hasn’t been effective. But to mobil ize against drugs the U.S. m ilita r y - half o f whose soldiers, according to recent studies, abuse drugs them selves— and the C IA , which has aided drug tra ffick ers for its own reasons in Southeast Asia and Latin America, is not a desirable solution. Far from elim inated the drug epi demic, we might only end up with a cure that is worse than the disease. O 19X1 PxtifU. Newt Serivcc
