THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by the
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
NOME, ALASKA
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 6itt
$1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAR
W. A. Boucher ..Owner-Publisher
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffice
at Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Nome, Alaska, Wednesday, May 11, 1949
FOR FREE
(By DeWitt Emery)
The something for nothing idea still persists in Wash
ington, its most recent manifestation being the deter
mined effort now under way to sell Federal Aid to Ed
ucation (Senate Bill 246) to the people on the basis that
it’s all “for free,” doesn’t cost anyone anything.
The “do-gooders” and the big spending bureaucrats
would have you believe that just as soon as Congress
passes and the President signs this bill, Uncle Sam will
reach up and pull the $300,000,000 out of the air; then
everything will be all set and everyone, especially the
bureaucrats, will be happy.
Actually, this money will have to come from the same
source as all the other money our Federal Government
spends; and out of the pockets of all other taxpayers.
So much for the “for free” angle. Now let’s look
at the need for federal aid to education.
It was in 1936 that the first ballyhoo for federal aid to
“save our schools” broke across this country. The “do
gooders” and the “bleeding hearts” all of a sudden had
discovered that the school systems of the several states
were about to come apart at the seams, and if the Fed
eral Government didn’t immediately start kicking in
three hundred million dollars a year, half or more of the
kids in the country, in a very short time, wouldn’t have
any place to go to school. So, in 1936 a “save our
schools” bill was introduced in Congress, setting up an
annual appropriation of $300,000,000.
Now, thirteen years later, the same bill—it’s almost j
worn out, it’s been introduced so many times—is again j
presented to Congress. In the meantime, what has hap-1
pened to the schools in the several states? Have they]
come apart at the seams? Are half or more of the chil-1
dren in the country roaming the streets all the time be
cause there isn’t any place for them to go to school?
You can answer that. What’s the situation in your com
munity, in neighboring communities and throughout
your state? Are your schools better, just the same, or
worse than they were thirteen years ago?
I, of course, do not know what has happened in the
past thirteen years in the schools in every city, town,
village, hamlet and rural district in the country, but I
do know what has happened nationally.
The records of the U. S. Office of Education show that
from 1936 to 1947—the last year for which figures are
available—the states including the subdivisions thereof,
increased the financial support of their schools from
$1,656,798,938 to $3,124,550,345. That’s an annual gain
of $1,567,751,407 or almost exactly five times the $300,
000,000 it was said Uncle Sam would have to put up
each year, starting in 1936, to keep our school system
from falling apart.
If the states have been able to not only take care of,
but acutally double the financial support of their schools
since agitation for federal aid started in 1936, isn’t it en
tirely reasonable to assume that they can continue to
handle their own school situations without any help
from the Federal Government? I think it is. If you
agree, then by all means express your views to Con
gress. The bureaucrats are putting plenty of pressure on
Congress to pass S. 246, and if you don’t do your part to
counteract their propaganda, they may win by default.
It’s up to you Mr. and Mrs. America.
A MILLION EVERY 12 MINUTES
(Coalinga, Calif., Record)
It is a safe bet that if the general taxpaying public,
and that really is everyone, had their say-so, the gov
ernment would adopt the labor-saving formula for the
modernization of government functions as proposed by
the Hoover commission. ' •
The purpose of the commission was to blueprint the
LOOK WHO WANTS TO PLAY BALL
.rMJftSl B i L_• »—-11ll . i
government functions in the interest of efficiency and
economy.
No one can deny the urgent need of such a project.
Every newspaper, every magazine, every observer
and every commentator has reported favorably on the
recommendations of the Hoover commission, which
would save billions of dollars annually if put into prac
tice.
The sorry picture of the situation is that the program
in all probability will not be adopted. It will be another
instance where the minority rules. That minority, in
this instance, will be that vast horde of leeches who
have their bureaucratic noses in the public trough.
The nearly three million individuals on the public
payroll of the Federal Government do not want effi
ciency. Efficiency would mean cutting down govern
ment operational overhead by combining overlapping
bureaucracies and cutting out all non-essentials, which
would result in a reduction in federal payrolls.
While on the subject of federal costs we read a Wash
ington report in which it was stated that jthe govern
ment for the present fiscal year is spending one million
dollars every 12 minutes. That is nearly $1,400 per sec
ond, just 1100 times the rate of a century ago, when the
operation of the government cost at the rate of one mil
lion dollars every nine days.
If by adoption of the Hoover recommendations, in
part or in whole these costs can be cut down—the com
mittee estimates $3,000,000,000 annually—it will reflect
a saving to every taxpayer.
READ THE LABOR LAWS
In connection with the current discussion in Con
gress about repeal of the Taft-Hartley Labor Law and
enactment of new legislation, it might be well for the
public to bear in mind the facts that there are three
legislative proposals under consideration.
The Administration bill introduced by Chairman Le
| sinski, would kill the Taft-Hartley Act and reinstate the
old Wagner Act, with some changes recommended by
the President. Another measure, introduced by Repre
sentative Wood, would retain most of the Taft-Hartley
Act, while repealing it in name.
There has been furious debate, not only in Congress,
but throughout the country, on the merits of the legisla
tion. Most of those engaging in the arguments will not
read either of the three measures but will debate vo
ciferously on the basis of emotions and prejudice.
While it may be that the old Wagner Act. gave too
much of the edge to labor organizations, the Taft-Hart
ley legislation undoubtedly went too far in the other di
rection. Something in between might better preserve
the interests of the public, with fairness and justice to
both labor and management.
• <—-■ —
Don’t worry about the smart-alecks who deride the
churches. That’s where you belong if you want to do
anything to improve yourself and your race.
I “Cut Spending,
(Not More Taxes,”
Says Sen. George
1 Bl 11
j WASHINGTON, (£>) — Dem
crats and Republicans alike in
Congress threw support yesterday
behind a reported recommenda
tion by President Truman’s coun
cil of economic advisers for a cut
in government Spending.
The council was said to have
!heid that because of unsettled
business conditions it would be
safer to trim spending than to try
any sharp tax increases.
Responsible officials said the
economists went even further—to
suggest the possibility of cutting
soma excise taxes and of delaying
six months a social security pay
roll tax boost scheduled for July 1.
I Each of these proposals got con
j siderable backing from the law
makers.
But the final decision on which
way to turn in the face of obvi
ously increasing financial pressure
<fn the nation’s economy rests with
Mr. Truman. Thus far he has re
fused to back down on his report
ed demands for $4,000,000,000 in
' new taxes.
I
I The economic advisers were
j
said to have urged the President to
1 accept a “lesser goal” than this.
Chairman George (D.-Ga.) of
the Senate finance committee said
the advisory report—delivered to
the White House last week but not
vet formally made public — con
firms the position he has taken.
“If the national income is
shrinking because business is
shrinking, it would be nonsense to
clap more taxes on a falling econ
omy,” George told a reporter.
“Our only hope is to cut expendi
tures.”
WASH INGTON, (/P) — Rep.
Doughton (D.-N. C.) head of the
tax-writing House ways and
means committee, said after a
White House call today that he fa
vors rigid government economies
to avoid tax increases.
Doughton told reporters that
Prescient Truman had asked him
to come to the White House for a
general discussion of the tax situ
ation and other matters. Dough
ton’s committee has made no move
yet to frame a tax bill in line with
President Truman’s January re
quest for $4,000,000,000 in new
taxes.
Doughton said he hopes it will
“not be necessary” to impose new
taxes because they “might effect
business adversely.”
In response to questions, he
said he thought the President
knew how he felt. But he did not
say what Mr. Truman had told
him.
Doughton made it clear that his
committee will not make any deci
sion on what to do about taxes un
til it completes consideration oi
proposed changes in the social se
curity act. He indicated it would
be at least a month before any tax
discussion can be held.
UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS
IN WASHINGTON
OLYMPIA, Wash. (/P)—A drop
of 3,142 persons from the State’s
unemployment rolls last week was
reported today by A. F. Hardy,
acting state employment security
commissioner.
The decline brings the total of
39,506 persons, of whom 30,924 are
covered by the state act. The re
mainder are veterans.
Jobless persons received $556,
380 in state funds and $176,261 in
federal funds.
The Arabs invented algebra.