OCR Text |
Show 22 Open Account by Chuck Akerlow d Toledano .Humphrey-Hawkin- s still a bad bill The notion earlier this year that the Humphrey-Hawkin- s full employment bill had been put to rest was a dream since it appears the bill seems to have the tenacity of its principal sponsor Sen. Hubert Humphrey, who is vigorously recovering from yet another bout of cancer. But if the Senate is looking for another wray to honor the old gent in his final years in the Senate, it couldnt have picked a worse momento. In its present state the bill provides that the President submit a full employment and balanced growth plan each year to Congress. The federal government would then become the employer of last resort so that any jobs not provided by the national economy would be provided by the government for those over 20 years of age. The new version of the bill also requires that the President make proposals to hold all price increases to other than a call for price controls. The notion of a national economic plan called for by this bill seems to me to run contrary to the basic premise of a free enterprise economy. While it seems the government's proper role is through indirect stimulus to the free enterprise economy, here we have an unabashed attempt to directly control the economy and set standards for employment and growth. The Soviets have engaged in national economic planning for many years without notable success in their What makes the s Humphrey-Hawkinsponsors their think system will improve the worlds greatest economic system is beyond me. Employment is directly tied to production. The more stability. I dont know how to interpret this in any manner mically. But let the government consistent with economic eco-onom- y. production necessary, the more people can be employed. Production comes as a direct result of marketplace incentives, such as the ability to produce a better product or the same product more econo- start dictating how many per- sons must be employed in private enterprise because some social planner thinks it a good idea to provide for balanced growth" and I believe we have removed the incentive to produce a product more efficiently. In fact, efunder Humphrey-Hawkin- s ficiency in production and free enterprise is punished not rewarded. The government ought to quit fooling around in matters it doesn't understand and s instead get on with the s of negotiating new' trade agreements to open new markets for American products; deal with the trade bus-sine- inequities which enables Japan to sell steel more cheaply in the U.S. than can domestic steel makers; and ease some of the more foolish environmental restrictions such as scrubbers on stacks where low-sulph- ur coal is used. If Humphrey really wants to Dc immortalized he ought to sign his name to a program such as that. Letters To The Editor Editor: his article on the historic district proposed for the Avenues Enterprise, Sept. 14), Mr. Policzcr misses the point about an historic district by a wide margin. Mr. Policzcrs article stressed the effect of an historic district designation upon property While the salutary effect upon values. property values, documented in historic districts throughout the country, is worth consideration, it is incidental to the concept of an historic district and what such designation conservation of the hoped to accomplish: In character and identity of an area or neighborhood for enjoyment by residents and visitors. Historic districts "result from the need to define those areas that give man a sense of place and to give recognition to the individual units that collectively contribute to this sense, according to William J. Murtagh, Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places. Avenues residents recognize the need to retain the character and identity of their neighborhood. In Policies for the Avenues, a document prepared by residents as part of their master planning process, this need is stated: The residents of the Avenues feel that it is essential that the character of the Avenues be maintained and reinforced while accommodating growth within environmentally sound principles. Development and rehabilitation activities must emphasize the preservation and improvement of the quality and character of the existing housing. To get to some specific points in Mr. Policzers article, the process of reviewing plans for buildings in the Avenues need not be review by the Landmarks cumbersome: Committee and the Planning Commission to insure that plans for remodeling or new construction are compatible with the character Demolition or of the neighborhood. incompatible new construction may be held up for five months while an acceptable alternative is worked out; if this is not possible, the owner is then free to go ahead. To aid property owners and architects in this process, at the suggestion of Planning Director Vernon Jorgensen, a set of guidelines (definitions and suggestions) will be published for the Avenues. It is hoped that similar guidelines can be prepared for other city historic districts. There are indeed other Salt Lake City neighborhoods with buildings of character, and these areas will be pinpointed through the e survey to be conducted over several years by the Utah State Historical Society. Sugarhouse and Central City residents have specifically requested the survey; Capitol Hill, while a State Register Historic District, is not yet a city district and does not enjoy the protection of the review process. Property values in our city historic districts will probably increase. Whether they do or not. the qualities that make these districts special and delightful can be city-wid- preserved through restoration and new' development to give us all a sense of place in our history. As Parker Nielson wrote in an earlier Enterprise article. There is alot of history of the variety to absorb on First Avenue. Quaint old houses, many tucked behind trees and shrubbery, speak of another era more eloquently than a history book ever could. ...Historic Preservation is, important to the spirit of a people. The spirits of our forebearers are embodied in the stones of buildings like those on Temple Square, First Avenue, or Brigham Street. Destroy their contributions and you destroy a part of a culture which is all of non-specif- ic us. Stephanie D. Churchill Director, Utah State Historical Society Hiss and panama canal By RALPH de TOLEDANO Copley News Service Prior to 1946, the Republicof Panamamade no claims to sovereignty over the Canal Zone in fact, j ust the contrary. The man who changed that around was Alger lliss, then head of the State Departments Office of Political Affairs. Hiss, who was later to be convicted of perjury in a spy case, territories slipped the Canal Zone into a list of an uproar Nations. was There which he submitted to the United at the time, but the harm had been dome. Until 1946, the Panamanian government saw the Canal Zone solely as a machine to milk the American taxpayer. U.S.-occupi- ed But it never challenged the treaty of 1903, which in declaring Americas right in perpetuity, also lla stated that this was in entire exclusion of Panamanian sovereignty. In 1903 and 1904, subsequent agreements signed by Panama and the United States used the word ceded four times. In 1914, finalizing these agreements, the National Assembly again used the word ceded. In 1936, the treaty was revised to eliminate certain obsolete clauses referring to Colombia, from which Panama had broken off. The United States also relinquished its rights to take over whatever Panamanian territory was required for the defense of the canal. Interestingly, a memorandum was attached to the 1936 treaty by Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles quoting the two Panamanian officials who had negotiated it as stating that their country had received "everything that Panama could possibly want from the United States and henceforth would request no more concessions. As a result of the 1936 treaty, the United States said Panama some $1 billion for permission to set up canal defenses during World War II on territory of the republic. And in 1955, the United States increased the annual payments for the use of the Panama Canal Railroad, turned over $140million worth of d land, and improved the employment opportunities of Panamanian nationals in the Canal Zone. What Alger Hiss tried to do by diplomatic stealth. Communists attempted to repeat by open violence. In 1964, mobs attacked the Canal Zone. These mobs, according to Joseph A. Califano then assistant secretary of defense and now President Carters secretary of HEW were made up of "known and identifiable Communists, members of the Communist Party of Panama, and people who belonged to the Vanguard of National Action, w'hich is... the Castro Communist Party in Panama. As late as 1972, the SuprcmcCourt let stand a ruling of the Court of Appeals, in U.S. vs. Husband R. Roach, that the "Canal Zone is an unincorporated territoiy of the United States over which Congress exercises complete and plenary power. Repeatedly, American presidents and secretaries of state have proclaimed both to Panama and to the world that the United States had lull sovereignty over the Canal Zone, and this was never seriously contradicted until Alger Hiss sent his little list to the United Nations where there were eager hands to take it from there. Why, therefore. President Carter and Ambassador Sol Linowitz agrue that the United States has no title to the Canal Zone or a faulty title at best is beyond comprehension. That they have been able to enchre former President Ford into supporting a treaty which, as a member of Congress, he warned also one sets to against w'ondering. Are there better reasons why the United States should surrender the Canal Zone that the "lace of sovereignty argument7 I have not heard them. U.S.-owne- |