n
PAGE fr-A
HERALD AND NEWS, Klamath Falls. Ore.
Friday, April IS, 1961
herald and $tUr$
diioiiaL (paqsL
Suburbia Distorts U.S. Perspective
In the days when Hollywood was flood
ing the nation and the world with more than
500, movies a year, a standard complaint
not unjustified was that they painted a dis
torted picture of this country's life.
;:-.',The motion picture industry is no longer
given sole blame, since its influence has
waned. Yet some scholars and other observers
suggest that the distortion today is greater
than ever.
Those who talk about the "hidden Ameri
ca" of poverty, disease and distress which
exists in our generally affluent nation are
arguing, in their way, that the country's image
is out of balance.
The reverse side of that coin has now
been defined for us by educator Ilarold
Taylor. At a Washington meeting of the Na
tional Committee on Support of the Public
Schools, of which he is a vice chairman,
Taylor said matters had reached the point
where the largely prosperous U.S. suburbs
were being portrayed as the sole symbol of
American life.
For many decades our great growth has
been in the suburbs. For the most part they
are now the "home" of middle class America.
They will get virtually all the fantastic new
growth which lies just ahead. And it is to
them that, with few exceptions, we hold the
mirror when we think to picture the America
of 1963.
The scholars say that more and more the
central cities are the abode of the rich and
the poor. Except in occasional "realistic"
films, plays or novels, life at the poor extreme
is seldom presented.
No one can object, certainly, to repre
sentations of America which stress the solid,
rewarding substance of middle class living.
But that life needs to be seen and lived
in full perspective.
Taylor's complaint, echoing some before
him, is that for too many people, and espe
cially growing youngsters, the good things of
suburbia are being taken in isolation.
Thousands grow up with no thorough
knowledge of the cities, their often belea
guered peoples, and their crushing problems
The cities are merely something to pass
through to reach the magnet of downtown en
tertainment and shopping.
Taylor's point seems well grounded. To
isolate a steadily enlarging segment of our
people in the sanitized air of the suburbs is
to render them ill-equipped for the rude shock
of meeting the rest of America as many of
them surely must at some stage in a ma
ture, useful life.
Trade Act Troubles Mount
-. It now develops that the Trade Expan
sion Act of 1961 hailed as the major achieve
ment of the Kennedy administration in the
last Congress cannot begin to be effective
before Jan. 1, 1965. It will take that long to
negotiate major tariff cuts authorized by the
act.
These negotiations will be conducted un
der the direction of Christian A. Herter, form
er Massachusetts governor and congressman
and President Eisenhower's last secretary of
state.
- Named by President Kennedy as his spe
cial assistant on international trade, Herter
has made one trip to Europe. Now he's pre
paring for two years of difficult bargaining.
'There is wide suspicion of the new U.S.
trade act in Europe and among the less devel
oped countries as well.
What they seem to fear is that the United
States is' trying to capture their markets.
They're reluctant to lower their own trade
barriers against U.S. exports.
Two major political hurdles must be
. crossed.
First is the French veto of Britain's ad
mission into the Common Market This
.thwarts trade act authority given the President
:to negotiate 100 per cent tariff reductions
j;on items in which 80 per cent of the trade
3s between the United States and the Common
Market. This was put iiuthe law in anticipa
tion that Britain would be admitted.
The second hurdle is that Russia, its sat
ellites and some of the neutral nations are ad
vocating a United Nations world trade confer
ence. What the Communist countries want, of
course, is removal of strategic materials trade
restrictions against them.
A U.N. trade conference might cause con
siderable difficulty if held while another
round of rate reductions under the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade GATT
was being negotiated.
The preliminaries to these negotiations
are considered more important than the nego- .
tiations themselves. They'll determine what
tariffs are to be cut and how the negotiations ,
are to be conducted.
Trade experts from most of the 41 coun
tries now in GATT have just begun meetings
in Geneva to do some exploring. The idea is
to negotiate on broad trade classifications
rather than item by item, which is slow going.
The last round of tariff negotiations took
445 days. The present plan is to have the ex
perts' preliminary recommendations ready for
a trade ministers meeting to begin May 18.
A final approval ministers meeting would then
be held in January 1964.
Meanwhile, here in the United States, a
list of imports on which tariff reductions
might be made, along with the proposed new
rates, is being prepared for issuance by Ken
nedy in July or August.
Public hearings then would be held on
what to include in the GATT negotiating pack
age. These probably will take the full six
months allowed by the new trade act. .
The final list of commodities on which
tariff reductions arc to be negotiated must
then lie before Congress for 60 session days .
for its approval.
So the actual trade negotiations can't
possibly begin before April 1964, or even
la(fr.
One of the principal American objectives
is to insure that agricultural products are in
cluded in the coming negotiations, along with
industrial products. In the last round of tariff
negotiations, agricultural items were pushed
to one side because the Common Market at
that time did not have an agricultural policy.
Common Market agricultural policies are
still cloudy, but the United States cannot get
caught in this bind again.
Foodstuff
Answer to f revious Piiuls
urn
ACROSS
1 Tood fish
4 Gumbo
vegetable
Hakery Item
12 Hail!
13 Machine part
14 Great I.ake
15 Encountered
16 Turncoats
IB GlU
20 Make amend!
21 Legal point
22 Silkworm
24 Domesticated
26 Mine entrarra
27 Short-napped
fabric
30 Nullified
32 Tranquil
34 Felt
35 Amatory
36 Observe
37 Ribbed fabrics
.111 River npnlt
No Variable star
41 Dry. as wine
42 Feminine
appellation 4s Convenience
49 Decided against
61 limited
62 Polynesian god
63 Sprawl
64 F.ternity
65 Slipped
66 Gaelic
67 Depot (an.)
DOWN -1
Summer
2 Above
3 Ordain
4 Monsters
6 Sharp
6 Kavrd
7 Kxul
8 Lariat
0 Order (Latin)
10 MortCH-e
uofeir Ipto'el scwm
Al
manac
11 majesty 31 Weirder
17 Spat Xi Flowers
ljiSuws ;,n Wanness
l.ola up HO Kntinnlei!
1M Hardy heroine 41 Move sidewind
115 Toward I tie
lwltered aide
26 Viper
J7 11 and I lacs
llSWc.t Indian
hhrub
?01eniMiiina)ii
Witticisms
4.1 .irandparental
44 lluhan painter
4t 1,inprp)i
47 Tumult
48 Volcano
0 ( auctio
1 12 13 I 1 15 16 17 I S 19 10 111
!2 13 Ti
15 rr
18 19 "' jj2
21 r 2F 21
3T25 1 ZJZ 27
30 31 ""32 33
34 35
35 37 38 "' 39
40 "DC 41 I
42 143 (44 Tl45 46 47 I4B
49 ' 150 51
52 " 53 54
55 56 57
LJ J I I I I I I 1 I "I
By United Press International
Today is Friday. April 19, the
Itwth day of 13 with 256 more
to follow.
The moon is approaching its
new phase.
The morning stars are Venus
and Saturn.
The evening stars are Mars and
Mercury.
On this day in history:
In 1775, the American Revolu
tionary War began.
In 1933, the United States went
off I he gold standard.
In 1951, Gen. Mat-Arthur ended
his military career.
In 1!I5. movie star Grace Kelly
of Philadelphia was married to
tr Prince Hainier 111 of Monaco.
A thought for the day Aesop
said: "It is not only fine feathers
that make line birds."
THEY
SAY...
Any government which a.-ks us
for Itclp in this matter will re
ceive help.
Assistant Swrriary of Slate Kd
win M. Martin, saving U.S.
will send military aid to any
Latin country threatened by
Communists,
"Let's Lock It Up Before It Has Pups!""
j" f
fill
Mr im
r
-tin IW 1 . J
i v,,1
a in
tl. ! 'Jl.l W..atF T. ? ".' i3fS
fHE GLOBAL VIEW...
Army Chafes
Under K's '
Party Rule
By LEON DENNEN
Newspaper Enterprise Analyst
NEW YORK NEA Six years
after he purged the popular Mar
shal Gcorgi Zhukov, Nikita Khru
shchev is facing an uphill struggle
in his efforts to control the Red
Army.
The Soviet Premier's fall from
power may not be imminent but
this is the real story behind the
rumors of his domestic and in
ternational troubles.
The Red Army
nfftfarc nvno.
,i cially the young-
M ones, are be
ginning to voice
"S3.--
''' . iA boldly their
A"""" , views against
the Communist
party's tight
control ol the
military.
This is revealed, among other
things, in a remarkable book re
cently printed in Moscow. Enti
tled "Military Strategy" iVoyen
nuia Strategia), the book was
written by a group of Russia's
top military experts and edited
by Marshal of the Soviet Union
V. D. Sokolovsky.
Russia's strategists, the book
makes clear, have little faith in
local "brush-fire" wars with con
ventional arms. As Red Star,
the Kremlin's military newspa
per, said in a review of the book,
the next war will be atomic and
short and the decisive period will
be the first strike. ,
"Rockets with nuclear war heads
are the basic weapons for a quick
defeat (of the enemy! and the
paralyzation of entire countries,"
Red Star wrote. "Such weapons
now determine the main direction
in the buildup of (Russia's) mili
tary forces and in the methods for
the conduct of tlie future war."
Tlie review agreed with the
"collective" authors of "Military
Strategy" that "the problem of
how to exploit outer space to fore
stall (lie aggressive designs of the
imperialists must be seriously
considered by the strategists."
Nevertheless, the Soviet rulers
were extremely critical of t h e
hook and its editor, Marshal So
kolovsky. The reason for their
displeasure, however, was not
strategy but politics.
Red Star, which is controlled by
Premier Khrushchev's backers,
reproached the writers of the
book for their failure to under
score the role of the Communist
party in the organization of Rus
sia's military forces. Kor in a
manner unprecedented in the So
viet Union. "Military Strategy"
emphasizes the need for a "uni
fied command" and a "centralized
command" in tlie conduct of war.
Russia's top strategists, it is
clear, hold the view that the army
should be led and guided by pro
fessional soldiers and military
specialists and not by the poli
ticians of the Communist party.
Discontent with Political Com
missars (Potlitniks appointed by
the party has been simmering in
tlf Red Army since the death of
Stalin in r.53. Khrushchev thought
he gained the upper hand in 1957
when he fired Zhukov from his
job as Defense Minister.
Zhukov. charged with opposing
the party's control of the mili
tary, was replaced by tlie pliant
and unpopular Marshal Rodion
Y. Malinovsky. At the same lime.
Marshal F. I. Golikov was ap
pointed chief of political surveil
lance of the armed forces.
Golikov's appointment was seen
STRICTLY
PERSONAL
By SYDNEY J. HARRIS
I admire and envy a writer
friend of mine, who takes the
proper stance on a matter I feel
strongly about, but rarely have
the courage to enforce.
Sitting with him in his study
a few weeks, ago, I overheard a
telephone conversation between
him and a man from a radio sta
tion. The man had called my
friend to participate in a round
table program; as he had a loud,
clear, radio-type voice, I could
as an indication that the Kremlin
intended to make him the power
behind Marshal Malinovsky. His
primary tasks were to stamp out
tlie army's aspirations toward lib
eration from the party, to step
up the Marxist-Leninist indoctrin
ation of soldiers and officers and
to bind them more closely to
Khrushchev's regime. .
But Golikov, though an expe
rienced and popular military com
mander, proved unequal to his
political task. Last May, he was
abruptly dismissed from his job
and replaced by a Communist
official, A. A. Epishev.
Epishev was never a profes
sional soldier. His sudden promo
tion to the rank of army general
was little short of sensational
even in Russia. It broke all the
normal rules of promotion in the
armed forces.
But the Kremlin obviously had
to bolster Epishev's prestige as
Khrushchev's political watchdog
ir. order to give him status with
the veteran Soviet military caste
with whom he has to deal.
The conflict between Khrush
chev and the Red Army's offi
cers seems to have reached a
critical point during the Cuban
crisis last October. In an effort
to head off criticism of the pre
mier's adventure in Cuba the De
fense Ministry even had to print
an article in the Red Star re
minding the military that tho
Communist party was still the
real boss of the army.
Red China's Mao Tse-tung is
obviously informed of the behind-the-scenes
conflict between the
Kremlin and the army. In recent
weeks ho has gone out of the
way and over Khrushchev's head
to woo the marshals and generals.
hear both ends of the conversa
tion. "I get the picture," said my
friend. "What fee are you pre
pared to pay for this job?"
"Well," said the radio man,
"it's a sustaining, public-service
program, you see, and so we
don't have any money allocated
for speakers."
"Are you being paid for your
work on it," asked my friend,
"or are you contributing your
services, too?"
"Naturally," said the man, "I'm
getting my regular salary. It's
part of my job."
"It's not part of mine," said
my friend. "What about the engi
neer in the control booth for
the program. Is he getting paid?"
"Well, certainly," said the ra
dio mari. "It's his job too."
"I thought that perhaps he was
volunteering after hours, as a
gesture of generosity and good
will," my friend remarked. "Now
tell me this what about the
announcer, the producer, the di
rector, and the man who comes
in and sweeps the floor after
wards? Are any of them doing it
as a public service?"
"No, of course not," admitted
the radio man. "But we just don't
have anything in our budget for
speakers. There's no money avail
able." "I can go along with that,"
said my friend. "I'm not greedy
for money. But I'm sure you don't
want charity either. Since you're
asking a service of me, why
can't you reciprocate with one
for me?"
"Such as what?" asked t h e
radio man.
"There's a lot that needs doing
around my house the walls need
washing, the basement should be
calcimined, and some bookshelves
have to be put up. Why don't
you come around on Saturday,
or send someone around, to do
these chores and then I'll
gladly let you have my services
for the program."
"I've never heard of such a
thing in my life," sputtered the
man.
"Neither have I." purred my
friend, "but I think it's high
time we both heard it. You'll
let me know, won't you? Thank
you and good-by."
.BERRY'S WORLD
i
. !
EDSON IN WASHINGTON . . .
Foreign Aid Bill
Just Looks Smaller
By PETER EDSON
Washington Correspondent
Newspaper Enterprise Assn.
WASHINGTON (NEA) Presi
dent Kennedy's foreign aid mes
sage to Congress turns out to be
a request for more money for
next year in spite of a tremen
dous effort to make the amount
look smaller.
The message is three times as
long as last year's. The first nine
pages deal with what an insignifi
cant thing the whole U.S. foreign
aid program really is only seven-tenths
of 1 per cent of the
gross national product but look
how much good it does.
There is extra emphasis on how
much the President himself has
cut back the program from his
January estimates.
There is full endorsement of the
recent report from the Presi
dent's Committee to Strengthen
the Security of tlie Free World,
headed by Gen. Lucius D. Clay.
I' called for a cutback of foreign
aid to more realistic levels that
both giver and receivers could
alford.
Then, like a night club check
at the end of the party, you get
the bad news. The foreign aid
bill for tlie year beginning July
1 even after being cut $420 mil
lion by the President still comes
up $4.5 billion in new obligation
a! authority.
This is still $600 million more
than Congress appropriated for
the current fiscal year.
If this amount is intended to
be chicken fat which Congress
can cut out of the new program,
the President probably will be
accommodated by the budget cut
ters. Military assistance requests
are for $80 million more than
this year.
Economic assistance requests
are for $516 million more, though
$210 million of this is for in
creased loans which presumably
will be paid back. And over 80
per cent of this money is spent
it. the United States.
The only really new initiative
in the foreign aid program for
the coming year is a double-barreled
proposal to increase pri
vate investments in the develop
ing countries. This is a perfectly
laudable effort since the intent
is to reduce the government's out
lays for foreign aid.
The first -part of the program
calls for revising the existing gov
ernment guaranty on private in
vestments abroad.
More than $900 million guaran
ties is now outstanding. The total
grew by $300 million in fiscal 1962
and for the first half of the cur
rent fiscal year the amount is
sued is $160 million.
In spite of this commendable
increase there is much concern
that the program is not working
as effectively as it should be
cause foreign governments won't
sign the necessary agreements to
make tlie guaranties effective.
The second proposal calls for
amendment of U.S. tax law to
give American taxpayers a cred
it for new investments in devel
oping countries. Europe and Ja
pan would thus be excluded.
The present idea is to grant
this tax credit for a trial period
of undecided length to see how
it would work.-
It is still an extremely fuzzy
thing because the Treasury De
partment, which is working out
the details, hasn't come up with
anything definite on how big the
credits would be. Present thinking
is that they would be larger than
tax credits granted on new in
vestments which promote domes
tic growth.
This is an extremely tricky pro-
posal. If the foreign credit is
bigger than the domestic credit,
it might become an incentive to
build plants abroad to employ
cheaper foreign labor.
Such investments also might
have a bad initial effect on Amer
ica's balance of payments posi
tion, though this might be offset
in part by the fact that equip
ment for any new ' investment
abroad would have to be made
and purchased in the United
Stales. .
The tax credit would be a one
time thing, applying only to the
original investment. Foreign earn
ings from the original investment
would not be eligible for the tax
credit. A credit on reinvestment
abroad of such earnings is bein"
considered.
Net capital outflow from Amer
ican investments in Latin Amer
ica, Asia and Africa is reported
by Department of Commerce at
$395 million in 1961. Reinvested
earnings in 1961 were $338 million
for a total investment of $733 mil
lion. Figures for 1962 are not yet
available.
In a speech in Mexico City last
ear, however. Treasury Secre-
tary Douglas Dillon declared that
investments could be increased by
$300 million to a $1 billion-a-year
level.
This would reduce government
foreign aid somewhat. But the tax
credit cost is unknown.
WASHINGTON REPORT . . .
Government Red Tape
Snarls Juice Saving
"Do you ghe trading stamps?"
By FULTON LEWIS JR.
This is a story of frozen orange
juice and federal government.
It's a tale of $2 million in
savings that taxpayers might have
gained, but won't. It is best told
by Pennsylvania Congressman
Dick Schweiker, a member of the
House Intergovernmental Rela
tions Subcommittee, who has
probed the case. He says:
"At tlie same time one federal
agency was having to pay
$13.50 for a case of frozen orange
juice concentrate, another agency
was giving up its right to buy
at less than half that price."
Representatives of Orville Free
man's Agriculture Department
have acknowledged that they can
celled a contract to buy more
than 383,000 cases of concen
trate at $5 each, although the
Defense Department needed tlie
juice for its troops and was paying
premium prices for it.
'After prodding by the citrus
industry last year, the Agriculture
Department decided there was a
surplus of frozen orange concen
trate on the market. Producers
complained the excess supply w as
driving down prices paid by con
sumers across the country.
Under the surplus commodities
program, the department agreed
last November to buy more than
l.l million gallons of the frozen
orange juice from processors with
surplus stocks.
More than 380.000 cases, each
containing 12 32-ounce cans, were
to be delivered between Decem
ber 3 and January 12 to individual
state agencies. They would, in
turn, distribute the juice to pri
vate charitable institutions, to
schools and public welfare agen
cies. Contracts were signed by of
ficials of the Agriculture Depart
ment and various processors call
ing for an average price of $3
per case.
Then on December 12. the sit
uation changed for the produc
ers and for the public. A series
of severe freezes hit Florida, bad
ly damaging the citrus crop. The
orange juice, as housewives soon
found out, skyrocketed.
The processors went to t h e
Agriculture Department and asked
to cancel the contracts. The rea
son, says Rep. Schweiker, was
obvious: "Once prices had soared
with news of the freeze, the in
dustry hardly wanted to be
bound by its contract to sell to
the government at the agreed
upon lower price. If it could suc
ceed in getting the contract can
celled, the industry could then
put the juice on the market
al a much higher price.
On Friday, December 14, a rep
resentative of industry called Ag
riculture and asked privately that
the orange juice contract be
broken. Agriculture obliged by
issuing a press release within
hours inviting industry to request
an end to the contract.
The official requests were
made. On Monday, December
. 17, Agriculture cancelled the con
tract, forfeiting the government's
right to tlie orange juice.
Floyd Hedlund. director of the
department's fruit and vegetable
division, was called before Schwei
ker's subcommittee. He was
asked what consideration was giv
en to saving the taxpayers some
money by turning over the orange
juice contracts to the Defense De
partment. "I did not give that considera
tion because 1 did not know it
was possible," he replied.
George Cooper, a member of
Secretary Freeman's legal staff,
admitted that it was very pos
sible, however. He testified that
existing law permitted the trans
fer of the government's contract
rights to the Defense Department,
which needs more than a million
gallons of the juice each year.
Such a move would have saved
over S2 million. "But the govern
ment's right hand," said Schwei
ker. "didn't know what the left
was doing and the potential
savings went out the window."
QUESTIONS
AND
ANSWERS
Q How ran rap j.ftrj bp d(
Icrmined?
A-Any year divisible by four is
a leap year, excepting century
ears, which must be divisible by
400.