OCR Text |
Show REPORT FROM WASHINGTON By Rep. Laurence J. Burton Last Thursday evening at a conference of the "New Left' in Chicago, the Rev. Martin Luther King accused Congress of "caring more for rats than it does for the Negro." His charge was based on the refusal of the House of Representatives to approve an Administration bill to create a new program to spend $20 million a year for rat control and extermination in the nation's cities. With all due regard for Dr. King who has a reputation repu-tation for being responsible, restrained and intelligent this particular statement did no one any good.' In the first place, it was clearly demagogic, designed to appeal to the firebrands and extremists ; secondly, it was absurd in the extreme ; and thirdly, it could hardly be expected to further the cause of civil rights for which Dr. King in the cities' slums. Over and over again, this chorus of protest pro-test has described the defeat of this bill as a terrible thing, leaving the cities without protection pro-tection against the hordes of rats that infest them. This is no to minimize the problems that the presence of rats in our cities create. But it, is to protest the emotionalism that has displaced reason in the debate on this subject, i was one of those who voted against the rat control bill when it was before the House on July 20. The bill was defeated, de-feated, incidentally, by a 207 to 176 vote. Because Dr. King has charged that I, together with my colleagues col-leagues who voted no, care is a leading spokesman. Dr. King's voice is only the latest of many that have been heard in an emotional chorus decrying the defeat of the rat control bill. His statement is noteworthy only because its language is mbre extreme than most of the others. Shortly after the bill was defeated the President felt called upon to upbraid its opponents in public pub-lic statements. A great hue and cry has been heard since that time, raised principally by Administration spokesmen in both the executive and legislative leg-islative branches, to the effect that the people who voted (against the rat bill were heart-k heart-k less types who had not compassion com-passion for the persons living more tor rats tnan human De-ings, De-ings, and because of the continuing con-tinuing stream of similarly foolish statements that have been made on the subject of rat control, it is well, I think, that an effort be made here to set the record straight. In the iirc,; nace, we already al-ready have on the books at least three federal laws under un-der which urban rat extermination exterm-ination can be funded. 1. Under the Department of the Interior, there is a technical techni-cal assistance program for rat extermination in urban areas. All applications for funds are presently being met. 2. Under the Office of Economic Eco-nomic Opportunity, there was provided approximately $323 million of unearmarked money last year that can be used for, among other things, rat eradication. eradi-cation. In the coming year, there is a proposal that this be boosted to $420 million. Chicago Chi-cago alone has received $2.9 million of federal money for rat eradication in the past three years. 3. Under the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the Comprehensive Health Services Ser-vices Act of 1966 authorized $125 million last year to states for a variety of public health programs, including rat extermination. exter-mination. A number of states and communities are in the process of applying for federal funds to eradicate rats under this program. There are still other programs pro-grams from which money can be received to eliminate the jnenace of rats. The President has designated the Demonstration Demonstra-tion Cities law as a source of funds for this purpose. Programs Pro-grams for plague and other disease control qualify for rat extermination money. , In addition, ad-dition, the General Services Administration runs a major rat control program for its facilities, fa-cilities, as do most other agencies. agen-cies. The Department of Agriculture Ag-riculture has $250 million available avail-able for pest control, including . rats, in rural areas. It seems to me that we have heard far too much nonsense non-sense on this issue. With at least three existing federal programs for urban rat eradication, erad-ication, is the real solution to add a fourth? Then, too, what about local responsibility? Are the cities themselves doing their part, 'or are they merely waiting for federal money and federal leadership to do the job for them? There was a time in this country when we didn't run to the federal government with every problem. We tried to solve them at the local level. I am not at all sure that the problem of rat infestation could not be largely controlled by more effective action on the part of the people and the local lo-cal governments directly concerned. |